Frontline Decision Making in the Adjudication of Applications; Request for Comments

Legal Status This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily
Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal
Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official
electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.

The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal
Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the
corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the
daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial
informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal
Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status.
For complete information about, and access to, our official publications
and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.

The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable
regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of
establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned
publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that
the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with
the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for
legal research should verify their results against an official edition of
the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML
rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not
provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.

Legal Status

Notice

Frontline Decision Making in the Adjudication of Applications; Request for Comments

A Notice by the Administrative Conference of the United States on 04/27/2026

• 1.

1.
This document has a comment period that ends in 62 days.
(06/26/2026)

Thank you for taking the time to create a comment. Your input is important.

Once you have filled in the required fields below you can preview and/or submit your comment to the Administrative Conference of the United States for review. All comments are considered public and will be posted online once the Administrative Conference of the United States has reviewed them.

You can view or you may also comment via Regulations.gov at /documents/2026/04/27/2026-08118/frontline-decision-making-in-the-adjudication-of-applications-request-for-comments.

It appears that you have attempted to comment on this document before
so we've restored your progress.
.
1.
2. Comment * What is your comment about? Upload File(s) Note: You can attach your comment as a file and/or attach supporting
documents to your comment. Attachment Requirements.

Email this will NOT be posted on regulations.gov

Opt to receive email confirmation of submission and tracking number? Tell us about yourself! I am... * An Individual An Organization Anonymous First Name * Last Name * City Region State Alabama Alaska American Samoa Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Zip Country Afghanistan Åland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestine, State of Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Réunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Phone Organization Type * Company Organization Federal State Local Tribal Regional Foreign U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Senate Organization Name * You are filing a document into an official docket. Any personal
information included in your comment text and/or uploaded
attachment(s) may be publicly viewable on the web. I read and understand the statement above.

2. Please review the Regulations.gov privacy notice and user notice.
3. Document Details Published Content - Document Details Agency Administrative Conference of the United States Document Citation 91 FR 22488 Document Number 2026-08118 Document Type Notice Pages 22488-22489 (2 pages) Publication Date 04/27/2026 Published Content - Document Details

• PDF Official Content
  • View printed version (PDF) Official Content
• Document Details Published Content - Document Details Agency Administrative Conference of the United States Document Citation 91 FR 22488 Document Number 2026-08118 Document Type Notice Pages 22488-22489 (2 pages) Publication Date 04/27/2026 Published Content - Document Details
• Document Dates Published Content - Document Dates Comments Close 06/26/2026 Dates Text Comments must be received no later than 10:00 a.m. (ET) June 26, 2026. Published Content - Document Dates

• Table of Contents Enhanced Content - Table of Contents This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the
  headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents.
  This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links
  has no substantive legal effect.

  -

  -

  -

  -

  • Enhanced Content - Table of Contents

• Public Comments Enhanced Content - Public Comments Comments are being accepted - .

Enhanced Content - Public Comments
- Regulations.gov Data Enhanced Content - Regulations.gov Data Additional information is not currently available for this document.

Enhanced Content - Regulations.gov Data

- Sharing Enhanced Content - Sharing Shorter Document URL https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2026-08118 Email Email this document to a friend Enhanced Content - Sharing

• Print Enhanced Content - Print
  • Enhanced Content - Print
• Document Statistics Enhanced Content - Document Statistics Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling, reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.

Page views 19
as of
04/25/2026 at 12:15 pm EDT Enhanced Content - Document Statistics
- Other Formats Enhanced Content - Other Formats This document is also available in the following formats:

JSON Normalized attributes and metadata XML Original full text XML MODS Government Publishing Office metadata More information and documentation can be found in our developer tools pages.

Enhanced Content - Other Formats
- Public Inspection Public Inspection This PDF is FR Doc. 2026-08118 as it appeared on Public Inspection on
04/24/2026 at 8:45 am.

It was viewed
15
times while on Public Inspection.

If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you
should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official
edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the
Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice
to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507. Learn more here.

Public Inspection
Published Document: 2026-08118 (91 FR 22488) This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Document Headings Document headings vary by document type but may contain
the following:

1. the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
2. the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to
3. the agency docket number / agency internal file number
4. the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details.

Administrative Conference of the United States

( printed page 22488)

AGENCY:

Administrative Conference of the United States.

ACTION:

Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

The Office of the Chairman of ACUS is requesting public input on frontline decision making in the adjudication of applications for benefits, loans, grants, licenses, and the like. “Frontline decision making” refers to processes that agencies use to render an initial determination, often based on a review of the application and supporting documentation, which precedes a hearing before an administrative law judge or other agency adjudicator. Responses to this request may inform an ongoing ACUS project, Frontline Decision Making in the Adjudication of Applications, which, if warranted, may recommend best practices for agencies to use.

DATES:

Comments must be received no later than 10:00 a.m. (ET) June 26, 2026.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments by email to info@acus.gov (with “Frontline Decision Making in the Adjudication of Applications” in the subject line of the message), or by U.S. Mail addressed to Frontline Decision Making in the Adjudication of Applications, Administrative Conference of the United States, 1120 20th Street NW, Suite 706 South, Washington, DC 20036. ACUS will ordinarily post comments on the project web page as they are received. Commenters should not include information, such as personal information or confidential business information, that they do not wish to appear on the ACUS website. For the full ACUS public comment policy, please visit https://www.acus.gov/​policy/​public-comment-policy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lea Robbins, Attorney Advisor, Administrative Conference of the United States, 1120 20th Street NW, Suite 706 South, Washington, DC 20036; Telephone (202) 480-2080; email lrobbins@acus.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Administrative Conference Act, 5 U.S.C. 591-596, established the Administrative Conference of the United States. The Conference studies the efficiency, adequacy, and fairness of the administrative procedures used by Federal agencies and makes recommendations to agencies, the President, Congress, and the Judicial Conference of the United States for procedural improvements (5 U.S.C. 594(1)). For further information about the Conference and its activities, see www.acus.gov.

Frontline Decision Making in the Adjudication of Applications

Many federal programs involve the adjudication of applications for benefits, loans, grants, licenses, and the like. In many of these programs, parties are legally entitled to an opportunity for a hearing before a federal agency adjudicator such as an administrative law judge (ALJ) or administrative judge (AJ).

Before proceeding to a hearing, many agencies first attempt to adjudicate applications and resolve cases through processes—sometimes referred to as “frontline”—that are less trial-like. For example, upon receiving an application, agency personnel may work with the applicant to develop an adequate record for decision making. A “frontline” decision maker—not an ALJ or AJ—may then render an initial determination based on a review of the application and supporting documentation.

ACUS is undertaking a project to examine and identify best practices for frontline decision making in the adjudication of applications for benefits, loans, grants, licenses, and the like in which there is a later opportunity for a hearing before a federal agency adjudicator. Among other topics, the project studies the personnel involved in frontline processes; the processes used to develop records and decide cases prior to the hearing stage; the relationship between frontline and hearing-level proceedings, including how evidence obtained and findings made in frontline proceedings may be used at the hearing level; the development and communication of relevant policies; quality assurance and strategies for promoting timeliness; and interactions between frontline components and other agency components, including those responsible for more formal adjudication and policy development.

Specific Topics for Public Comment

ACUS welcomes views, information, and data on all aspects of frontline decision making in the adjudication of applications in which there is a later opportunity for a hearing. For this project, ACUS intends to research frontline decision making at agencies such as the Social Security Administration; the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; the Department of Veterans Affairs; the U.S. Small Business Administration; and the Department of Labor. However, this request for comments is not limited to frontline adjudications of applications at those agencies. ACUS also seeks specific feedback on the following questions related to frontline decision making.

1. If you have, or represented someone who has, submitted an application for benefits, a loan, a grant, a license, or the like in which there is a later opportunity for a hearing before an ALJ or another federal agency adjudicator, what was your experience with the personnel involved in the frontline adjudication of that application? Were you aware of the titles or credentials of the frontline personnel (e.g., job titles, professional licensure, qualifications)? How much communication did you have with the frontline personnel?

2. Did you submit evidence to the frontline personnel and, if so, how was it submitted? Was it clear how the frontline decision maker considered the evidence you submitted when he or she adjudicated your or your client's application?

3. Did the frontline personnel obtain other evidence and, if so, how and from whom did they obtain it? Was it clear how the frontline decision maker considered that evidence when he or she adjudicated your or your client's application?

4. Did you want to, and if so, were you able to review the record compiled ( printed page 22489) by the frontline personnel before a decision was made?

5. How would you describe your overall experience during the frontline adjudication of your or your client's application? Did you appeal the frontline decision? If so, did you have a hearing on your or your client's application before an ALJ or another agency adjudicator?

6. If you appealed the frontline decision, did you have a hearing before an ALJ or another agency adjudicator? If you had a hearing before an ALJ or another agency adjudicator, how did the adjudicator consider the frontline decision and consider the record compiled by frontline personnel? Did you receive clear information before or during the hearing about how the adjudicator would consider the frontline decision and record when deciding the appeal?

7. Are you aware of agency policies (e.g., rules, guidance, manuals, memorandums) that govern how frontline personnel interact with applicants or how they interact with other ALJs or other agency adjudicators who may hear appeals from frontline decisions?

8. Are you aware of agency policies that govern the following:

a. Development and communication of relevant policies (including training);

b. Assuring adequate input from the applicant;

c. Identifying and reducing administrative burdens in the evidence-gathering process;

d. Quality assurance and strategies for promoting timeliness; and

e. Standards governing appeals.

1. Are there any agency policies regarding frontline decision making that you think are especially beneficial? In your experience, are there any agency policies regarding frontline decision making that have presented challenges, are unclear, or are applied inconsistently?

2. Are there particular facts, situations, concerns or goals that you think would be helpful for agencies to consider when they develop and implement policies on frontline decision making? For example, how should agencies:

a. Strike a balance between allowing frontline decision makers flexibility to decide individual cases fairly, accurately, and efficiently while ensuring policies are applied consistently across all cases?

b. Leverage the on-the-ground experience and expertise of frontline personnel when formulating policies or managing programs;

c. Strike a balance between efficient and timely decision making and fair and accurate decision making?

d. Use automation, including but not limited to artificial intelligence?

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 595.

Dated: April 22, 2026.

Shawne C. McGibbon,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2026-08118 Filed 4-24-26; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6110-01-P

Published Document: 2026-08118 (91 FR 22488)