The only definition of a job applicant OFCCP ever wrote into 41 CFR chapter 60 sits in the one part it has proposed to delete. Internet Applicant has been codified at 41 CFR 60-1.3 since 6 February 2006, and its sole authority, Executive Order 11246, was revoked on 21 January 2025. Section 503 and VEVRAA survive as statutes and still require counting applicants. Neither defines the word, and OFCCP has proposed reserving the 503 count.

A note on tense and limits. Every passage here is live CFR text as of 20 July 2026: a fact about the code, not about what binds you. Every duty below binds the employer as a federal contractor, never an individual clearance holder, as our overview of OFCCP compliance sets out. None is legal advice, and EO 14173 makes anti-discrimination compliance material to payment under 31 U.S.C. 3729(b)(4). Check it with your contracting officer and counsel.

What does the Internet Applicant rule actually test?

The definition at 41 CFR 60-1.3 reads:

“Internet Applicant means any individual as to whom the following four criteria are satisfied: (i) The individual submits an expression of interest in employment through the Internet or related electronic data technologies; (ii) The contractor considers the individual for employment in a particular position; (iii) The individual’s expression of interest indicates the individual possesses the basic qualifications for the position; and, (iv) The individual at no point in the contractor’s selection process prior to receiving an offer of employment from the contractor, removes himself or herself from further consideration or otherwise indicates that he or she is no longer interested in the position.”

All four must be satisfied, and the contractor’s channel choice controls only the first. Paragraph (2) attaches to criterion (1)(i) alone: submitting through the Internet “includes all expressions of interest, regardless of the means or manner in which the expression of interest is made, if the contractor considers expressions of interest made through the Internet or related electronic data technologies in the recruiting or selection processes for that particular position.” Criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv) still gate independently. Reverse the channel and so does the prong, in Example C: Contractor C considers “only paper resumes … for the Mechanic position, therefore no individual meets this part of the definition of an Internet Applicant.” Examples A and B run the other way, position by position.

Paragraph (3) hands the contractor a lever. “A contractor may establish a protocol under which it refrains from considering expressions of interest that are not submitted in accordance with standard procedures the contractor establishes. Likewise, a contractor may establish a protocol under which it refrains from considering expressions of interest, such as unsolicited resumes, that are not submitted with respect to a particular position.” Cutting a large volume by “random sampling or absolute numerical limits” is not consideration either. A standing, uniformly applied protocol bounds the count; shutting off online applications does not.

Criterion (iii) carries the only deadline. Where a contractor sources from an external resume database rather than advertising, paragraph (4)(i)(B) requires the basic qualifications to be recorded “in advance … prior to considering any expression of interest for that particular position,” and to be noncomparative, objective and relevant. Screen first, document later, and the record is worthless.

If nobody is an Internet Applicant, do you keep nothing?

Short answer. No. The retention sentence at 41 CFR 60-1.12(a) reaches resume-database activity “regardless of whether the individual qualifies as an Internet Applicant.” Failing the test removes a person from one count, not from the file.

The governing clause sits at the end of a long sentence in 41 CFR 60-1.12(a). For internal resume databases the contractor keeps “a record of each resume added …, the date each resume was added …, the position for which each search … was made, and … the substantive search criteria used and the date of the search.” For external ones: the position searched, the criteria, the date, “and the resumes of job seekers who met the basic qualifications … who are considered by the contractor” — all of it “regardless of whether the individual qualifies as an Internet Applicant.”

Search criteria, not just results, which is why surviving an OFCCP audit turns on sourcing logs. That paragraph’s clock governs “any personnel or employment record made or kept by the contractor,” not just those database records: two years, or one year for a contractor with fewer than 150 employees or no Government contract of at least $150,000 — a federal-contract test, not a revenue test.

Do not file that clock under the revoked order and purge on it. 41 CFR 60-741.80(a) and 60-300.80(a) impose the identical clock under Section 503 and VEVRAA, on live statutory authority, and both name the records: “job advertisements and postings; applications and resumes; tests and test results; interview notes.” OFCCP’s July 2025 proposal to rewrite 60-741.80 reprints it word for word. All three attach the same penalty: “there may be a presumption that the information destroyed or not preserved would have been unfavorable to the contractor,” unless the loss came from “circumstances that are outside of the contractor’s control.”

The status itself governs two narrower things: the “where possible” demographic identification under 60-1.12(c)(1)(ii), and adverse-impact analysis under (d), where OFCCP requires “only those records relating to the analyses of the impact of employee selection procedures on Internet Applicants.” Who is counted, not what is kept.

Is any of this still binding in 2026?

Part 60-1’s authority note names one source: “Sec. 201, E.O. 11246 … as amended.” Executive Order 14173, at 90 FR 8633, revoked it; the 90-day window closed around 21 April 2025. It orders OFCCP to “immediately cease: (A) Promoting ‘diversity’; (B) Holding Federal contractors and subcontractors responsible for taking ‘affirmative action’; and (C) Allowing or encouraging Federal contractors and subcontractors to engage in workforce balancing based on race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin.” All three, and none is recordkeeping. Its Section 7(a) carve-out names veterans and the Randolph-Sheppard Act, nothing about disability, so do not credit it with sparing Section 503 or VEVRAA.

The rescission proposal is RIN 1250-AA17, at 90 FR 28472. Its caption lists nine parts; its amendment instruction does not. It proposes “removing and reserving parts 60-1, 60-2, 60-3, 60-4, 60-20, 60-40, 60-50 and 60-999, and … revising part 60-30” — and the revised 60-30, which houses the enforcement machinery, is re-grounded on “29 U.S.C. 793 … and 38 U.S.C. 4212,” to “retain the Section 503 and VEVRAA components.” Two further proposals published the same day: AA18 for Section 503 (90 FR 28494), AA19 for VEVRAA (90 FR 28485). All three were still proposed on 22 July 2026.

Take the lower CFR figure seriously: under 41 CFR 60-300.5(e) the clause is “part of every contract … whether or not it is physically incorporated,” so a subcontractor reading only the higher FAR number concludes wrongly.

The surviving duties require counting something nobody defined

Under 41 CFR 60-741.44(k) a contractor documents annually, and keeps three years: “(1) The number of applicants who self-identified as individuals with disabilities … or who are otherwise known to be individuals with disabilities; (2) The total number of job openings and total number of jobs filled; (3) The total number of applicants for all jobs; (4) The number of applicants with disabilities hired; and (5) The total number of applicants hired.” VEVRAA’s 60-300.44(k) is identical with protected veterans substituted, and item (1) is why that protected-veteran question sits on contractor applications. Both sit in Subpart C, which reaches only contractors with 50 or more employees and a contract of $50,000 or more (Section 503) or $100,000 or more (VEVRAA). Neither part defines “applicant” or contains the word “Internet.”

The two are not symmetric. AA18 would amend 60-741.44 to read “(k) [Reserved],” remove 60-741.42 (the self-identification section (k)(1) cross-references) and remove 60-741.45, the 7 percent utilization goal. AA19 revises 60-300.21(g)(2) and 60-300.65, leaving 60-300.44(k) and the listing clause untouched. The VEVRAA count and listing duty are holding; the Section 503 count is on the table. Nor will skimming 60-1.3 rescue item (3): the “Applicant” defined there means “an applicant for Federal assistance involving a construction contract,” not a job seeker.

Where does a cleared opening have to be listed?

41 CFR 60-300.5(a) is the equal opportunity clause, reaching contractors through FAR 52.222-35. Paragraph 2 requires it “to immediately list all employment openings … but excluding those of independently operated corporate affiliates, with the appropriate employment service delivery system where the opening occurs”; the state job bank satisfies that. Paragraph 3 adds timing and a limit read with it: listing “shall be made at least concurrently with the use of any other recruitment source or effort,” and “does not require the hiring of any particular job applicants or from any particular group.” A referral obligation, not a quota, as VEVRAA and the mandatory job listing explains.

Listing is not the whole duty. Paragraph 4 is a separate step: a contractor other than a state or local government “shall advise the employment service delivery system in each state where it has establishments that: (a) It is a Federal contractor … and (b) it desires priority referrals from the state of protected veterans for job openings at all locations within the state,” plus each hiring location and the responsible official’s contact details. And: “In the event that the contractor uses any external job search organizations to assist in its hiring, the contractor shall also provide … the contact information for the job search organization(s).” They fall due “simultaneously with the contractor’s first job listing at each employment service delivery system location,” updated with the next listing when anything changes. Skip paragraph 4 and the state never flags you as a federal contractor, the priority referral never happens, and your postings sit inert.

Now the exceptions, and there are more than this paragraph holds. Paragraph 6.i defines the term: “All employment openings includes all positions except executive and senior management, those positions that will be filled from within the contractor’s organization, and positions lasting three days or less.” Three, no catch-all, no clearance among them. But that list bounds the definition, not the duty. Paragraph 5, immediately above, removes the duty outright: paragraphs 2 and 3 “do not apply to the listing of employment openings which occur and are filled outside of the 50 states, the District of Columbia,” Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, Wake Island and the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands. 41 CFR 60-300.4(a)(3) agrees: the part “applies only to employment activities within the United States and not to employment activities abroad.” For OCONUS billets that occur and are filled overseas, that is the exception you have, and listing them anyway publishes program and location detail you may have no business publishing.

One more line governs the advertisement. Paragraph 12: the contractor “must, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to their protected veteran status.” Unconditional, on every requisition and every board.

Where our own board is the weaker choice

We run ClearedJobs.NET, so weigh this accordingly. Paragraph 2’s last sentence is conditional: information given to a private job service “will satisfy the contractor’s listing obligation if the privately run job service or exchange provides the information to the appropriate employment service delivery system in any manner and format that the employment service delivery system permits which will allow that system to provide priority referral of protected veterans.” A scan of our homepage and employer page on 22 July 2026 found no mention of OFCCP, VEVRAA, the National Labor Exchange or state workforce agencies. That is an absence of a claim, not proof of an absence of capability. So do not book a ClearedJobs.NET posting as your VEVRAA listing: confirm with us, or also list with the state system. And if you use us, paragraph 4 says you owe the state our details as an external job search organisation.

On this axis a general aggregator that is a documented National Labor Exchange feed is the stronger compliance choice and a clearance-niche board is the weaker one. Our advantage is audience quality, a recruiting argument and not a compliance one; that side is covered in where to post cleared jobs. No published statistic covers what share of cleared openings go to niche boards or state job banks, so a percentage quoted at you is a vendor survey in costume.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does posting a cleared job on a niche board satisfy VEVRAA?

Only if that board passes the opening to the appropriate employment service delivery system in a format allowing priority referral of protected veterans, per 41 CFR 60-300.5(a). Ask the board, list with the state job bank if unclear, and make the paragraph 4 disclosures regardless.

If we accept only paper resumes, does the recordkeeping stop?

No. Example C in 41 CFR 60-1.3 means no one qualifies as an Internet Applicant for that position, which affects the demographic and adverse-impact analyses. Paper applications and resumes stay personnel records under 60-1.12(a), 60-741.80(a) and 60-300.80(a), kept two years, or one for a small contractor.

Is the Internet Applicant rule still in force?

It remains codified at 41 CFR 60-1.3, current as of 20 July 2026, and its only authority was revoked on 21 January 2025. The removal proposal was not final on 22 July 2026. No primary source says OFCCP has stopped enforcing Part 60-1 recordkeeping: EO 14173’s three cessations do not name it, and 60-1.12(e) grounds the duty in “the Executive Order and this part.” Codified, unrepealed, enforcement uncertain.

Does a clearance requirement trigger the national security exemption?

No. Under 41 CFR 60-300.4(a)(2) the head of the contracting agency must find a specific contract “essential to the national security” and its award without compliance “necessary to the national security,” then notify the OFCCP Director within 30 days. Two findings, by an agency head, attaching to a contract, not something a contractor invokes. 60-741.4(a)(2) matches.

OFCCP’s VEVRAA recordkeeping collection, OMB 1250-0004, went to OIRA on 23 April 2026 and was still pending on 22 July 2026, against a previously approved expiration of 31 July 2026. Put all three rulemakings on a monthly check: AA17 for the part housing the definition, AA18 for the Section 503 count, AA19 for the listing duty. Then write down the applicant definition your organisation actually uses, because no regulation is going to supply one.