Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Federal Acquisition Regulation: Section 508-Based Standards in Information and Communication Technology (2021)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 15:31, 29 April 2025 by Annelise Reinwald (contribs) (Text replacement - "Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review. ↵↵Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 furt...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


The Federal Acquisition Regulation: Section 508-Based Standards in Information and Communication Technology is a significant rule issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Department of Defense (DoD), and the General Services Administration (GSA), effective September 10, 2021, that amends the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to implement accessibility standards.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Name: Federal Acquisition Regulation: Section 508-Based Standards in Information and Communication Technology
  • Code of Federal Regulations: 40 CFR 2, 40 CFR 7, 40 CFR 10, 40 CFR 11, 40 CFR 12, 40 CFR 39
  • Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
  • Action: Final rule
  • Type of significant rule: Other significant rule

    • Timeline

    The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

    • September 10, 2021: The final rule became effective.[1]
    • August 11, 2021: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) published the final rule.[1]
    • June 1, 2020: The comment period ended.[1]
    • March 31, 2020: The DoD, GSA, and NASA published the proposed rule and opened the comment period.[1]

    Background

    Congress amended 508 f the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 in 1998 to update the information and communication technology(ICT). The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board sets the accessibility standards for ICT that is covered by section 508. [1]

    Summary of the rule

    The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “

    DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing a final rule amending the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to incorporate recent revisions and updates to accessibility standards issued by the U.S. Access Board.[2]

    		”

    Summary of provisions

    The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[1]

    “

    This final rule amends the FAR to incorporate recent revisions and updates to the accessibility standards issued by the U.S. Access Board pursuant to section 508. These revisions and updates provide benefits that would accrue to Federal agencies, including productivity increases by Federal employees and time saved from reduced phone calls to Federal agencies. Additionally, persons with disabilities using public-facing Federal information and data (e.g., Federal websites) would experience improved access and time savings. There are also substantial unquantifiable benefits. For example, enhanced ICT accessibility for persons with disabilities can be expected to improve access and use of mission-critical ICT, productivity, ability to achieve professional potential, independent living, increase civic engagement, decrease stigma, promote equality, and enhance integration into American society. Updating the FAR to incorporate the revised 508 accessibility standards is also expected to provide benefits to ICT firms that are difficult to quantify and thus were not monetized. For example, harmonization with national and international consensus standards is likely to assist American ICT companies by helping to achieve economies of scale created by wider use of these technical standards.

    This rule codifies changes made by the U.S. Access Board. As such, the monetized costs and benefits in the Final Regulatory Impact Analysis (FRIA), which accompanied the U.S. Access Board's Final ICT Rule, are now realized at the Federal contract level.

    The Access Board's FRIA estimates that, under the expected cost scenario, incremental compliance costs to Federal agencies for procured ICT under the revised 508 accessibility standards over a 10-year timeframe will be $79.0 million per year using a 7% discount rate, and $82.8 million per year using a 3% discount rate. These costs will largely be incurred from compliance with the revised 508 accessibility standards for procured ICT products and services.

    With respect to monetized benefits attributable to procured ICT, the Access Board's FRIA estimates that, under the expected scenario, benefits for procured ICT (and, hence, this final rule) are likely to have an annualized value of $33.1 million over a 10-year timeframe using a 7% discount rate, and $35.2 million using a 3% discount rate.[2]

    		”

    Significant impact

    See also: Significant regulatory action

    Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.

    Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic impact of $100 million or more. Executive Order 14094, issued by President Joe Biden (D) on April 6, 2023, made changes to Executive Order 12866, including referring to economically significant rules as section 3(f)(1) significant rules and raising the monetary threshold for economic significance to $200 million or more.[1]


    The text of the Federal Acquisition Regulation: Section 508-Based Standards in Information and Communication Technology rule states that OMB deemed this rule: significant, but not economically significant:

    “

    This is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993.[2]

    		”

    Text of the rule

    The full text of the rule is available below:[1]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 “Federal Register,” “Federal Acquisition Regulation: Section 508-Based Standards in Information and Communication Technology,” August 11, 2021
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Federal_Acquisition_Regulation:_Section_508-Based_Standards_in_Information_and_Communication_Technology_rule_(2021)&oldid=10361118"