On January 14, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement published a correction in the Federal Register to an earlier notice. This correction addresses an incorrect docket number in a 60-day public comment solicitation for the Departure Notification Record, an information collection used to monitor the departure of certain nonimmigrant aliens from the United States. The original notice appeared on January 8, 2026, and the correction ensures that public comments are directed to the proper channel, identified as docket number ICEB-2026-0001-0001. This minor but crucial adjustment underscores the procedural rigor required in federal information collections under the Paperwork Reduction Act, potentially affecting how stakeholders engage with immigration enforcement policies.
Background on the Departure Notification Record
The Departure Notification Record is a form or data collection mechanism employed by ICE to verify and record the exit of nonimmigrant aliens who are required to depart the United States upon the expiration of their authorized stay. This tool supports compliance with immigration laws by providing evidence of timely departure, which can be critical in cases involving visa overstays or enforcement actions. According to ICE, the collection is part of ongoing efforts to maintain accurate records for immigration enforcement and border security.
The notice process stems from the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which mandates that federal agencies obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget for information collections that impose a burden on the public. Agencies must periodically renew these approvals and solicit public comments to assess the necessity, accuracy, and burden of the collection. In this instance, ICE's January 8 notice initiated a 60-day comment period, inviting input on aspects such as the estimated time required to complete the record and suggestions for minimizing respondent burden.
The Nature of the Correction
The correction specifically targets the docket number listed in the original notice. Federal Register documents use docket numbers as unique identifiers for organizing public comments and related materials on platforms like Regulations.gov. An incorrect docket number could misdirect submissions, leading to incomplete records or overlooked feedback. The updated notice replaces the erroneous identifier with ICEB-2026-0001-0001, appearing in the document's heading, ADDRESSES section, and supplementary information.
Sharon Hageman, Deputy Assistant Director of ICE's Office of Regulatory Affairs and Policy, signed the correction, emphasizing its role in maintaining transparency. The document references the original Federal Register citation as FR Doc. 2026-00118, published on page 717, and specifies the exact locations of the errors on pages 717 and 718. This level of detail reflects standard practices in federal corrections, ensuring traceability and accountability.
Legal and Procedural Context
This correction aligns with broader federal requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how agencies issue rules and notices. Errors in public notices, while uncommon, must be promptly addressed to uphold the integrity of the comment process. For context, similar corrections have occurred in other DHS notices, such as those related to customs forms or cybersecurity reporting, where docket inaccuracies could undermine stakeholder participation.
Key players include ICE, operating under the Department of Homeland Security, and the Government Publishing Office, which manages the Federal Register. The Office of Management and Budget plays an oversight role in approving information collections, evaluating factors like the annual burden hours—though specific figures for this collection were not detailed in the correction notice. Perspectives on such collections vary: immigration advocacy groups often critique them for potential overreach or privacy concerns, while enforcement proponents view them as essential for national security. For instance, organizations like the American Immigration Council have historically commented on similar ICE collections, arguing for reduced burdens on vulnerable populations.
Implications for Public Engagement and Policy
The short-term impact of this correction is to facilitate accurate comment submission during the ongoing 60-day period, which began on January 8, 2026. Interested parties, including legal professionals, immigrants' rights organizations, and policy analysts, can now submit feedback confidently via the corrected docket. This ensures that diverse viewpoints inform any revisions to the Departure Notification Record, potentially influencing how ICE tracks departures amid evolving immigration policies.
In the longer term, this incident highlights the challenges of administrative accuracy in a complex regulatory environment. Errors, even clerical ones, can erode public trust in federal processes, especially in sensitive areas like immigration enforcement. If unaddressed, they might lead to legal challenges alleging inadequate notice, drawing from precedents like those in environmental rulemaking cases where procedural flaws invalidated agency actions. Different stakeholders may interpret this differently: critics could see it as symptomatic of broader DHS inefficiencies, while supporters might appreciate the swift correction as evidence of responsiveness.
The notice provides contact information for Omar Charris at ICE, encouraging inquiries but noting that comments are not accepted by phone. This approach balances accessibility with structured engagement, a common feature in federal notices.
In summary, this Federal Register correction by ICE addresses a docket number error in its notice for the Departure Notification Record, reinforcing procedural standards under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Key takeaways include the importance of accurate identifiers for public participation and the role of such collections in immigration enforcement. Looking ahead, the comment period may yield insights into refining the record, with potential follow-up notices extending to a 30-day period before Office of Management and Budget review. Ongoing debates could center on balancing enforcement needs with privacy protections, shaping future iterations of similar tools. Challenges remain in ensuring error-free publications amid high volumes of federal notices, while opportunities exist for enhanced digital tracking to prevent such issues.
