Overview
Title
General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR); Update to OMB Approval Table
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The General Services Administration fixed a mistake they made earlier. They changed "JAN 2025" to "MAR 2025" to make sure everything is correct, like fixing the date on a calendar to the right month.
Summary AI
In the Federal Register, the General Services Administration issued a correction to a previously published rule. The original document, identified as 2025-05430, appeared on March 28, 2025. The correction involves changing the date "JAN 2025" to "MAR 2025" on page 14054 in two specified sections. The purpose of this correction is to update the rules to reflect the accurate month of approval.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
In April 2025, a document from the General Services Administration (GSA) was published in the Federal Register, detailing corrections to a previously issued rule. This document is identified as 2025-05430 and focuses on amending the "General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR)." The original rule had been published a few weeks earlier on March 28, 2025. The corrections involved changing the month “JAN 2025” to “MAR 2025” in two places within the document. Although this change seems minor, it is essential to ensure consistency and accuracy in the legal and regulatory paperwork.
Summary
The purpose of the correction is to update the documented dates within the GSAR to reflect the accurate month. This kind of administrative adjustment ensures that any references to approval or effective dates remain consistent and error-free, which is crucial for maintaining the integrity of legal documents and regulations.
Issues and Concerns
While brief, the document exhibits a few concerns that could affect comprehension:
Lack of Context: The correction notice does not provide an abstract or detailed background, leaving readers without context for why these changes are necessary.
Unclear Significance: For someone not familiar with the administrative processes, the change from "JAN 2025" to "MAR 2025" might seem trivial. The document does not elucidate the importance or consequences of this change, potentially leading to confusion about its impact.
Inconsistency in Presentation: There is a minor inconsistency where the same numbering is applied to different corrections, which could create slight confusion for readers trying to follow the changes systematically.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, understanding these types of corrections might seem of little consequence since they pertain to internal regulatory documentation. However, ensuring that all recorded information is precise and current is critical for the transparent and lawful administration of federal regulations. Updated regulations that are free from errors help maintain public trust in governmental processes.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For parties directly engaged with the GSA or those affected by changes to acquisition regulations, such as government contractors or legal professionals, these corrections can have a more pronounced impact. Accurate dates can affect timelines for compliance and implementation. Inconsistent dates could potentially lead to disputes or misinterpretations regarding deadlines and compliance requirements. Therefore, it is in the interest of those stakeholders to have these corrections implemented promptly and accurately.
Ensuring clarity and accuracy in legal documents supports efficient business operations and reduces the risk of confusion leading to potential legal challenges. This is a positive outcome for entities that rely heavily on precision in regulatory environments. However, without a clear explanation of the context surrounding these changes, stakeholders might need to spend additional time and resources to ensure they understand the implications of such corrections.
Issues
• The document lacks an abstract in its metadata, which might reduce comprehension for readers unfamiliar with the context.
• The correction information provided might be confusing without the original document as it does not explain the significance of changing 'JAN 2025' to 'MAR 2025'.
• There is a minor inconsistency in the numbering of corrections, as '1.' is used before both listed corrections.
• The document does not specify the action or purpose behind the correction, limiting the reader's understanding of its impact or importance.