The Real ID Act of 2005 raises serious concerns about privacy, data security, cost, fairness and mission creep that should be fully scrutinized before the act is implemented, an advisory committee to the Homeland Security Department recommended May 7.
Because those concerns are unresolved, the DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee said it cannot endorse the Real ID Act or the notice of proposed rulemaking at this time.
Given that these issues have not received adequate consideration, the committee feels that it is important that the following comments do not constitute an endorsement of Real ID or the regulations as workable or appropriate, the panel wrote in comments about the Real ID Act issued May 7.
Congress approved the Real ID Act in 2005 to establish a national system to strengthen the integrity of state drivers licenses. Governors have said the act will cost up to $11 billion to implement over five years.
The data privacy committee said DHS Chief Privacy Officer Hugo Teufel asked it to review the notice of proposed rulemaking. In an eight-page comment letter, the panel issued 12 recommendations for improving the rulemaking.
Given the magnitude and potentially serious consequences of the Real ID Act's national identity management system, the federal government and states need to examine more seriously issues of privacy, accountability and data security, among others, the advisory committee wrote.
For example, under the current rulemaking, states are asked to submit comprehensive plans for protecting the personal data to be collected from individuals. However, the plans are likely to be inconsistent and ineffective because there are no minimum national standards that need to be met, the advisory group said. It recommends that the final rule include such a standard.
In addition, the comprehensive plans must address privacy, which they currently are not required to do, the advisory group said. There should be rules for accountability and storage of the data, notice to individuals on information being collected, provisions for redress and access, and provisions explicitly limiting what the cards can be used for, among others.