# Verification record — `sg/ica/identity-card-replacement` v1.0.0 This file is the **source-review record** for this document version, per the [`manual-source-review-v1`](../../../../../practices/manual-source-review-v1.md) practice. It documents the provenance of the published fields and flow and states the current verification claim honestly. ## Current claim - **`status`:** `draft` - **`verification.method`:** `manual-source-review-v1` - **`verification.lastVerifiedAt`:** `2026-07-02` The document was **derived from and cross-checked against** the official sources below, but the full field-by-field comparison the practice requires (`manual-source-review-v1` → Procedure step 2) has **not** been completed against the live self-service e-Service itself, because that e-Service is Singpass- authenticated (see "Why a paper form" below). It therefore remains `draft`, not `verified`. ## Sources examined - **Document `(id, version)`:** `sg/ica/identity-card-replacement` / `1.0.0` - **Spec version:** GovSchema `0.3.0` - **Authority:** Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA), Singapore. - **Primary source URL:** — "Lost Identity Card" process page. Fetched live, 2026-07-02 (HTTP 200). Confirms: 14-day report-and-replace window, no police report required, fees (S$100 first loss / S$300 second-and-subsequent), payment methods (Visa, Mastercard, AMEX, Internet Direct Debit, PayNow), 7-working-day processing, 3-month collection window, and the primary e-Service link (`eservices.ica.gov.sg/esvclandingpage/iconline`, Singpass-authenticated). - **Official form:** "Application for Replacement of NRIC (Loss) Form", fetched directly as a real PDF (HTTP 200) from — the same URL a live public FormSG proxy-reporting form instructs applicants to download, complete, and re-upload (see below), independently confirming this is ICA's current canonical replacement-application form. - **Live public corroboration (FormSG):** ICA's own "Lost Identity Card" page links a "Proxy report lost and replacement of IC" form (`go.gov.sg/proxyic` → `form.gov.sg/6a14fd09d3a03b1a74dda45a`), a live, unauthenticated government form for those reporting *on behalf of* someone medically unable to self-report. Its public JSON API (`https://form.gov.sg/api/v3/forms/6a14fd09d3a03b1a74dda45a`, HTTP 200, fetched 2026-07-02) returns the form's exact field schema — Name, Mobile number, Email, "Name of IC holder", "IC number", "Location of the loss of the IC", "Date of Loss", "Description of the loss of IC", an attachment slot for the completed "Application for Replacement of NRIC (Loss) Form" PDF, a Doctor's memo attachment, an optional LPA/Deputyship attachment, and a four-option declaration checkbox — confirming both the PDF form's continued currency and that ICA still requires the same underlying PDF to be completed regardless of reporting channel. This proxy form's own applicant-facing fields (name/IC-of-holder, loss location, loss date, loss description) are **not** modelled in this schema, since this document is scoped to self-application (see "Scope" below). - **Retrieved / reviewed:** 2026-07-02 (all sources confirmed live at authoring time). - **Reviewer:** GovSchema Engineering (Standards Engineer — initial authoring source review). ## Why a paper form, when the primary channel is online Identical situation to `sg/ica/passport-application`: the primary self-service channel (MyICA e-Service) is Singpass-authenticated and has no published field-by-field specification reachable without a real Singpass login. The official PDF replacement-application form is the only ICA-published, independently inspectable, field-by-field specification of this process, and its continued live use is independently corroborated by the public FormSG proxy form above. ## How the PDF was decoded The PDF is **not** a fillable AcroForm (`doc.getFieldObjects()` returned no fields; `doc.getAnnotations()` returned zero annotations on every page) and its content-stream text uses a custom glyph encoding with no recoverable Unicode `Tj`/`TJ` string content (naive `zlib`-inflate-and-regex extraction, the method used successfully on `sg/ica/passport-application`'s IMM(E)11, returned only whitespace and hex-glyph runs here). Each of the form's first five pages was instead **rendered to a raster image** (`pdfjs-dist` + `canvas`, scale 2.0) and read directly. Page 6 ("For official use only") was confirmed via text extraction alone (that much *did* decode) to be an internal ICA processing block, out of scope. ## What was directly observed vs. inferred | Field(s) | Basis | |---|---| | `nricNumber`, `fullName`, `nameInChineseJawiTamil`, `nameInHanyuPinyin`, `alias`, `marriedName`, `address`, `sex`, `dateOfBirth`, `race`, `religion`, `dialectGroup`, `countryOrPlaceOfBirth`, `nationality`, `contactNumber`, `email` | **Directly observed**: transcribed from the rendered image of the official PDF form's Part I, "Particulars of Applicant" (page 1). | | `declarationInformationTrue`, `consentPhotographReuse`, `declarationNoForeignCitizenship`, `acknowledgeNoRefundIfRecovered`, `declarationDate` | **Directly observed**: transcribed from the rendered image of Part II, "Declaration by Applicant" (page 2), split into one boolean per distinct declared statement plus a signature date, per this registry's convention (see `gb/co/register-to-vote`'s `declarationAddressConfirmed`/`declarationDate`). | | `photo` | **Directly observed** photo box instruction ("Colour photo must be taken against white background, and taken within the last 3 months") on page 1, cross-checked against ICA's general Photo Guidelines page for exact pixel/format/size specs (same specs as `sg/ica/passport-application`'s `photo` field — ICA does not publish IC-specific photo specs separate from its general standard). | | `reasonForNameChange` and the `changeOfParticularsSupportingDocument` document | **Directly observed** instruction box ("Please attach the following documents: ... Supporting documents for any change of particulars e.g. deed poll for a change in name"), modelled as a free-text reason plus a conditionally-required document rather than a guessed enum of change types, since the form does not enumerate them. | | `paymentMethod` and the `replacementFee` document | **Directly observed** fee amounts and payment methods from the "Lost Identity Card" process page's "Fees" section (not from the PDF, which has a payment-details block for card details only — see "Modelling decision: no raw card fields" below). | | `doctorMemoOrLpa` document | **Directly observed** instruction box ("Doctor Memo/ Lasting Power of Attorney (as required)") at the top of the PDF form, but its precise trigger condition is **not confirmed** for the self-application scope this document targets — the FormSG proxy form corroboration above suggests this note may apply primarily (or only) to the medical-incapacity proxy-reporting path, not an applicant reporting for themselves. Left as an unconditional optional document rather than guessing a `requiredWhen` condition; flagged here for a future reviewer with e-Service access to confirm. | ## Modelling decision: no raw payment-card fields The PDF's "Payment Details" block (page 1) asks for "Name on Credit Card", "Credit Card Number", "Credit Card expiry date", and "CVC" as free-text boxes. Per this registry's established convention (see `sg/ica/passport-application`'s `paymentMethod` field), GovSchema models **which** payment method is used, not raw cardholder data — collecting a live PAN/CVC through a schema field would be a payment-processing concern, not a form-structure concern, and is a data-handling anti-pattern this registry deliberately avoids. `paymentMethod` plus the `replacementFee` payment document capture the fee obligation and accepted methods without modelling card-capture fields. ## Modelling decision: one document covers Part I + Part II of the paper form; the proxy/collection sections are out of scope The PDF form contains four sections beyond the two modelled here: 1. **"Particulars of Requestor"** (top of page 1, before Part I) — a separate NRIC/Name/Contact block. Left unmodelled: for a self-reporting applicant this duplicates Part I; it is only functionally distinct when a third party is completing the form, which this document's scope excludes. 2. **"Authorisation to a Proxy to collect Identity Card"** (page 3) — a physical counter-collection delegation (name, NRIC, relationship, and thumbprints of both the applicant and an authorised collector). Excluded: this is a collection-logistics step, not an application-data field, and requires a physical thumbprint an online agent-driven schema cannot supply. 3. **Thumbprint boxes** (page 1, right/left thumbprint) — a biometric capture step performed at an ICA counter, not a value an agent submits through a form field. 4. **Proxy/medical-incapacity reporting** (the FormSG form referenced above, for someone unable to report in person or online) — a distinct channel/process with its own applicant-facing fields (reporter identity, loss location/date/description), not this document's self-application flow. 5. **Age-30/age-55 scheduled re-registration** — a distinct, ICA-notice- triggered process, catalogued separately as `sg/ica/identity-card-reregistration` (not yet authored). Page 6 ("For official use only") is ICA's internal processing block and out of scope by definition. ## Test run with mock data Per this cycle's "complete a test run with valid example mock data" instruction: the live self-service e-Service requires a genuine Singpass login and therefore cannot be exercised with fabricated data (there is no public test/sandbox mode, consistent with every other Singpass-gated flow in this registry). A conformance packet (`conformance/sg/ica/identity-card-replacement/1.0.0/application-packet.json`) was instead assembled illustrating every field of this schema populated with a fabricated mock applicant, following this registry's standard conformance- packet convention for schemas whose live channel cannot be safely or publicly test-submitted. ## Scope and jurisdiction notes - **Whole of Singapore.** ICA's identity-card function is national; there is no subnational variation. - **Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents only**, consistent with NRIC eligibility generally. - **Loss/damage replacement only.** Scheduled age-30/55 re-registration is a distinct document (`sg/ica/identity-card-reregistration`, not yet authored). - **Self-application only.** Proxy/medical-incapacity reporting, and the physical-collection proxy-authorisation section, are out of scope (see above). ## Path to a `verified` claim (next step) To advance to `status: verified`, a reviewer with Singpass access applies `manual-source-review-v1` (Procedure step 2) field-by-field against the live `eservices.ica.gov.sg/esvclandingpage/iconline` e-Service flow, confirms or corrects every field transcribed from the PDF above (particularly the exact input constraints, which the PDF's blank-line layout does not specify), and resolves the `doctorMemoOrLpa` trigger-condition ambiguity noted above by shipping a **new schema version** (immutability — VERSIONING §3, practice Procedure step 5), then records the outcome here plus sets `status: verified` with a current `verification.lastVerifiedAt`/ `nextReviewBy`. ## Re-verification Per the practice's **Cadence**, `nextReviewBy` is set to **2027-01-01** (6 months). Re-check the source on or before that date and on any `source.url` change.