Browse regulations

Prohibits use of federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement funds for lobbying activities to influence federal officials or Congress regarding those covered federal actions. Requires recipients to file certifications (Appendix A) that they haven't used prohibited funds and disclosure forms (Appendix B) if non-federal funds were used for lobbying. Exemptions exist for regular legislative liaison activities and professional/technical services directly related to preparing bids or proposals. $10,000-$100,000 civil penalties apply for violations or failure to file required disclosures.

While anti-corruption is a legitimate goal, this regulation duplicates criminal statutes (18 U.S.C. 201 bribery, 18 U.S.C. 1343 fraud) and imposes massive compliance costs across all federal funding recipients. The certification and disclosure requirements create a bureaucracy that burdens small businesses disproportionately while doing nothing to stop actual bribery. The 'reasonable compensation' and 'professional services' exceptions are loopholes that undermine the rule. Americans would be better off with clearer criminal laws enforced by prosecutors, not a regulatory maze that treats routine business-government communication as presumptively suspect.

Grants the Senior Procurement Executive authority to waive advance notice requirements for contract actions and authorizes paid advertisements for procurement notices, subject to delegations and funding availability.

Adds unnecessary regulatory complexity and bureaucratic overhead; authorizes wasteful taxpayer spending on advertisements; waiver determinations could be handled via internal guidance without CFR codification, reducing the regulatory burden on agencies and contractors.

USAID internal policy requiring analysis of projects for 'gray-area' trade/investment activities and insertion of special contract language to ensure compliance with statutory prohibitions on foreign aid use.

Imposes bureaucratic overhead and vague 'gray-area' analysis, leading to over-compliance that wastes resources and likely chills effective foreign assistance. The same statutory objectives can be achieved through simpler, less costly mechanisms.

Designates the National Communications System as the federal focal point for electromagnetic pulse (EMP) information concerning telecommunications, coordinating data sharing and research to prevent duplication and ensure preparedness.

Creates a redundant bureaucratic layer for specialized technical coordination that could be handled by existing military and communications agencies without federal designation, adding compliance costs and regulatory overhead without clear public benefit.

This regulation provides procedures for radio spectrum management during wartime emergencies, national peril, or public emergencies. It establishes presidential emergency authority over telecommunications, grants the Director of OSTP power to control frequency assignments, and coordinates between government agencies and the FCC for effective spectrum usage during crisis periods.

This regulation creates a wartime emergency communications control framework that is constitutionally questionable and prone to abuse. It centralizes unprecedented power in executive agencies, potentially enabling censorship and disrupting private communications during emergencies when free flow of information is most critical. The scope exceeds legitimate emergency needs and represents regulatory overreach into civil liberties.

Emergency wartime telecommunications procedures requiring federal agencies to submit international telecom requirements to the National Communications System (NCS), with DoD handling NATO requirements and State Department approving foreign government requests. Private sector submits requirements to FCC. Authority derives from Communications Act 706 and Executive Orders, exercisable only during wartime emergencies.

This is not peacetime regulation but wartime emergency preparedness coordination. The cost of maintaining this mechanism is negligible compared to the catastrophic risk of uncoordinated emergency telecommunications during wartime. National security communications are a core federal function; without this framework, the government would be unable to ensure continuity of command, control, and coordination with allies during hostilities. The scope is strictly limited to wartime and involves minimal burden on private parties who would similarly need to prioritize national security in an actual conflict.

Establishes comprehensive national telecommunications management framework for wartime and non-wartime emergencies, creating NS/EP (National Security/ Emergency Preparedness) systems with priority service, spectrum management, and coordinated response structures across federal agencies and private sector.

Creates massive federal bureaucracy that centralizes telecommunications control, violates constitutional limits on federal power, and establishes peacetime emergency authorities that can be abused. The extensive coordination mechanisms and priority systems represent regulatory overreach into private sector operations that should be handled by market forces and state/local governments.

Establishes a federal framework for national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) telecommunications, including priorities system, government coordination structures (NCS, JTRB, NCC, NTMS), and presidential authority to control telecommunications during wartime and other emergencies under various statutes including Section 706 of the Communications Act.

Creates a permanent government control apparatus over private telecommunications infrastructure, imposing compliance costs and enabling potential seizure of resources. The regulatory framework distorts market investment and operational decisions, risks regulatory capture through close industry-government coordination, and expands federal power beyond constitutional limits. Emergency preparedness can be achieved through voluntary coordination, contracts, and market-based incentives without coercive priority systems and permanent bureaucracies.

This regulation establishes the administrative framework for the Maritime Administration's maintenance and repair (M&R) subsidy program for commercially operating vessels. It prescribes vessel survey requirements, eligibility criteria (including mandatory domestic sourcing of labor and materials), quarterly reporting via Form MA-140, substantiation rules, penalty provisions for foreign repairs, and appeal procedures. The program subsidizes eligible vessel operators under operating-differential subsidy agreements (ODSA).

This regulation perpetuates an illegitimate corporate welfare program that distorts maritime markets, imposes protectionist domestic sourcing requirements that increase shipping costs, and creates extensive compliance burdens favoring incumbent operators. The administrative apparatus consumes taxpayer resources while enabling regulatory capture. The unseen consequences include misallocation of capital away from productive uses, higher consumer prices for goods transported by sea, and the erosion of competitive market discipline. The program violates free enterprise principles by transferring wealth from taxpayers to politically connected shipping interests and should be abolished along with its implementing regulations.

This regulation governs statutory hearings under the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 for maritime applications, establishing procedures for notice, intervention, evidence submission, and hearings conducted by the Maritime Administration or Maritime Subsidy Board.

This regulation creates costly bureaucratic barriers to maritime commerce through complex intervention requirements and mandatory hearings, distorting market competition and imposing compliance costs that protect incumbent operators while raising prices for consumers. The procedures serve as regulatory capture mechanisms rather than protecting public interest.

This regulation establishes minimum safety requirements for automatic auxiliary boilers, including design, construction, testing, and operation standards for various boiler types (steam, hot water, thermal fluid, exhaust gas, and incinerators) used in marine applications. It incorporates multiple technical standards and covers controls, safety devices, fuel systems, electrical components, and testing procedures.

This is a highly specialized technical regulation for marine boilers that creates unnecessary compliance costs for ship operators without clear public benefit. Safety standards for marine equipment should be handled by classification societies and industry self-regulation rather than federal mandates. The incorporation of numerous private standards (ASME, ASTM, ISO, etc.) creates a complex regulatory labyrinth that benefits incumbent manufacturers while raising barriers for smaller operators and foreign competitors.

Prohibits use of federal appropriated funds for lobbying activities related to federal contracts, grants, loans, or cooperative agreements. Requires certifications and disclosures from recipients exceeding $100k/150k thresholds, with exceptions for employee liaison activities and professional services directly related to bid preparation. Applies to all recipients including state/local governments.

Deleting this would allow taxpayer funds to be used to lobby for more federal funding, creating a perverse incentive that corrupts the allocation process and benefits entrenched players. The regulation narrowly targets only the misuse of appropriated money—private lobbying remains protected speech. The minimal compliance burden is justified by preventing a systemic distortion of government decision-making where recipients can use public funds to influence their own funding.

Regulation implements Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act for ACTION agency, prohibiting disability discrimination in its programs. It defines terms, requires self-evaluations and accessibility modifications, mandates auxiliary aids, sets facility standards, and establishes complaint procedures.

Without it, federal agencies could exclude disabled citizens from programs they fund, denying equal access. The framework ensures systematic compliance and enforceable rights that informal policies cannot replicate.

Regulation prohibits recipients of federal contracts, grants, loans, and cooperative agreements from using appropriated funds to lobby federal officials or Congress regarding those awards. Requires certifications and disclosure forms for lobbying with non-appropriated funds, with civil penalties of $10,000-$100,000 for violations or failure to file. Contains narrow exceptions for certain professional services and routine agency liaison activities.

Imposes significant compliance costs on businesses (disproportionately small firms) for constitutionally-protected petitioning activities. Creates a complex regulatory maze distinguishing between permissible and impermissible communication with government, chilling legitimate advocacy. The $2 trillion+ annual regulatory compliance burden includes these reporting requirements that serve primarily to enrich compliance industries while producing minimal transparency benefits beyond existing criminal anti-lobbying statutes. Federalism violation: lobbying regulation traditionally resides with states under police powers.

Federal regulation prohibiting use of appropriated funds for lobbying activities related to federal contracts, grants, loans, and cooperative agreements, requiring certification and disclosure forms for covered federal actions exceeding $100,000 (contracts/grants) or $150,000 (loans).

Creates massive compliance bureaucracy costing billions annually while failing to prevent actual corruption - lobbyists simply use non-appropriated funds. The $25,000+ penalties and complex reporting requirements impose significant administrative burden on small businesses and non-profits without achieving meaningful reform of the lobbying system.