The "Regulatory Accountability Act" seeks to enhance the transparency, accountability, and analytical rigor of federal agency rulemaking. It introduces new definitions for "guidance," "major guidance," and "major rule," establishing clear criteria based on economic impact, policy significance, or departure from existing policy. The bill assigns the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) a central role in reviewing and overseeing agency compliance with these new procedural and analytical requirements. Under the proposed framework, agencies must conduct comprehensive analyses for all rules, considering legal authority, problem significance, and a reasonable number of alternatives. For major rules , this includes detailed quantitative and qualitative cost-benefit analyses of alternatives, with the objective of maximizing net benefits. Agencies must also consider cumulative regulatory burdens and ensure benefits align with the statutory provision authorizing the rulemaking. Before publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking, agencies must submit it to the OIRA Administrator for review. The public notice must include the proposed rule's text, a summary of the agency's considerations, and for major rules, a preliminary explanation of how benefits justify costs and a discussion of alternatives. All supporting studies, models, and scientific information relied upon by the agency must be made publicly accessible in the rulemaking docket. The bill extends public comment periods, requiring at least 60 days generally, and 90 days for major rules, with an additional 30-day responsive comment period for major rules. It also imposes restrictions on agency communications during rulemaking, prohibiting advocacy for or against a proposed rule and requiring the publication of all ex parte communications with stakeholders. For potential major rules, an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking is mandated, along with a published timetable for the rulemaking process. When issuing final rules, agencies must publish a notice that includes a reasoned determination of the considerations, responses to significant public comments, and a plain language summary. For major rules, the final notice must affirm that the rule's benefits justify its costs and that it maximizes net benefits, or provide a detailed justification for adopting an alternative. Agencies are required to use the best reasonably available scientific, technical, or economic information. A key provision mandates that agencies establish a framework for assessing major rules, outlining regulatory objectives, methodologies for measuring effectiveness and impacts, and a plan for ongoing data gathering. These assessments, to be conducted within ten years of a rule's effective date, will analyze actual benefits and costs, determine if objectives are met, and identify if rules are unnecessary or could be improved. OIRA will oversee these assessments, ensuring timely compliance and publishing the results. The bill also modifies judicial review standards, requiring courts to decide questions of law de novo , while giving due regard to agency views. The weight given to an agency's interpretation of its own rules will depend on the thoroughness, validity of reasoning, and consistency of that interpretation. Notably, actions taken by the OIRA Administrator under these new rulemaking provisions are generally precluded from judicial review. These amendments will not apply to rulemakings that are pending or completed as of the bill's enactment date.