As explained in the previous post, on May 16, 2025, the Department of Energy (DOE) published a “Direct Final Rule” (DFR) that would rescind the Department’s section 504 new construction regulation and specifically its incorporation of the quantitative design standards in the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS). The DFR stated that it would be effective on “unless significant adverse comments are received by June 16, 2025.”
In the 30 days the DFR permitted for comments, our community really stepped up. By the June 16 deadline, the Department had received 20,711 comments.
20,711 comments!
Likely as a result of this robust community turn-out, the effective date has been delayed twice: on July 14, 2025, the Department issued a notice delaying the effective date until September 12, 2025. On September 11, 2025, the Department issued a notice further delaying the effective date until December 10, 2025.
The DOE was slow to start making comments available for public review, but has — as of this morning — published 1,638 of the 20,711 comments. F&R is downloading comments to a Google Drive folder for easier review. I’m sure we’ll never get all 20,711, but the ones we have so far are a joy to read. Here are some random highlights:
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the Department of Energy’s (DOE) proposed changes to the Section 504 accessibility rules.
For over a decade, I have served as an All Source Intelligence Analyst with the Pennsylvania National Guard, with deployments to Kuwait and Jordan. In this role, my work has been centered on research, analysis, and providing clear, actionable intelligence. This experience has taught me that success and safety depend on precision and adherence to established protocols.
Rescinding the rules for accessibility will negatively impact designers, investors, contractors, persons with disabilities, and our court system. Leaving the decision-making for risk management up to the people causing the project to be constructed is an open invitation for litigation, cost-cutting, and discrimination.
Ideologues who seek to thwart, de-fund or defang rules and regulations are often those who seek to break them, under the premise that they will suffer no consequences. The victims here are not only people with disabilities; they are each and every taxpayer in the US.
While the Department’s intent to “give private entities flexibility to comply with the law in the manner they deem most efficient” may be well-meaning, flexibility must not come at the cost of basic access. Minimum accessibility standards are not optional-they are foundational.
I have witnessed firsthand how accessible new construction transforms lives- enabling people with mobility, sensory, and cognitive impairments to learn, work, and participate in public life on equal footing with their peers.
The notion of rescinding new construction requirements regarding accessibility for the disabled is contrary to American patriotic values of equality and justice for all.
I don’t know what will happen on December 10, but our community has demonstrated emphatically that this administration cannot retreat from accessibility.