DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

 The Department of Justice’s highest priority is to protect America against acts of terrorism, both foreign 

and domestic, within the letter and spirit of the Constitution. While vigorously pursuing the fight against 

terrorism, the Department is also reinvigorating its traditional missions by embracing its historic role in 

fighting crime, protecting civil rights, preserving the environment, and ensuring fairness in the market 

place. The Department is working to achieve the fair and impartial administration of justice for all 

Americans, to assist its State and local partners, and to defend the Nation’s interests according to the 

law. In addition to using investigative, prosecutorial, and other law enforcement activities, the Department 

is also using the regulatory process to better carry out the Department’s wide-ranging law enforcement 

missions. 

 The Department of Justice's key regulatory priorities include regulatory initiatives in the area of civil 

rights, criminal justice, and immigration. These are summarized below. However, in addition to these 

initiatives, several other components of the Department carry out important responsibilities through the 

regulatory process. Although their regulatory efforts are not separately discussed in this overview of the 

regulatory priorities, those components have key roles in implementing the Department's anti-terrorism 

and law enforcement priorities. 

Civil Rights 

 In September 2010, the Department published its final rules amending its regulations implementing 

title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination by public entities, and 

title III of the ADA, which prohibits discrimination by public accommodations and certain testing entities 

and requires commercial facilities to be constructed or altered in compliance with the ADA accessibility 

standards. These key regulations adopt revised ADA Standards for Accessible Design and address 

certain key policy issues. During the course of this rulemaking project, the Department became aware of 

the need to provide guidance on four additional subject matter areas—use of accessible web sites, movie 

captions and video descriptions, the accessibility of emergency call centers (Next Generation 9-1-1), and 

accessible equipment and furniture. On July 26, 2010, the Department published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) for each of these subject areas. These rules will be the focus of the Civil 

Rights Division’s regulatory activities for FY 2011. The Department also plans to propose amendments to 

its ADA regulations to implement the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, which took effect on January 1, 

2009. 

 The four ANPRMs published on July 26, 2010, include: 

 NG 9-1-1. This ANPRM seeks information on possible revisions to the Department’s regulation to 

ensure direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for individuals with disabilities. In 1991, the Department of 

Justice published a regulation to implement title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). 

That regulation requires public safety answering points (PSAPs) to provide direct access to persons with 

disabilities who use analog telecommunication devices for the deaf (TTYs) 28 CFR 35.162. Since that 

rule was published, there have been major changes in the types of communications technology used by 

the general public and by people who have disabilities that affect their hearing or speech. Many 

individuals with disabilities now use the Internet and wireless text devices as their primary modes of 

telecommunications. At the same time, PSAPs are planning to shift from analog telecommunications 

technology to new Internet-Protocol (IP)-enabled Next Generation 9-1-1 services (NG 9-1-1) that will 

provide voice and data (such as text, pictures, and video) capabilities. As PSAPs transition from the 

analog systems to the new technologies, it is essential that their plans ensure that people with 

communication disabilities will be able to use the new systems. Therefore, the Department published this 

ANPRM to begin to develop appropriate guidance for PSAPs that are making this transition. 

 Movie captioning and video description. Title III of the ADA requires public accommodations to take 

“such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is treated differently 

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

1
because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, unless the covered entity can demonstrate that 

taking such steps would cause a fundamental alteration or would result in an undue burden.” 42 U.S.C. 

section 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii). Both open and closed captioning and audio recordings are examples of 

auxiliary aids and services that should be provided by places of public accommodations, 28 CFR section 

36.303(b)(1)-(2). The Department stated in the preamble to its 1991 rule that “[m]ovie theaters are not 

required * * * to present open-captioned films,” 28 CFR part 36, app. B, but it was silent regarding closed 

captioning and video description in movie theaters. 

 Since 1991, there have been many technological advances in the area of closed captioning and video 

description for first-run movies. In June 2008, the Department issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM) to revise the ADA title III regulation, 73 FR 34466, in which the Department stated that it was 

considering options for requiring that movie theater owners or operators exhibit movies that are captioned 

or that provide video (narrative) description. The Department received numerous comments urging the 

Department to issue captioning and video description regulations. The Department is persuaded that 

such regulations are appropriate. However, the Department decided to issue an ANPRM to obtain more 

information regarding issues raised by commenters; to seek comment on technical questions that arose 

from the Department’s research; and to learn more about the status of digital conversion. In addition, the 

Department sought information regarding whether other technologies or areas of interest (e.g., 3D) have 

developed or are in the process of development that either would replace or augment digital cinema or 

make any regulatory requirements for captioning and video description more difficult or expensive to 

implement. Responses to these questions will inform the Department’s decisions about the scope of a 

proposed rule. 

 Web Site Accessibility. The Internet as it is known today did not exist when Congress enacted the 

ADA, yet today the World Wide Web plays a critical role in the daily personal, professional, civic, and 

business life of Americans. The ADA’s expansive nondiscrimination mandate reaches goods and 

services provided by public accommodations and public entities using Internet websites. Being unable to 

access websites puts individuals at a great disadvantage in today’s society, which is driven by a dynamic 

electronic marketplace and unprecedented access to information. On the economic front, electronic 

commerce, or “e-commerce,” often offers consumers a wider selection and lower prices than traditional, 

“brick-and-mortar” storefronts, with the added convenience of not having to leave one’s home to obtain 

goods and services. For individuals with disabilities who experience barriers to their ability to travel or to 

leave their homes, the Internet may be their only way to access certain goods and services. Beyond 

goods and services, information available on the Internet has become a gateway to education, 

socializing, and entertainment. 

 The Internet is also dramatically changing the way that governmental entities serve the public. Public 

entities are increasingly providing their constituents access to government services and programs through 

their websites. Through government websites, the public can obtain information or correspond with local 

officials without having to wait in line or be placed on hold. They can also pay fines, apply for benefits, 

renew State-issued identification, register to vote, file taxes, request copies of vital records, and complete 

numerous other everyday tasks. The availability of these services and information online not only makes 

life easier for the public, but also enables governmental entities to operate more efficiently and at a lower 

cost. 

 The ADA’s promise to provide an equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities to participate in and 

benefit from all aspects of American civic and economic life will be achieved in today’s technologically 

advanced society only if it is clear to State and local governments, businesses, educators, and other 

public accommodations that their websites must be accessible. Consequently, the Department is 

considering amending its regulations implementing title II and title III of the ADA to require public entities 

and public accommodations that provide products or services to the public through Internet websites 

make their sites accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. 

 Equipment and Furniture. Both title II and title III of the ADA require covered entities to make 

reasonable modifications in their programs or services to facilitate participation by persons with 

disabilities. In addition, covered entities are required to ensure that people are not excluded from 

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

2
participation because facilities are inaccessible or because the entity has failed to provide auxiliary aids. 

The use of accessible equipment and furniture is often critical to an entity’s ability to provide a person with 

a disability equal access to its services. Changes in technology have resulted in the development and 

improved availability of accessible equipment and furniture that benefit individuals with disabilities. 

Consequently, it is easier now to specify appropriate accessibility standards for such equipment and 

furniture, as the 2010 ADA Standards will do for several types of fixed equipment and furniture, including 

ATMs, washing machines, dryers, tables, benches, and vending machines. To the extent that ADA 

standards apply requirements for fixed equipment and furniture, the Department will look to those 

standards for guidance on accessibility standards for equipment and furniture that are not fixed. The 

ANPRM seeks information about other categories of equipment—particularly medical equipment and 

exercise equipment. The public is invited to suggest other types of equipment that should be addressed. 

Prison Rape Elimination 

 Pursuant to the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA or the “Act”), the Department is drafting 

regulations to adopt national standards for the detection, reduction, and punishment of prison rape. 

PREA established the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission for the purpose of studying prison 

rape. The Commission issued a report that provided recommended national standards for reducing 

prison rape, which in turn, are to be reviewed by the Justice Department. Specifically, PREA mandates 

that national standards issued pursuant to PREA “shall be based upon the independent judgment of the 

Attorney General, after giving due consideration to the recommended national standards provided by the 

Commission... and being informed by such data, opinions, and proposals that the Attorney General 

determines to be appropriate to consider.” The Act further provides that the Department “shall not 

establish a national standard... that would impose substantial additional costs compared to the costs 

presently expended by Federal, State, and local prison authorities.” 

 The Department is reviewing the Commission’s recommendations and is drafting proposed 

regulations. In addition, the Department is reviewing a study by an independent contractor commissioned 

by the Department’s Office of Justice Programs to analyze the costs of the Commission’s proposed 

recommendations. The Department is also reviewing extensive public comments on the Commission’s 

proposed recommendations pursuant to an ANPRM that the Department issued while awaiting the 

completion of the cost analysis. 

Federal Habeas Corpus Review Procedures in Capital Cases 

 Pursuant to the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005, on December 11, 

2008, the Department promulgated a final rule to implement certification procedures for States seeking to 

qualify for the expedited Federal habeas corpus review procedures in capital cases under chapter 154 of 

title 28 of the United States Code. On February 5, 2009, the Department published in the Federal 

Register a notice soliciting further public comment on all aspects of the December 2008 final rule. As the 

Department reviewed the comments submitted in response to the February 2009 notice, it considered 

further the statutory requirements governing the regulatory implementation of the chapter 154 certification 

procedures. The Attorney General has determined that chapter 154 reasonably could be construed to 

allow the Attorney General greater discretion in making certification determinations than the December 

2008 regulations allowed. Accordingly, a new rulemaking, and the removal of the entire December 2008 

final rule, is warranted in order to articulate the standards the Attorney General will apply in making 

chapter 154 certification decisions and to obtain public input concerning the formulation of such 

standards. As the first step of this process, the Department published a notice in the Federal Register

on May 25, 2010, proposing to remove the December 2008 regulations pending the completion of a new 

rulemaking process. The May 2010 rule will be finalized by a final rule to be published in the fall of 2010. 

The next step in the process will be the publication of a new proposed rule proposing new chapter 154 

certification standards and seeking public input concerning the formulation of such standards.

Criminal Law Enforcement 

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

3
 For the most part, the Department’s criminal law enforcement components do not rely on the 

rulemaking process to carry out their assigned missions. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), for 

example, is responsible for protecting and defending the United States against terrorist and foreign 

intelligence threats, upholding and enforcing the criminal laws of the United States, and providing 

leadership and criminal justice services to Federal, State, municipal, and international agencies and 

partners. Only in very limited contexts does the FBI rely on rulemaking. For example, the FBI is currently 

updating its National Instant Criminal Background Check System regulations to allow criminal justice 

agencies to conduct background checks prior to the return of firearms. 

 The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issues regulations to enforce the 

Federal laws relating to the manufacture and commerce of firearms and explosives. ATF's mission and 

regulations are designed to: 

• Curb illegal traffic in, and criminal use of, firearms, and to assist State, local, and other Federal law 

enforcement agencies in reducing crime and violence; 

• Facilitate investigations of violations of Federal explosives laws and arson-for-profit schemes; 

• Regulate the firearms and explosives industries, including systems for licenses and permits; 

• Assure the collection of all National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms taxes and obtain a high level of 

voluntary compliance with all laws governing the firearms industry; and 

• Assist the States in their efforts to eliminate interstate trafficking in, and the sale and distribution of, 

cigarettes and alcohol in avoidance of Federal and State taxes. 

 ATF will continue, as a priority during fiscal year 2011, to seek modifications to its regulations 

governing commerce in firearms and explosives. ATF plans to issue final regulations implementing the 

provisions of the Safe Explosives Act, title XI, subtitle C, of Public Law 107-296, the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 (enacted Nov. 25, 2002). 

 Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled Substances. Combating the proliferation of methamphetamine 

and preventing the diversion of prescription drugs for illicit purposes are among the Attorney General’s 

top drug enforcement priorities. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is responsible for enforcing 

the Controlled Substances Act and its implementing regulations to prevent the diversion of controlled 

substances, while ensuring adequate supplies for legitimate medical, scientific, and industrial purposes. 

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 continues to develop and enhance regulatory controls relating to the 

diversion control requirements for controlled substances. 

 One of DEA’s key regulatory initiatives is its Interim Final Rule with Request for Comment “Electronic 

Prescriptions for Controlled Substances” [RIN 1117-AA61]. This regulation provides practitioners with the 

option of writing prescriptions for controlled substances electronically and permits pharmacies to receive, 

dispense, and archive electronic prescriptions for controlled substances. This regulation provides 

pharmacies, hospitals, and practitioners with the ability to use modern technology for controlled 

substance prescriptions while maintaining the closed system of controls on controlled substances. 

 Bureau of Prisons Initiatives. The Federal Bureau of Prisons issues regulations to enforce the Federal 

laws relating to its mission: To protect society by confining offenders in the controlled environments of 

prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure, 

and that provide work and other self-improvement opportunities to assist offenders in becoming lawabiding citizens. During the next 12 months, in addition to other regulatory objectives aimed at 

accomplishing its mission, the Bureau will continue its ongoing efforts to: Streamline regulations, 

eliminating unnecessary language and improving readability; improve disciplinary procedures through a 

revision of the subpart relating to the disciplinary process; reduce the introduction of contraband through 

various means, such as clarifying drug and alcohol surveillance testing programs; protect the public from 

continuing criminal activity committed within prison; and enhance the Bureau’s ability to more closely 

monitor the communications of high-risk inmates. 

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

4
Immigration Matters 

 On March 1, 2003, pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA), the responsibility for 

immigration enforcement and for providing immigration-related services and benefits such as 

naturalization and work authorization was transferred from the Justice Department's Immigration and 

Naturalization Service (INS) to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). However, the immigration 

judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals in the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR)) 

remain part of the Department of Justice. The immigration judges adjudicate approximately 300,000 

cases each year to determine whether the aliens should be ordered removed or should be granted some 

form of relief from removal, and the Board has jurisdiction over appeals from those decisions, as well as 

other matters. Accordingly, the Attorney General has a continuing role in the conduct of removal 

hearings, the granting of relief from removal, and the detention or release of aliens pending completion of 

removal proceedings. The Attorney General also is responsible for civil litigation and criminal 

prosecutions relating to the immigration laws. 

 In several pending rulemaking actions, the Department is working to revise and update the regulations 

relating to removal proceedings in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the hearings in 

resolving issues relating to removal of aliens and the granting of relief from removal. 

 On June 3, 2009, the Attorney General announced his intention to initiate a new rulemaking 

proceeding for regulations to govern claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in immigration 

proceedings. The Department is currently drafting regulations to further this goal. The Department is 

also drafting regulations pursuant to the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection 

Reauthorization Act of 2008 to take into account the specialized needs of unaccompanied alien children 

in removal proceedings. 

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

5
The 1 Actions Described in the Regulatory Plan

Title

Regulation 

Identifier 

Number

Rulemaking 

Stage

National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape 1105-AB34 Proposed Rule Stage

Department of Justice (DOJ) 

Legal Activities ( LA ) RIN: 1105-AB34

 View Related Documents

Title: National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape

Abstract: The Department of Justice has under review national standards for enhancing the prevention, detection, and

response to sexual abuse in confinement settings that were prepared by the National Commission on Prison Rape Elimination

pursuant to the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA) and recommended by the Commission to the Attorney General.

Through an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM), the Department received public input on the Commission's

proposed national standards and information useful to the Department in publishing a final rule adopting national standards for

the detection, prevention, reduction and punishment of prison rape, as mandated by PREA.

Priority: Other Significant Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Proposed Rule

Major: Undetermined Unfunded Mandates: No

CFR Citation: 28 CFR 115 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations ) 

Legal Authority: 5 USC 301; 28 USC 509; 28 USC 510; 42 USC 15601

Legal Deadline: 

 Action Source Description Date

Other Statutory 06/23/2010 

Regulatory Plan:

Statement of Need: Rape is violent, destructive, and a crime—no less so when the victim is incarcerated. Tolerance of

sexual abuse of prisoners in the government's custody is incompatible with American values. Congress affirmed the duty to

protect incarcerated individuals from sexual abuse by enacting the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA), 42 U.S.C.

section 15601 et seq.

Legal Basis: PREA requires the Attorney General to promulgate regulations that adopt national standards for the detection,

prevention, and punishment of prison rape. PREA established the Commission to carry out a comprehensive legal and factual

study of a penological, physical, mental, medical, social, and economic impacts of prison rape in the United States, and to

recommend to the Attorney General national standard for the detection, prevention, reduction and punishment of prison rape.

The Commission released its recommended national standards in a report dated June 23, 2009. Pursuant to PREA the final

rule adopting national standards "shall be based upon the independent judgment of the Attorney General, after giving due

consideration to the recommended national standards provided by the Commission...and being informed by such data,

opinions, and proposals that the Attorney General determines to be appropriate to consider." 42 U.S.C. section 24607(a)(2).

PREA expressly mandates that the Department shall not establish a national standard "that would impose substantial additional

costs compared to the costs presently expended by the Federal, State, and local prison authorities." 42 U.S.C. section

24607(a)(3).

Alternatives: Given the specific direction of Congress, the Department is obligated to issue a rule that promulgates

regulations establishing national standards to combat prison rape. As discussed in the rule and in the Regulatory Impact

Analysis (RIA) the Department has received input from numerous stakeholders concerning the development of these regulations

and, as part of the development process, considered a wide range of proposals in developing the content of such standards.

Costs and Benefits: In directing the Attorney General to promulgate national standards for enhancing the prevention,

detection, reduction, and punishment of prison rape. Congress understood that such standards were likely to require federal,

state, and local agencies (as well as private entities) that operate inmate confinement facilities to incur costs in implementing

and complying with those standards. Given the statue's aspiration to "eliminate" prison rape in the United states, Congress

recognized that costs would need to be expended. Indeed, the statute's findings (42 U.S.C. section 15601) suggest an

assessment by Congress that the benefits to society of eliminating prison rape are likely to outweigh any anticipated costs of

achieving that goal. The Department's full discussion of the anticipated costs and benefits of this rule is included in the rule's

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

6
Initial Regulatory Impact Assessment.

Risks: These regulations are intended to carry out the intent of Congress to eliminate prison rape. The risks from the failure

to promulgate these regulations are primarily that inmates in Federal, State, and local facilities would be at higher risk of sexual

assault than they would be if these regulations are promulgated.

Timetable:

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM 03/10/2010 75 FR 11077 

ANPRM Comment Period End 05/10/2010 

NPRM 12/00/2010 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Required: Undetermined Government Levels Affected: Undetermined

Federalism: No

Energy Affected: No

Agency Contact: Robert Hinchman 

Senior Counsel, Office of Legal Policy

Department of Justice

Legal Activities

Room 4252 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington , DC 20530 

Phone: 202 514-8059 

FAX: 202 353-2371

E-Mail: robert.hinchman@usdoj.gov

Regulations.gov Monday, December 20, 2010 The Regulatory Plan

7