[The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations]
[Department of Justice Regulatory Plan]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)

Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The Department of Justice is not a major regulatory agency, and it 
carries out its vital investigative, prosecutorial, and other law 
enforcement activities principally through means other than the 
regulatory process. Even so, the Department does have significant 
responsibilities for implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act 
(ADA) as well as the immigration laws, including the Immigration Reform 
and Control Act of 1986 and the Immigration Act of 1990. The 
Department's key regulatory goals and initiatives are set forth in 
detail below.
The Department has worked actively to implement the general regulatory 
principles of Executive Order 12866. Relatively few of the Department's 
rules are significant regulatory actions requiring review by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Executive Order. Accordingly, 
the orientation of the OMB review process to focus on significant rules 
has required the Department to increase its own efforts to ensure that 
all of its regulations are carefully reviewed for consistency with the 
Administration's regulatory principles, including the large majority of 
rules that are not reviewed directly by OMB as significant regulatory 
actions.
Pursuant to section 4(c) of Executive Order 12866, the Department of 
Justice provides the following statement of regulatory priorities, 
focusing in particular on three regulatory initiatives in the areas of 
civil rights and immigration.
In addition to the specific initiatives set forth below, several other 
components of the Department carry out important responsibilities 
through the regulatory process. Although their regulatory efforts are 
not singled out for specific attention in this Regulatory Plan, those 
components carry out key roles in implementing the Department's law 
enforcement priorities. In particular, the Drug Enforcement 
Administration (DEA) is responsible for controlling abuse of narcotics 
and dangerous drugs by restricting the aggregate supply of those drugs. 
DEA accomplishes its objectives through coordination with State, local, 
and other Federal officials in drug enforcement activities; development 
and maintenance of drug intelligence systems; regulation of legitimate 
controlled substances; and enforcement coordination and intelligence-
gathering activities with foreign government agencies. DEA has various 
regulatory actions under development relating to the drug control 
requirements and to streamlining initiatives undertaken pursuant to the 
Administration's Regulatory Reinvention initiative.
Also, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will be promulgating 
regulations under the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act 
of 1994 (CALEA). Congress enacted CALEA to address the recent and 
continuing advances in telecommunications technology which have 
impaired and, in some instances precluded, law enforcement agencies 
from fully conducting various types of court-authorized electronic 
surveillance. The Attorney General is authorized to reimburse carriers 
for all of the reasonable costs directly associated with the 
modifications they perform on equipment, facilities, and services 
deployed on or before January 1, 1995. These regulations will provide 
the cost accounting standards for reimbursements.
Civil Rights
The Department and its Civil Rights Division are deeply committed to a 
rigorous and revitalized approach to the enforcement of this Nation's 
civil rights laws. In keeping with that commitment, the Division will 
be reviewing, updating, and improving its civil rights regulations, 
which are the Division's basic enforcement tools. As a priority for the 
coming year, the Division is completing the initial ADA rulemaking 
cycle by amending its regulations under the ADA to incorporate revised 
standards applicable to new buildings and facilities used by State and 
local governments. The Department's Regulatory Plan has one civil 
rights initiative.
The Department is planning to make revisions in its regulations 
implementing title II of ADA (and conforming changes to title III) in 
order to incorporate the revised accessibility design guidelines 
developed by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
Board (the Access Board). Subtitle A of title II of the ADA protects 
qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the 
basis of disability in the services, programs, or activities of all 
State and local governments. Title III of the ADA protects qualified 
individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of 
disability by public accommodations and in commercial facilities. The 
Access Board's new guidelines for State and local buildings and 
facilities are the subject of a related, pending rulemaking proceeding, 
and have been subject to considerable scrutiny through the Board's 
regulatory process. The Department of Justice, which is required by 
statute to promulgate regulations that do not go below the Access 
Board's minimum guidelines, will incorporate them into the Department's 
title II rule.
These amendments to the ADA regulations are an important step forward 
in fulfilling the promise of the ADA in ushering in a new era of 
opportunity and dignity for the many millions of Americans with 
disabilities. These regulations, which will apply to new construction 
and to alterations of State and local buildings and facilities, will 
open doors that have shut out people with disabilities in the past.
Immigration
The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is responsible for 
facilitating the entry of persons legally admissible as visitors or as 
immigrants to the United States, for preventing unlawful entry or 
receipt of immigration benefits by those who are not entitled to 
receive them, and for apprehending or removing those aliens who enter 
or remain illegally in the United States. Though many of the 
Administration's goals for more effective immigration process require 
either new statutory authority or increased resources, the regulatory 
process is a vital aspect of carrying out the goals of the immigration 
laws.
Certainly, one of the regulatory challenges facing the Department of 
Justice is to improve the effectiveness of those regulatory efforts. 
Commissioner Meissner established three fundamental goals at the time 
of her confirmation: to increase the professionalism of the Service, to 
provide immigration control with compassion, and to build the Service's 
role in immigration policy leadership and communication. The regulatory 
priorities for the Service follow those priorities, though other 
desired improvements may require legislative action. Two INS 
initiatives are included in this regulatory plan.
The principal policy and program delivery regulations which will be 
presented this year address areas of vulnerability in the immigration 
system. They are also structured to facilitate the proper use of the 
system by deserving persons. The principal regulation will provide 
reforms which are geared to streamlining the naturalization process.
The Service has launched a major initiative, ``Citizenship USA,'' 
designed to increase access to citizenship. Through this project, INS 
will streamline the naturalization process to assure that eligible 
applicants are approved and sworn in as citizens within 6 months of 
filing their applications. A team of INS headquarters and field staff, 
with the assistance of outside experts, has reviewed the current 
process and will propose to the Commissioner a number of modifications 
to procedures and policies. One of the first of these changes is the 
designation of qualified organizations to provide assistance to 
individuals applying for naturalization, on a fee-for-service basis.
The second major program area to be addressed in this regulatory plan 
is the Service's ongoing effort to facilitate the U.S. business 
community's ability to comply with the Employer Sanctions provisions of 
the Immigration Control and Reform Act. Over the past year the Service 
has published a supplemental proposed rule which not only further 
reduced the number of acceptable documents for verifying employment 
eligibility, but also proposed the addition, based on public comments, 
of an employee attestation provision.
The Service has also been involved in discussions with various private- 
and public-sector organizations concerning the feasibility of an 
electronic Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification Form. Efforts 
are currently underway to allow a pilot demonstration program to test 
various phases of electronically handling and/or processing the Form I-
9. The demonstration project is scheduled to be a 2-year project, after 
which the Service hopes to be in a position to present findings and 
recommendations for possible regulatory and/or legislative 
modifications.
Additionally, the Service will be promulgating regulations which will 
propose to eliminate references to several types of employment 
authorization documents (EADs) and to phase in replacement of these 
documents by a new, more secure, EAD.
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--Civil Rights Division (CRT)

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

62. NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN STATE AND LOCAL 
GOVERNMENT SERVICES; PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND COMMERCIAL FACILITIES; 
ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS
Priority:


Other Significant


Legal Authority:


 42 USC 12134; 42 USC 12186; 5 USC 301; 28 USC 509; 28 USC 510; PL 101-
336


CFR Citation:


 28 CFR 35; 28 CFR 36; 28 CFR 37; 28 CFR 38


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


On July 26, 1991, the Department published its final rules implementing 
titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which 
prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities 
(title II) and in places of public accommodation and commercial 
facilities (title III). Those regulations included accessibility 
guidelines required for facilities covered by title III--the ADA 
Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG)--but did 
not specifically include guidelines for facilities covered by title II, 
such as courthouses or prisons. Title II entities now have the option 
of using ADAAG (without certain exceptions applicable only to title III 
facilities) or another existing standard, the Uniform Federal 
Accessibility Standards.
The final rule will amend titles II and III to adopt a revised version 
of ADAAG, which incorporates new guidelines for facilities typically 
covered by title II. The new guidelines were issued as an interim rule 
by the Access Board and were published on the same day as the 
Department's proposed rule. The Department's final rule will also amend 
the compliance procedures set forth in subpart F of the title II 
regulation.


Statement of Need:


Section 504 of the ADA requires the Access Board to issue supplemental 
minimum guidelines and requirements for accessible design of buildings 
and facilities subject to the ADA, including titles II and III. 
Sections 204(c) and 306(c) of the ADA provide that the Attorney General 
shall promulgate regulations implementing titles II and III that are 
consistent with the Access Board's ADA guidelines. Because the 
Department of Justice is required by statute to promulgate regulations 
that do not go below the Access Board's minimum guidelines, and because 
this rule will adopt guidelines issued by the Access Board, as also 
required by statute, this rule is required by statute.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The summary of the legal basis of authority for this regulation is set 
forth above in the Legal Authority and in Statement of Need.


Alternatives:


The Department is required by the ADA to issue this regulation as 
described in the Statement of Need above. All comments (including those 
that suggest alternatives to the current proposed guidelines) received 
by the Department on the proposed rule and by the Access Board on its 
current interim rule and its guidelines published December 21, 1992, 
have been and will continue to be thoroughly analyzed and considered by 
the Department prior to the adoption of any final rule.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


The Clinton Administration is deeply committed to ensuring that the 
goals of the ADA are met. Promulgating this amendment to the 
Department's ADA regulations will ensure that entities subject to the 
ADA will have one comprehensive regulation to follow. Currently, 
entities subject to title II of the ADA (State and local governments) 
have a choice between following the Department's ADA standards for 
title III, which were adopted for places of public accommodation and 
commercial facilities and which do not contain standards for common 
State and local government buildings (such as courthouses and prisons), 
or the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS). By developing 
one comprehensive standard, the Department will eliminate the confusion 
that arises when governments try to mesh two different standards. As a 
result, the overarching goal of improving access to the built 
environment to persons with disabilities will be better served.
The Access Board has analyzed the impact of applying its proposed 
amendments to ADAAG to entities covered by titles II and III of the ADA 
and has determined that they are a significant regulatory action for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866. The Access Board has prepared a 
Regulatory Assessment, which includes a cost impact analysis for 
certain accessibility elements and a discussion of the regulatory 
alternatives considered.
The Access Board has determined that this proposed rule will have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
and, therefore, has included the flexibility analysis required by the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act in its regulatory assessment. The Access 
Board has made every effort to lessen the economic impacts of its 
proposed rule on small entities, but recognizes that such impacts are 
the necessary result of the mandate of the ADA itself. The Access 
Board's analysis also applies to the Department's proposed adoption of 
the revised ADAAG. The Department's proposed procedural amendments will 
not have a significant economic impact on small entities.
The Access Board has made every effort to lessen the impact of its 
proposed guidelines on State and local governments, but recognizes that 
the guidelines will have some federalism impacts. These impacts are 
discussed in the Access Board's Regulatory Assessment, which also 
applies to the Department's proposed rule.


Risks:


Without this amendment to the Department's ADA regulations, regulated 
entities will be subject to confusion and delay as they attempt to sort 
out the requirements of conflicting design standards. This amendment 
should eliminate the costs and risks associated with that process.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM            59 FR 31808                                    06/20/94
NPRM Comment Per59 FR 31808                                    08/19/94
Final Action                                                   09/00/96
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local


Agency Contact:
John Wodatch
Chief, Disability Rights Section
Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
P.O. Box 66738
Washington, DC 20035-6738
Phone: 800 514-0301
TDD: 800 514-0383
Fax: 202 307-1198
RIN: 1190-AA26
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)

                              -----------

                          PROPOSED RULE STAGE

                              -----------

63.  STREAMLINING NATURALIZATION
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 8 USC 1103; 8 USC 1252b; 8 USC 1362; 8 USC 1421; 8 USC 1443; 8 USC 
1447; 8 USC 1448


CFR Citation:


 8 CFR 103; 8 CFR 292


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


This regulatory change is part of the Immigration and Naturalization 
(INS) ``Citizenship USA'' Project to make the naturalization process 
more accessible to eligible immigrants. The change is intended to 
increase the availability of high-quality, low-cost assistance to 
applicants for naturalization and other immigration benefits. It will 
reduce the burden of current regulations and will clarify some 
regulatory provisions which have been confusing to affected parties. It 
will also expand the partnership between INS and organizations in local 
communities.


Statement of Need:


INS now receives far more applications for naturalization than in 
previous years. Many of these applications are filed with some of the 
required information missing, or improperly filled out. Processing 
these applications and returning them for additional information wastes 
time of INS employees, and adds delay to an applicant's waiting time.
Many voluntary organizations working in immigrant communities help 
individuals prepare their applications. INS has learned that these are 
more likely to be complete and legible, expediting processing. Further, 
these organizations provide information regarding INS requirements and 
procedures, which helps individuals decide whether and when to file 
applications for naturalization and other immigration benefits. INS 
believes that increasing the availability of such assistance will 
increase the efficiency and effectiveness of its naturalization 
efforts, reduce the waiting time for applicants, and increase 
satisfaction among its applicants.
INS will amend existing regulations to establish procedures to 
designate qualifying organizations and their individual employees on a 
provisional basis to assist applicants for various naturalization 
benefits, on a fee-for-service basis. These procedures will be 
coordinated with those regarding representation by organizations 
recognized by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The legal basis of authority for these regulatory modifications is set 
forth above in Legal Authority. No aspect of these actions is required 
by statute or court order.


Alternatives:


Some attorneys provide these services to their clients; however, the 
demand exceeds the supply. The BIA recognizes qualified organizations 
to provide representation, which may include application assistance; 
again, the need for assistance exceeds the total capacity of these 
organizations, which are restricted to charging no more than a nominal 
fee for services. By establishing its own procedures for designation, 
INS can expand the availability of high-quality, low-cost services. As 
such designated organizations will be able to charge fees to support 
these services, they should be able to expand to meet the need.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


There will be a relatively small cost for staff time necessary to 
determine the qualifications of organizations and their individual 
employees seeking designation, as well as a small cost for monitoring 
the ongoing quality of such services and the designees' continued 
compliance with the requirements. The benefits include: shortened 
average processing time for applications due to improved accuracy; 
reduced demand for INS staff to answer routine application questions or 
provide forms; better understanding of requirements and procedures by 
potential applicants; fewer filings by clearly ineligible persons, 
saving them and INS time and money; and the potential for enhanced 
relationships between INS and the public in local communities. The INS 
anticipates that these benefits will substantially exceed the costs.


Risks:


These regulatory initiatives do not involve risk reduction efforts 
involving health, public safety, or environmental concerns.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM (INS 1735) Comment Period End 2/96                        12/00/95
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


Federal


Additional Information:


Craig S. Howie, Sr., Adjudications Officer is also an agency contact.
INS No. 1735, Contact Yolanda Sanchez-K, Pearl Chang.
INS No. 1275, Related Naturalization effort.


Agency Contact:
E. B. Duarte, Jr. Director
Outreach and Facilitation Staff
Examinations
Department of Justice
Immigration and Naturalization Service
425 I Street NW.
Room 3214
Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 514-5014
RIN: 1115-AE18
_______________________________________________________________________
DOJ--INS

                              -----------

                            FINAL RULE STAGE

                              -----------

64. CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS
Priority:


Other Significant


Reinventing Government:


This rulemaking is part of the Reinventing Government effort. It will 
revise text in the CFR to reduce burden or duplication, or streamline 
requirements.


Legal Authority:


 8 USC 1101; 8 USC 1103; 8 USC 1255a; 8 USC 1255a note; 8 USC 1324a; 8 
USC 1160; 8 CFR 2


CFR Citation:


 8 CFR 210; 8 CFR 245a; 8 CFR 274a


Legal Deadline:


None


Abstract:


The document reduction rule (INS No. 1399-93) reduces the number of 
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)-issued documents that are 
acceptable for purposes of completing the Employment Eligibility 
Verification Form (Form I-9). This rule proposes to further simplify 
compliance with the employment eligibility verification requirements 
and address the concerns of employers who allege confusion created by 
the multiplicity of acceptable documents on the Form I-9.
A supplemental proposed rule published on June 22, 1995, at 60 FR 32472 
proposed creating a requirement on the part of the employee to sign an 
attestation in section 3 of Form I-9, during the reverification process 
indicating that they are still authorized to work in the United States 
(INS No. 1399S-94). The supplemental rule also proposed the elimination 
of Federal identification cards as acceptable List B identity 
documents.


Statement of Need:


In a March 1990 report, the General Accounting Office (GAO) noted that 
the multiplicity of acceptable work eligibility documents can give rise 
to confusion and uncertainty in the minds of employers seeking to 
determine whether individuals are eligible to work. (Immigration 
Reform: Employer Sanctions and the Question of Discrimination 62 (GAO/
GGD-90-62, Mar. 1990)). A reduction in the number of acceptable 
documents should reduce confusion and uncertainty on the part of 
employers, and thereby reduce potential employment discrimination based 
upon misapplication of the employment eligibility verification 
requirements.


Summary of the Legal Basis:


The legal basis of authority for this regulation is set forth above in 
Legal Authority. No aspect of this regulatory action is required by 
statute or court order.


Alternatives:


One often repeated criticism of employer sanctions is the number of 
documents that are acceptable for completing the Form I-9. The Service 
has taken steps to address this criticism. In July 1988, the Service 
committed to the establishment of procedures for a uniform employment 
authorization policy. First, the Service limited the number and types 
of paper documents on which employment could be authorized. Second, the 
Service introduced the standardized Employment Authorization Document 
(Form I-688B). The Service has determined that further steps can be 
taken to streamline the employment eligibility verification system by 
reducing the number of documents acceptable for Form I-9 purposes. 
During the next few months the Service will issue a proposed regulation 
which introduces a new, more secure employment authorization document 
(EAD) which will eventually replace existing EADs.


Anticipated Costs and Benefits:


Employment is often the magnet that attracts individuals to come to or 
stay in the United States illegally. The employer sanctions provisions 
help reduce the strength of this magnet by requiring employers to hire 
only those individuals who may legally work in the United States. This 
rule, by reducing the number of documents that are acceptable for 
employment eligibility verification purposes, will reduce confusion and 
uncertainty on the part of employers in the application of the 
employment eligibility verification requirements. This, in turn, will 
increase employer compliance and thereby result in more jobs being 
available for those who are authorized to work in the United States. In 
addition, by reducing confusion and uncertainty on the part of 
employers, this rule will reduce potential employment discrimination 
based upon misapplication of the employment eligibility verification 
requirement.


Risks:


An employment eligibility verification system that relies on a 
multiplicity of documents, and is difficult to understand, may result 
in employment discrimination based upon misapplication of the 
employment eligibility verification requirements. In addition, a 
complicated employment eligibility verification system may encourage 
fraud and result in individuals who are authorized to work in the 
United States being displaced by unauthorized individuals.


Timetable:
_______________________________________________________________________
Action                                 DFR Cite

_______________________________________________________________________
NPRM (INS 1399);58 FR 61846riod end 12/23/93                   11/23/93
Supplemental NPR60 FR 32472S) Comment period end 7/24/95       06/22/95
Public Notice (INS 1713) Pilot Demonstration Program           10/00/95
Final Rule (INS 1399)                                          12/00/95
Small Entities Affected:


Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, Organizations


Government Levels Affected:


State, Local, Federal


Additional Information:


INS No. 1399-92
INS No. 1399S-94, Control of Employment of Aliens Supplemental Rule.
INS No. 1713-95, Demonstration Project for Electronic I-9s, contact 
Robert Atwater, 202-514-2998.
Cross Reference INS No. 1707-95, RIN 1115-AE06, contact Sharen Nichols, 
202-514-3156.


Agency Contact:
Cristina Hamilton
Associate General Counsel
Office of General Counsel
Department of Justice
Immigration and Naturalization Service
425 I Street NW.
Room 6100
Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 514-2895
RIN: 1115-AB73
BILLING CODE 4410-01-F