Browse regulations

Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) regulatory framework governing contract administration, audit requirements, records retention, benefit coordination, claims procedures, and experience-rated carrier agreements with specific notification and review provisions.

This regulatory framework creates massive compliance costs for health carriers, imposes federal micromanagement of state-regulated insurance contracts, and establishes bureaucratic review processes that add no value while protecting incumbent carriers from competition through complex administrative barriers.

OPM regulates advertising by health insurance carriers in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). It requires carriers to limit ads to factual statements about their own plan, reference the official OPM brochure, include mandatory disclaimers, avoid FEHBP logos, and restrict enrollment instructions to basic procedural info. Misleading advertising is prohibited and violations can lead to contract termination.

This regulation violates free speech principles and suppresses truthful comparative advertising that would help federal employees make informed choices. It creates unnecessary compliance costs that get passed to enrollees as higher premiums, benefits large incumbent insurers who can absorb compliance burdens, and violates the Tenth Amendment by federalizing advertising standards that should be governed by state contract/false advertising laws. The legitimate goal of preventing fraud can be achieved through existing FTC authority without restricting commercial speech.

Definitions section for terms used in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and Postal Service Health Benefits (PSHB) Program, including carrier, community rate, adjusted community rate, medical loss ratio, and related concepts.

Retaining this definitional regulation sustains the FEHBP/PSHB programs, which impose billions in hidden taxes on American households, distort health insurance markets, and create a privileged federal employee class with superior benefits. The programs violate Tenth Amendment federalism by federalizing health insurance, a sector properly left to states and private enterprise, and contradict founding principles of limited government and equal treatment under law.

FEHBAR is OPM's acquisition regulation supplementing the FAR specifically for Federal Employees Health Benefits Program insurance contracts. It establishes procedures for procuring health insurance carriers, sets documentation/approval requirements, and mandates OMB paperwork approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Federal employee health benefits lack constitutional basis—employee compensation/benefits are state and private sector matters under the Tenth Amendment. This federalization creates unnecessary regulatory layers, compliance costs, and market distortions. The same outcome (quality health coverage for federal workers) can be achieved more efficiently through direct premium payments or state-administered programs without federal acquisition bureaucracy. FEHBAR represents regulatory overreach that treats federal workers as a privileged class withspecial procurement rules, contradicting equal sovereignty principles.

FCC rule governing detailed accounting procedures for telecommunications companies to allocate costs, revenues, and expenses between interstate (federal) and intrastate (state) jurisdictions. Contains complex technical formulas, measurement standards like 'weighted standard work seconds' and 'conversation-minute-kilometers,' and a 30-year freeze (2001-2030) on certain allocation factors based on 2000 data. Applies to local exchange carriers' property accounts, requiring jurisdiction-specific separations for rate regulation and Universal Service Fund contributions.

No legitimate constitutional basis for federal micromanagement of private telecom accounting. Imposes massive compliance costs that disproportionately crush small businesses while protecting incumbent monopolies. Violates federalism by federalizing what should be state-regulated intrastate utilities. The 30-year cost freeze locks in incumbent advantages and prevents market adaptation. Creates perverse incentives that distort investment, pricing, and competition without serving any public safety or consumer protection purpose. The rule's sheer complexity ensures only large corporations can navigate it, using regulatory barriers to exclude competition—precisely the 'unseen' damage von Mises warned about.

Regulation establishes conduct rules for a federal military academy (USMA), governing property access, prohibited actions (vandalism, gambling, drugs, weapons, etc.), parking, photography, solicitation, and enforcement mechanisms with fines/imprisonment.

Military academies require secure, disciplined environments to train officers. These regulations provide clear, reasonable rules for behavior on federal property, ensuring safety, order, and mission effectiveness. Removing them would impair the academy's ability to maintain security, discipline, and operational integrity—core functions of a military training institution.

Sets criteria for financial institutions that can hold funds under maritime programs, requiring FDIC membership and limiting deposits to 5% of a depository's total deposits.

Creates unnecessary barriers to entry for maritime financing, limits competition among financial institutions, and imposes arbitrary 5% cap that could restrict capital availability for maritime programs without clear safety justification.

Establishes uniform minimum manning requirements for U.S. vessels, implementing statutory requirements and international conventions (STCW, SOLAS) to ensure safe vessel operation through qualified crew with appropriate credentials and endorsements.

Maritime safety requires qualified personnel with proper training and credentials. Without these standards, vessel accidents would increase, endangering lives, cargo, and marine environments. The costs of inadequate manning far exceed compliance burdens.

This regulation establishes procedures for federal agencies to collect debts from employees through salary offsets without consent, applying to debts owed to or by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). It provides detailed notice requirements, hearing procedures, deduction limits (maximum 15% of disposable pay), refund provisions, and coordination between creditor and paying agencies.

This regulation enables involuntary wage garnishment by federal agencies, undermining employee property rights and due process. The 15% deduction cap still represents forced extraction of earnings without consent, creating a government-sanctioned system of debt collection that bypasses private sector protections. It institutionalizes a form of compelled labor where employees must work to pay debts to the state, distorting labor markets and creating perverse incentives for agency debt collection practices.

This regulation governs when Department of Health and Human Services employees can testify or produce documents in legal proceedings, establishing procedures for handling subpoenas and protecting official duties from excessive disruption.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it prevents government employees from being constantly pulled into private litigation, which would disrupt critical public health functions and waste taxpayer resources on unnecessary testimony.

This regulation establishes detailed procedures for states and Indian tribes to assume federal inspection, enforcement, and investigation responsibilities for oil and gas operations on federal and Indian lands under FOGRMA, including delegation and cooperative agreement frameworks, with federal oversight, funding, and certification requirements.

The regulation creates a complex, costly bureaucratic apparatus with perverse incentives (50% penalty sharing), extensive record-keeping burdens, and federal micromanagement of state/tribal programs. Compliance costs imposed on states, tribes, and oil operators constitute a hidden tax that stifles production and raises energy costs. The same objectives could be achieved through direct federal enforcement or simpler state partnerships without this elaborate framework.

This subpart restates existing statutory and regulatory procedures for segregating (withdrawing) and opening public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management. It defines key terms, specifies automatic time periods for various types of segregations (90 days to 5 years), and outlines procedures for opening lands. It covers numerous specific scenarios including emergency withdrawals, Alaska native selections, power projects, Carey Act grants, and more. It explicitly states it 'does not replace or supersede' existing title 43 provisions.

This is a redundant procedural restatement that adds another layer of complexity to the Code of Federal Regulations without creating new substantive protections. It imposes compliance burdens on BLM staff and the public, delaying productive use of public resources through arcane time periods and filing requirements. The underlying statutes already provide the necessary framework; this codification merely expands bureaucratic minutiae. The unseen cost is economic activity foregone due to procedural delays and the chilling effect of regulatory complexity on investment and development.

This regulation establishes the administrative appeals process for Medicare provider and supplier determinations made by CMS and OIG, including enrollment denials, terminations, exclusions, and sanctions. It defines affected parties, outlines hearing rights before Administrative Law Judges, Departmental Appeals Board review, and judicial review, and sets forth procedural rules for filings, transcripts, and representation.

Due process is fundamental; eliminating this framework would permit arbitrary deprivation of property interests and threaten healthcare access for Medicare beneficiaries. The regulation achieves fair, efficient review through specialized administrative procedures with a defined path to courts—a balance unattainable through either unchecked agency action or full federal litigation.

Medicare Part B Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) premium determination, collection, and payment policies including premium amounts, collection methods, grace periods, and special provisions for various beneficiary categories

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it ensures Medicare Part B coverage remains financially sustainable through premium collection mechanisms, preventing system collapse and maintaining healthcare access for millions of elderly and disabled Americans who depend on these benefits.

Establishes a user fee system for private entities to obtain CDC reference biological standards and preparations, with government/public health exemptions. Fees reflect production costs and are published in a fee schedule.

Deletion would cut off access to essential, standardized reference materials that ensure measurement consistency across laboratories, compromising research quality and public health surveillance. The government's role as a neutral standard-setter is irreplaceable: private standards would be fragmented and commercially biased, failing to provide the universal framework needed for scientific coordination and emergency response.