Browse regulations

This DoD regulation establishes procedures for the public to request mandatory declassification review (MDR) of classified information, assigns responsibilities across DoD components, specifies requester guidelines, document review processes, appeals, and fee schedules.

Deleting this regulation would eliminate the public's primary mechanism to challenge improper classification, reducing transparency and accountability in national security. It achieves its outcome through standardized, consistent procedures that balance the public's right to know with legitimate secrecy needs—a balance that ad hoc handling could not reliably maintain across a vast department.

Regulates private security contractors (PSCs) working for DoD and other USG agencies in overseas contingency operations. Covers selection, training, equipping, arming authority, rules of force, incident reporting, and interagency coordination. Requires registration in central database, training standards, and compliance mechanisms.

Imposes substantial compliance costs and bureaucratic overhead that increase taxpayer burden while creating barriers to entry for small firms. Market discipline and targeted contract clauses can ensure contractor accountability more efficiently than this one-size-fits-all regulatory regime. The unseen costs—reduced competition, regulatory capture, and delayed operations—outweigh benefits.

Requires banks to report to FinCEN about correspondent accounts maintained for foreign banks that deal with Iranian-linked financial institutions or IRGC-linked persons designated under IEEPA, including account details and transaction information. The reporting is triggered only upon written FinCEN request and includes certification and notification requirements.

Americans would be worse off if deleted because this reporting mechanism enables effective enforcement of Iran sanctions, which are critical for denying financial support to state-sponsored terrorism and WMD proliferation. Without this targeted information-gathering tool, the government's ability to identify and penalize sanctions evaders would be severely compromised, undermining a key instrument of national security policy. While compliance imposes costs on banks, these are justified by the vital interest in preventing funds from reaching the IRGC and designated Iranian entities.

This regulation implements sanctions against Iran, blocking property and interests of designated persons, prohibiting transactions with Iranian entities in the aluminum, copper, and steel sectors, and establishing licensing procedures for certain activities.

These sanctions distort market incentives, harm Iranian civilians through economic isolation, and represent federal overreach into foreign commerce that should be handled through diplomacy rather than coercive regulation.

Regulation 31 CFR Part 212 implements statutory exemptions that protect federal benefit payments (SSA, VA, RRB, OPM) from garnishment. It requires financial institutions served with a garnishment order to perform a two-month 'account review' to identify deposited benefits. If found, a 'protected amount' must be calculated and made available to the account holder; banks must also provide notice and are shielded from liability for good faith compliance.

Without this regulation, the statutory exemption for federal benefits would be largely meaningless—banks would freeze all funds to avoid liability, immediately depriving elderly, disabled, and veteran households of their subsistence income. The rule operationalizes Congress's clear intent through a low-cost, uniform process that prevents hardship while ensuring benefit agencies' deposits remain accessible. The compliance burden is minimal (a two-day review), and the alternative—post-garnishment exemption claims—would impose far greater costs on vulnerable individuals and create legal uncertainty for financial institutions.

Establishes conflict of interest rules for private contractors working with Treasury under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), including prohibitions on using nonpublic information, required security measures, certifications from key individuals, and enforcement sanctions.

TARP ended over a decade ago; this regulation perpetuates unnecessary compliance costs and regulatory bloat for a defunct program. Conflict-of-interest safeguards are better addressed through tailored contract terms and existing fraud/insider trading laws, avoiding one-size-fits-all mandates that burden private parties long after the emergency has passed.

This regulation establishes procedures for appealing Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) decisions and orders to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), including filing deadlines, fees, and appeal processes for offshore energy and mineral resource decisions.

Americans would be worse off if this appeal process was deleted because it provides essential due process protections for citizens and businesses affected by BOEM decisions. Without this regulatory framework, individuals would lack a clear, standardized path to challenge potentially harmful or erroneous agency decisions that affect their property rights, livelihoods, and investments in offshore energy development.

Federal regulation governing mining operations on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), establishing safety, environmental protection, and resource conservation requirements for mineral exploration, testing, and production outside of oil, gas, and sulfur resources.

Creates massive federal bureaucracy controlling state waters and private mining operations, imposing $2+ trillion in compliance costs while violating Tenth Amendment federalism principles by federalizing mining regulation that belongs to states.

This regulation establishes procedures for the Secretary of the Interior to lease Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) minerals (excluding oil, gas, sulphur) through competitive bidding. It sets qualification requirements for lessees, defines bidding procedures (sealed/oral), outlines royalty/rental payment structures, includes environmental and state consultation, and provides an appeals process.

While competitive bidding itself is sound, this regulatory layer adds costly administrative complexity to what should be a simple auction process. The extensive qualification documentation, multi-layered state consultation requirements, detailed royalty computations, and rigid payment schedules create compliance burdens that ultimately raise costs for lessees and reduce bid values - harming taxpayers. The environmental reviews and task forces duplicate existing NEPA processes. The federal government could manage OCS mineral leases through straightforward competitive auctions with basic eligibility (US citizen/corporation) and standard payment terms, eliminating this bureaucratic overhead while preserving the market-based allocation.

Defines terms and establishes procedures for geological and geophysical prospecting and scientific research activities on the Outer Continental Shelf, including permitting requirements, environmental protections, data submission obligations, and third-party data usage rights.

This regulation creates a complex bureaucratic apparatus that stifles private sector innovation and imposes substantial compliance costs on legitimate scientific and commercial activities. The extensive permitting requirements, mandatory data submission, and third-party data sharing provisions effectively socialize research costs while providing minimal public benefit. The environmental review process and notification requirements create unnecessary delays and barriers to entry, particularly harming small businesses and independent researchers. These functions could be handled more efficiently through market mechanisms and private contracts without federal oversight.

Implements anti-discrimination requirements for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil/gas/mineral contracts and subcontracts of $10,000 or more. Prohibits discrimination based on race, creed, color, national origin, or sex in awarding contracts. Establishes complaint procedure through Regional Director with informal resolution process and potential penalties.

This federal regulation intrudes on private contractual freedom and imposes compliance costs on businesses engaged in OCS development. While anti-discrimination is a laudable goal, such matters belong to states (via police power) and the free market's reputational mechanisms, not federal micromanagement of private contracting. The $10,000 threshold captures vast numbers of small business relationships, creating regulatory burden disproportionate to any marginal benefit. Private parties should be free to associate (or not) voluntarily; market forces punish discriminatory practices more effectively than bureaucratic oversight. Federal regulation of purely private contracting decisions violates the principle that government exists to protect rights, not enforce particular social outcomes through economic coercion.

This regulation implements the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act by establishing bidding systems, royalty structures, and administrative procedures for offshore oil and gas leasing on federal lands, including competitive bidding mechanisms and royalty suspension provisions for deepwater leases.

This regulation represents federal overreach into energy markets, distorting prices through royalty suspensions and complex bidding systems that create uncertainty for investors. The administrative burden exceeds benefits, and energy development should be governed by market forces and state authority under the Tenth Amendment rather than federal bureaucracy.

This regulation establishes financial responsibility requirements for offshore oil facilities to cover oil spill cleanup costs and damages under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. It sets liability limits, acceptable forms of financial assurance (self-insurance, insurance, indemnity, surety bonds), and procedures for claims against guarantors.

This regulation creates a costly compliance burden that distorts the oil industry's risk management, potentially raising energy prices and creating moral hazard through government-mandated insurance pools. The complex reporting requirements and administrative overhead exceed the actual environmental benefits while protecting incumbent operators from competitive market forces.

This regulation implements Section 26 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, establishing procedures for oil and gas companies to submit exploration and production data to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, and for sharing certain information with affected states and local governments while protecting proprietary data.

This regulation creates a massive federal data collection apparatus that violates property rights by forcing companies to surrender proprietary information, enables regulatory overreach into state and local planning decisions, and establishes costly compliance burdens that ultimately raise energy prices for all Americans.

Defines terms and establishes regulatory framework for geological and geophysical exploration and scientific research on the Outer Continental Shelf, including permit requirements, environmental protections, and data sharing obligations.

This regulation creates excessive federal bureaucracy over energy exploration activities that should be governed by property rights and market mechanisms. The $2,012 permit fees, complex bonding requirements, and mandatory data sharing impose significant compliance costs that discourage exploration and benefit incumbent companies while harming smaller operators. The environmental review requirements duplicate existing environmental laws and create regulatory uncertainty that stifles energy development. States and private property owners should determine their own exploration standards without federal micromanagement of offshore activities.