Browse regulations

Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to award contracts without competition for agricultural research, extension, and teaching programs, requiring competition to the maximum practicable extent and a written justification when competition is not used.

Non-competitive contracting inflates taxpayer costs, distorts market incentives, and invites regulatory capture. The same objectives can be achieved through competitively awarded contracts that specify necessary expertise, eliminating the need for this exception and its hidden tax burden on Americans.

Delegates authority from the Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) to Mission Area senior contracting officials to authorize paid newspaper advertisements under 44 U.S.C. 3702; redelegation must be in writing.

This internal agency procedural rule does not protect the public or serve a critical function; its removal would not harm Americans and would reduce regulatory clutter, with the agency able to manage delegations via internal guidance.

Mandates insertion of specific FAR clauses in federal contracts: AGAR 452.204-70 for simplified acquisition contract closeout modifications, and AGAR 452.204-71 for contracts requiring Personal Identity Verification (PIV) under FAR 52.204-9.

These mandatory procurement clauses add administrative burden without clear net benefit. They exemplify bureaucratic prescription over streamlined contracting, raising compliance costs—especially for small businesses—and creating barriers to government competition. Federal procurement would be better served by flexible, outcome-based approaches that reduce paperwork and let market forces optimize procedures.

This regulation mandates that USDA procurement officials comply with federal ethics standards (5 CFR 2635) and procurement integrity rules (FAR 3.104), requiring guidance from USDA ethics officials on conduct issues.

Deleting these standards would invite corruption, conflicts of interest, and waste of taxpayer funds. Uniform ethics and procurement rules prevent regulatory capture, ensure competitive bidding, and maintain public trust. The unseen costs of cronyism—higher prices, lower quality, and barriers to fair competition—far exceed minimal compliance burdens. Without enforceable standards, USDA procurement would be vulnerable to the very special-interest influence this regulation prevents.

Internal USDA definitions establishing procurement authority hierarchy: 'Acquisition official,' 'Agency head,' 'Head of Contracting Activity,' 'Mission Area senior contracting official,' and 'Senior Procurement Executive.'

These are purely internal organizational definitions imposing no compliance costs on the public or distorting markets. They contribute to the 185,000-page regulatory labyrinth without improving Americans' liberty, wellbeing, or economic efficiency. USDA can manage role definitions through internal manuals; CFR codification serves only bureaucratic inertia.

The AGAR is USDA's supplemental acquisition regulation implementing and supplementing the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) for USDA procurements. It establishes procurement policies, procedures, and contract clauses for USDA contracting activities, governs deviations and delegations, and designates agency-specific internal guidance structures.

The AGAR imposes an unnecessary regulatory layer atop the FAR, multiplying bureaucracy, formal rulemaking costs, and compliance overhead for USDA procurement. Its maintenance and enforcement waste taxpayer resources that could be avoided by relying on the FAR and streamlined internal directives.

This Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) subpart establishes a pilot program allowing noncompetitive sole-source award of follow-on defense contracts to qualified businesses—defined as S corporations with 100% employee ownership through ESOPs. The program, authorized by FY2022 and FY2024 NDAAs and set to expire December 27, 2029, permits one sole-source follow-on contract per predecessor contract to contractors with satisfactory performance ratings, and limits subcontracting to non-qualified businesses to 50% unless waived. The regulation implements mandatory contract clauses and provisions for participating acquisitions.

This regulation distorts defense procurement by replacing competitive bidding with sole-source preference for a narrow business structure, increasing costs and reducing accountability. It violates equal treatment principles by picking winners—ESOP-owned S-corps—while burdening other businesses, especially small firms that cannot adopt this specific structure. The 50% subcontracting limit further complicates supply chains and raises prices. Even as a pilot, it bureaucratizes what should be market decisions and expands DoD's regulatory footprint without constitutional warrant.

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) implementing the American Security Drone Act of 2023, prohibiting federal agencies from procuring or operating unmanned aircraft systems manufactured or assembled by designated foreign entities, with various exemptions for national security agencies and waivers available.

This protectionist regulation restricts federal agencies' ability to procure best-value products based on arbitrary national origin bans rather than actual security risk assessments. It reduces competition, increases taxpayer costs, shields domestic incumbents, and creates compliance burdens—all while using vague 'national security' to override free market principles. The security rationale is overbroad; true security requires case-by-case evaluation of specific vulnerabilities, not blanket bans on entire categories of foreign technology.

FCC regulation allocating three radio frequency bands (2025-2110, 2200-2290, 2360-2395 MHz) for space launch operations with technical standards, non-exclusive licensing, and mandatory frequency coordination to prevent harmful interference.

Without government-coordinated spectrum management, overlapping frequencies would cause interference risking launch failures, loss of life, and destruction of multi-billion dollar assets. The regulation's technical standards and coordination process efficiently prevent tragedy of the commons in this scarce, safety-critical resource in a way private ordering couldn't replicably ensure.

FCC regulation prohibits broadband providers and related entities from adopting policies that discriminate based on protected characteristics or have discriminatory effects, unless justified by technical or economic feasibility. Covers deployment, service quality, pricing, marketing, and customer service. Places burden on entities to prove feasibility defenses and creates an advisory opinion process.

Regulation imposes substantial compliance costs and legal uncertainty that distort market incentives. The 'discriminatory effects' standard creates liability for facially neutral practices with statistical disparities, forcing ISPs to prioritize regulatory compliance over economic efficiency. This will raise consumer prices, reduce investment in network expansion (especially in less profitable areas), and stifle innovation through risk-averse behavior. Actual intentional discrimination is already prohibited under existing civil rights law; this overbroad expansion of federal authority into broadband marketplace will harm the very consumers it claims to protect.

Regulation by Federal Maritime Commission establishes standards for when ocean common carriers' refusals of cargo space accommodations or refusals to deal are 'unreasonable' under 46 U.S.C. 41104. It defines terms, lists elements for claims, non-binding factors and examples, and requires carriers to file an annual documented export policy (non-public).

Imposes compliance costs (annual filing), creates vague 'unreasonable' standard leading to arbitrary enforcement and litigation that chills legitimate operational decisions, interferes with carriers' autonomy to optimize safety and efficiency, and may reduce competition by raising barriers to entry. The unseen effect is regulatory overreach that undermines market discipline.

This FMC regulation mandates minimum information requirements for demurrage and detention invoices in the shipping industry, including identifying, timing, rate, dispute, and certification information, plus strict 30-day invoicing and dispute resolution timelines. A technical violation (missing required info) nullifies payment obligation.

Federal micromanagement of private contractual invoicing creates disproportionate compliance burdens on small carriers and NVOCCs, encourages technical defenses to legitimate charges, and substitutes bureaucratic form requirements for market-driven billing practices. Existing contract law and commercial reputation systems sufficiently protect against fraud and abuse; the unseen costs include reduced contractual flexibility, increased litigation over paperwork technicalities, and barriers to entry in the shipping logistics market that protect incumbents from competition.

Implements Great Lakes pilotage regulations by setting physical examination requirements, minimum training round trips for apprentice pilots based on endorsement, prescribing mandatory course instruction topics, and requiring pilotage pool working rules approval and coordination with Canada.

Deletion would risk maritime safety on the Great Lakes, a vital commercial waterway with complex navigation and international border. Federal standards ensure pilots are physically fit, adequately trained, and knowledgeable of regulations and emergency procedures, preventing accidents that could cause loss of life, environmental harm, and economic disruption. The uniform, mandatory framework is superior to relying on private liability or state-by-state rules, which would create inconsistency and potentially lower safety standards, especially given the cross-border nature of Great Lakes shipping.

Federal regulation establishing a comprehensive framework for Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to protect human subjects in all research conducted, supported, or regulated by federal agencies. Requires institutions to provide written assurance of compliance, mandates IRB review and approval for most research activities, defines key terms like 'human subject' and 'research,' and includes exemption categories for low-risk activities.

Massive compliance costs and administrative burden stifle research innovation and create barriers to entry. Violates constitutional federalism by imposing uniform federal standards on matters better left to states and professional self-regulation. Unintended consequences include delayed medical breakthroughs and distorted research incentives. Alternative mechanisms (state laws, liability, professional ethics) can adequately protect subjects without bureaucratic overreach.

This regulation establishes the organizational structure, leadership, and operational details of AmeriCorps (the Corporation for National and Community Service), including its four main programs: NCCC, Seniors, State and National, and VISTA. It defines the agency's regions, leadership positions, and logo usage restrictions.

This federal agency administers voluntary service programs that properly belong to civil society, states, or localities. Its $1+ billion budget and administrative overhead crowd out private charities, distort the nonprofit sector through grant dependency, and violate Tenth Amendment principles. The unseen costs include creating a permanent bureaucracy, distorting incentives for community organizations to seek federal funds rather than private donations, and expanding federal reach into traditionally voluntary, local activities. Americans would be wealthier and freer without this layer of government intervention—the work could be done more efficiently by private charities, faith-based organizations, and state initiatives, as envisioned by the Founders.