Iceland Custodian Consent for Passport Issuance to a Minor (Samþykki forsjármanna vegna útgáfu vegabréfs fyrir einstakling undir 18 ára, Form V-901)

Candidate selection

This session's brief (GOV-2226, "GovSchema Standard Research") re-scanned CATALOG.md's "Known Gaps & Opportunities" fresh. Iceland stood at 4 of 6 verticals (Business Formation, Taxes, Visa, DMV); Passport and National ID remained open. A prior cycle (GOV-2219, 2026-07-10) had already scouted both remaining gaps and left a named, well-sourced candidate for Passport: Þjóðskrá's Form V-901, "found on the skra.is forms index, 21 fields" — but left it unauthored. That candidate was re-screened fresh this session rather than assumed still valid (the URL, byte size, and hash were all independently re-confirmed; see "Source" below), and authored here.

Iceland's actual passport application process is confirmed (GOV-2084, GOV-2219) to be in-person and biometric via island.is pre-registration, with no downloadable field-by-field form — that finding is unchanged and this document does not contradict it. V-901 is a distinct, narrower, genuine standalone paper form embedded within that process: a custodian-consent document used when a child's custodian(s) cannot jointly attend in person, confirmed by the server's own Content-Disposition filename (see below), not just the form's printed title.

Source

• Primary: https://www.skra.is/lisalib/getfile.aspx?itemid=d7b8075a-8643-11e6-943e-005056851dd2 — reached via skra.is's own forms index (skra.is/umsoknir/eydublod-umsoknir-og-vottord/), item "V-901 — Umsókn — Útgáfa vegabréfs - undir 18 ára" ("Issuance of passport - under 18 years"). Fetched fresh this session with a browser User-Agent (curl -A "Mozilla/5.0 ... Chrome/124.0 Safari/537.36"): HTTP 200, content-type: application/pdf, exactly 193,261 bytes, SHA-256 cb4fefe4faa842cb3402b5acc81d8b361b38225a5f7831c87c5a26679baaed60. Last-Modified: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:17:38 GMT per the server's own response header — the specimen is ~3 years old but still directly listed and served from the authority's own current, unauthenticated forms index, the same "still on the live index" currency signal this registry's is/skatturinn/simplified-individual-tax-return record used. Content-Disposition: inline; filename="V-901-samthykki forsjarmanna vegna utgafu vegabrefs undir 18 ara.pdf" — the server's own internal filename translates to "V-901-consent of custodians regarding issuance of passport under 18 years," independently corroborating the document's true subject (custodian consent) beyond just its printed on-page title. No login, CAPTCHA, or WAF/bot-mitigation challenge was encountered.
• Retrieved: 2026-07-10.
• Reviewer: GovSchema Engineering (initial authoring source-review).

node tools/verify-sources.mjs registry/is/thjodskra/passport-issuance-consent-minor/1.0.0 re-fetched the cited URLs a second time immediately before finalizing this record: 1 directory, 3 URLs checked, 0 warnings, 0 allowlisted, all clear. No entry was added to tools/verify-sources-allowlist.json — this domain needs none.

Extraction method

Confirmed programmatically with pdfjs-dist (legacy/build/pdf.js, Node CommonJS) before any field cataloguing began:

• doc.numPages → 1 (a genuinely single-page form).
• page.getAnnotations() → exactly 21 Widget annotations, all fieldType: "Tx" (plain text fields) — no checkbox or radio widgets at all on this specimen, despite the printed page visibly containing a two-option checkbox choice (see the structural finding below). This matches the prior GOV-2219-cycle scouting note's own field-count claim ("21 fields") exactly.

Every widget's field name, type, and rect was dumped, then cross-walked to its printed label using a position-aware (x/y proximity) script: page.getTextContent() items were sorted by descending y then ascending x and paired against each widget's rectangle by visual column/row alignment — the same technique this registry's is/samgongustofa, is/utl, at/bmeia, and se/migrationsverket schemas describe using, rather than eyeballing the rendered page alone. (A headless-Chromium visual render was also attempted per this registry's usual secondary-confirmation practice, but the available chrome-linux64 build's headless PDF viewer produced only a blank screenshot in this environment — a tooling limitation, not a source concern; the position-aware text-layer cross-walk alone was sufficient here since every field sits on an unambiguous single printed label line, unlike is/samgongustofa's multi-checkbox grid, which needed the extra visual pass to resolve.)

One non-obvious structural finding

A printed two-option checkbox choice has no backing AcroForm widget at all. The printed declaration "Hér með staðfestist að upplýsingar sem hér eru gefnar um forsjá barns eru réttar og að útgáfa vegabréfs er samþykkt" ("It is hereby confirmed that the information given here about the child's custody is correct and that issuance of the passport is approved.") is immediately followed by two options — "☐ Barnið hefur tvo forsjáraðila*" ("The child has two custodians") and "☐ Barnið hefur einn forsjáraðila" ("The child has one custodian") — but page.getTextContent() renders both "☐" glyphs as ordinary static text content, and neither has a corresponding entry in page.getAnnotations()'s 21-widget list. This is confirmed as a genuine upstream authoring gap (the PDF's own form fields simply do not cover this choice at all, unlike is/samgongustofa's prior finding of unnamed-but-present widgets), not an extraction artifact. Since this choice is substantively required to complete the form correctly (it governs whether a second custodian's block is expected to be filled at all) and this registry's charter is to model the government process's fields for agent consumption, not merely whatever a specific PDF's AcroForm happens to expose, it is modelled as custodyType, an enum field with no sourceRef widget name to cite (disclosed as such in the field's own sourceRef, which cites the printed checkbox line instead of a widget name).

A second, smaller ambiguity: the widget literally named "Forsjáraðilar" in the source PDF's own AcroForm sits at the same y-band as that word's printed section-header text, rather than beside a data-entry label of its own (unlike every other field on this form, which sits directly beside a printed field-specific label such as "Nafn:" or "Kennitala:"). It is modelled as custodyArrangementNote, an optional free-text field, with the ambiguity disclosed directly in the field's own description rather than guessed at confidently.

Field reconciliation (21 widgets + 1 semantic-only field → 22 schema fields)

• Child (3 fields, 3 widgets): childFullName ("Fullt nafn barns"), childNationalId ("Kennitala"), childLegalResidence ("Lögheimili").
• Custody declaration (2 fields, 1 widget + 1 semantic-only field): custodyArrangementNote (the ambiguous "Forsjáraðilar" widget, see finding above), custodyType (the unnamed two-option checkbox choice, see finding above — no widget).
• Custodian 1 (6 fields, 6 widgets): custodian1DateAndPlace ("Dagsetning og staður"), custodian1Name ("Nafn"), custodian1NationalId ("Kennitala"), custodian1Phone ("Símanúmer"), custodian1Address ("Lögheimili"), custodian1Email ("Netfang") — the left/first-printed column of the two side-by-side custodian blocks.
• Custodian 2 (6 fields, 6 widgets): the mirrored right/second-printed column (_2-suffixed widget names), each requiredWhen custodyType equals two_custodians.
• Witnesses (5 fields, 5 widgets): witnessDateAndPlace (shared, single field for both witnesses — unlike the custodian blocks, this date/ place line is not duplicated per witness), witness1Name/witness2Name ("Nafn", left/right columns), witness1NationalId/witness2NationalId ("Kennitala", left/right columns).

22 fields modelled: 21 backed 1:1 by an AcroForm widget, plus 1 (custodyType) modelled as a semantic-only field with no backing widget (see the structural finding above).

Scope decisions and judgment calls

• Custodian 1's six fields (date/place, name, kennitala, phone, address, email) are all required: true. None carries an explicit "(valkvætt)"/ optional annotation the way is/samgongustofa's salePrice does, and they sit in the form's primary declaration block — the same no-explicit-optionality-marker-means-required convention this registry's is/samgongustofa VERIFICATION.md already establishes for this jurisdiction's forms.
• Custodian 2's six fields are gated requiredWhen custodyType equals two_custodians, not statically required. The form's own printed structure makes clear a second custodian block only applies when custodyType is two_custodians; when the child has only one custodian, the second column is inapplicable, matching the spec's requiredWhen mechanism (GSP-0013 §2) rather than a fabricated always-required field.
• Witness fields are left required: false with no requiredWhen condition, not gated against a synthetic boolean. The form's own printed applicability note ("aðeins ef annar forsjáraðilinn er fjarverandi myndatökuna" — "only if one of the custodians is absent during the photo-taking") describes a real-world fact about a specific appointment (attendance at the child's passport photograph session) that is distinct from custodyType (which only states how many custodians the child has) and has no dedicated field or checkbox of its own anywhere on the form to gate against. Per this registry's established practice (is/samgongustofa's co-owner/second-party fields, ar/dnrpa's co-buyer/co-seller blocks) of not inventing a fabricated gating field where the source provides none, this conditional applicability is stated in each witness field's own description instead of encoded as requiredWhen.
• Kennitala fields share the registry's standard pattern (^[0-9]{6}-?[0-9]{4}$), matching every other is/* schema's kennitala fields.
• Email fields use the same RFC-shaped pattern already established in this registry (e.g. mx/inm/forma-migratoria-multiple-electronica), reused here rather than inventing a new one.
• witnessDateAndPlace is one shared field, not two. Unlike the custodian blocks (each of which repeats "Dagsetning og staður" once per column), the witnesses section prints this label only once, and its matching widget's rect spans the section's full width rather than being split into two half-width columns — confirmed via the position-aware text/widget cross-walk, not assumed by symmetry with the custodian blocks.
• Out of scope: every wet-ink signature line ("Undirskrift," appearing four times — once per custodian, once per witness), the printed declaration/attestation sentences themselves (fixed prose the signature satisfies, not fillable fields), the introductory explanatory paragraph (criminal-liability warning under Act No. 136/1998 on Passports, and the note that only one custodian need attend to collect a completed passport), and the final "Undirritun starfsmanns embættis og stimpill" (office employee's signature and stamp) block — all Þjóðskrá's own printed guidance or staff-executed content, not applicant-authored data, consistent with this registry's established practice.

Mock conformance test

A standalone Node script (conformance.mjs, not committed — ad hoc verification harness matching this registry's usual practice) evaluates required/requiredWhen presence, enum membership, and pattern/ minLength/maxLength bounds.

• Valid mock 1 — the simplest real-world case: custodyType: "one_custodian", only custodian 1's block filled, no witnesses. 0 errors.
• Valid mock 2 — the maximal case: custodyType: "two_custodians", both custodian blocks filled (one in Reykjavík, one in Akureyri), custodyArrangementNote populated, and both witnesses filled (the custodian-absent-from-photo-appointment scenario). 0 errors.
• Negative control 1 — mock 2 with custodian2Name/ custodian2NationalId removed while custodyType remains "two_custodians". Fails with both flagged missing, confirming the requiredWhen conditional-required mechanism fires correctly.
• Negative control 2 — mock 1 with childNationalId set to a non-kennitala string and custodyType set to an out-of-enum value ("three_custodians"). Fails with both flagged (childNationalId: pattern mismatch; custodyType: not in enum), as expected.

Tooling run

• node tools/validate.mjs registry/is/thjodskra/passport-issuance-consent-minor/1.0.0/schema.json → ok, 1/1 passed.
• node tools/validate-ajv.mjs registry/is/thjodskra/passport-issuance-consent-minor/1.0.0/schema.json → ok (validated against spec v0.3 meta-schema, ajv 2020-12).
• node tools/verify-sources.mjs registry/is/thjodskra/passport-issuance-consent-minor/1.0.0 → 1 directory, 3 URLs checked, 0 warnings, 0 allowlisted, all clear.
• npm run build-index (from tools/govschema-client/) → regenerated registry-index.json to include this document.

Re-verification

Per the manual-source-review-v1 practice's cadence, nextReviewBy is set to 2027-01-10 (~6 months): this is a from-scratch opening of Iceland's Passport vertical with one non-obvious structural finding (a printed two-option choice with no backing AcroForm widget at all) and one smaller field-naming ambiguity (custodyArrangementNote). Re-check the cited PDF URL and hash, confirm no newer specimen has replaced it on skra.is's forms index, and re-attempt a visual render of the source (this session's headless-Chromium attempt did not succeed — see "Extraction method" above) to further corroborate the two disclosed judgment calls, on or before that date and on any source.url change.