FirstAlerts

OFCCP Final Rules Rescind Affirmative Action Regulations, End Disability Self-ID Form

Final rules from the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs rescind affirmative action regulations under EO 11246 and modify Section 503 and VEVRAA, with conflicting effective dates reported.

2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 3, 2026, 5:06 p.m. ET

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 9, 2026, 4:23 p.m. ET
The has issued final rules that rescind affirmative action regulations under Executive Order 11246 and modify Section 503 and VEVRAA, according to reports from natlawreview.com. Another report from the same outlet says the final eliminates Form CC-305, disability data collection, and the 7% utilization goal. The effective dates are in conflict: one report says the rules take effect on September 21, 2026, while another says October 26, 2026. The proceeding is at the final stage, according to natlawreview.com.

Earlier reports

  1. Sep 3, 2026, 5:06 p.m. ETFirst report

    OFCCP Final Rule Eliminates Disability Self-ID Form and 7% Utilization Goal

    The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) has issued a final rule that eliminates Form CC-305, the disability self-identification form, and the 7% utilization goal, according to a report by the National Law Review.

    The rule, which takes effect on September 21, 2026, was issued in an administrative proceeding and is now final, the report states.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 19 Sept 2026, 20:23current

    First published.

  2. Version 13 Sept 2026, 21:06current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.