The Government’s Momentum in Ensuring Dominance in AI Continues as OMB Issues Guidance for Regulation of AI Applications
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.19.20
On November 17, 2020, the Office of Management Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-21-06, “Guidance for Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Applications” providing policy considerations for AI applications that are developed and deployed by the private sector.
The Memorandum notes that fostering innovation and growth in AI is the Government’s top priority and thus agencies must avoid implementing policies or regulations that hamper these priorities. To that end, the Memorandum: (A) propounds ten principles that agencies should consider when determining whether regulation over AI capabilities are necessary; (B) identifies four non-regulatory actions that agencies can take outside the rulemaking process; and (C) addresses how to reduce barriers to the deployment and use of AI.
The ten principles that agencies should consider when formulating regulatory and non-regulatory AI approaches are: (1) Public Trust in AI; (2) Public Participation, including from industry; (3) Scientific Integrity and Information Quality; (4) Risk Assessment and Management; (5) Benefits and Costs; (6) Flexibility; (7) Fairness and Non-Discrimination; (8) Disclosure and Transparency; (9) Safety and Security; and (10) Interagency Coordination.
The Memorandum notes that agencies may find that regulation is unnecessary but that a non-regulatory approach may be warranted to address the risks of AI applications. The Memorandum provides examples of such approaches, including: (1) Sector-Specific Policy Guidance or Frameworks; (2) Pilot Programs and Experiments, including periodically informing industry and the public about emerging trends and changes; (3) Voluntary Consensus Standards, including involving the private sector and other stakeholders in the development of such standards; and (4) Voluntary Frameworks.
The Memorandum also addresses how to reduce barriers to the deployment and use of AI. The memo states that agencies can: (1) provide access to federal data and models for AI R&D; (2) communicate with the public about the benefits and risks of utilizing AI; (3) engage with the private sector regarding the development of voluntary consensus standards; and (4) engage in international regulatory cooperation.
Finally, the Memorandum requires agencies to submit a plan that identifies any regulations that govern the agency’s use of AI applications and also to list and describe the agency’s plan to regulate AI. Agency plans are due to OMB by May 17, 2021.
The key takeaway for federal government contractors is that the Government is making a big push with respect to AI governance and safety, and now is the time for industry to get involved through opportunities such as public-private working groups and notice and comment rulemaking. Doing so can help shape any regulatory or non-regulatory actions that may soon apply to industry’s development and deployment of AI applications.
Contacts

Partner and Crowell Global Advisors Senior Director
- Washington, D.C.
- D | +1.202.624.2698
- Washington, D.C. (CGA)
- D | +1 202.624.2500
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26


