Summary#
This bill, called the Guidance Out Of Darkness (GOOD) Act, requires most federal agencies to publish their guidance documents in one public place on the internet. The main change is a rule that agencies must post new guidance when issued and must upload existing guidance that is in effect within 180 days. The stated goal is to make agency guidance easier for the public to find.
- Main change: Agencies must publish guidance documents in a single internet location designated by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
- Which documents: The bill defines “guidance documents” broadly (for example: memoranda, notices, letters, blog posts, speeches, no‑action letters) if an agency official has designated them as setting out a policy or interpretation.
- Timing: New guidance must be posted when issued. Existing, in‑effect guidance must be posted within 180 days of the law. OMB must name the website within 90 days.
- Organization: Agencies must link from their own websites to the single location and organize documents into categories and subcategories.
- Exceptions: Documents or parts of documents exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) do not have to be posted. Rescinded guidance must be kept online but marked as rescinded and show the rescission date and, if applicable, the court case number.
What it means for you#
- Federal agencies and OMB: Must collect and publish guidance documents at a central website. OMB must pick that site within 90 days. Agencies must add existing guidance within 180 days and post new guidance as issued.
- Businesses and regulated parties: Could find it easier to locate agency guidance that affects how rules are followed or enforced.
- Lawyers, compliance staff, and advocates: May get a single, centralized place to search for guidance, including older or rescinded items.
- Members of the public: May have better online access to agency interpretations and advice that previously were scattered across many pages or not clearly labeled.
- What is unclear: The bill does not specify technical standards (for example, required search functions, metadata, file formats, or accessibility standards). It also does not say how OMB or agencies will verify they have found every document that should be posted.
Expenses#
No publicly available information.
- This change would likely increase administrative and IT work for agencies and for OMB. Possible needs include staff time to locate, review, and upload documents; website hosting and maintenance; and categorization and linking from agency sites.
- The bill does not include a funding provision or a federal cost estimate in the text provided.
Proponents' View#
- The bill appears intended to increase transparency by making agency guidance easy to find in one place.
- It could reduce confusion by creating a public record of what non‑binding agency advice and interpretations are in effect.
- Keeping rescinded guidance online with a clear label could help show changes over time and make legal and policy histories easier to trace.
- A central site with agency links could save time for businesses, lawyers, and the public who search for guidance across multiple agency websites.
Opponents' View#
- One concern is administrative burden: agencies may need extra staff, IT upgrades, or money to collect and post many documents. The bill does not provide funding.
- The bill lets agencies decide which documents are “designated” as guidance. This could leave important materials out if an agency chooses not to label them.
- FOIA exemptions allow agencies to withhold certain documents or information, so some key guidance might still be unavailable.
- The law does not set technical or search requirements. This may limit how useful the central repository is in practice.
- The bill does not create penalties or a clear enforcement mechanism if an agency fails to post required materials, so compliance and oversight are uncertain.