Browse regulations

Specifies procedures and requirements for EPA approval of State NPDES programs under the Clean Water Act. States must meet federal standards to administer the program, including implementing specific federal permit requirements and maintaining EPA oversight through Memoranda of Agreement.

This regulation entrenches federal control over water pollution regulation by forcing states to implement federal NPDES standards rather than developing independent programs. The approval process, MOA requirements, and mandate to implement specific federal provisions creates a cooperative federalism scheme that perpetuates unconstitutional federal overreach into intrastate waters under the Commerce Clause, while imposing administrative burdens on states that could regulate water quality directly through their own police powers.

This part implements the NPDES permit program under the Clean Water Act, requiring permits for any discharge of pollutants from a point source into waters of the United States. It establishes federal and state permitting requirements, public participation procedures, and defines key terms like 'pollutant,' 'point source,' and 'waters of the United States.' The program covers industrial, municipal, and agricultural discharges with various exemptions.

This regulation imposes crushing hidden costs ($14k+ per household annually) and creates an un-knowable labyrinth across 185,000+ pages of CFR, violating rule of law. It disproportionately devastates small businesses (30% higher compliance costs per employee), enables regulatory capture through complexity, and unconstitutionally federalizes intrastate water quality—a Tenth Amendment state/local function. Unseen effects include suppressed competition, distorted economic incentives, and the impossibility of voluntary market-based solutions like pollution trading. Water quality can be better protected through state-level standards, clearly defined property rights, and tort law—allowing local innovation and actual cost internalization.

This EPA regulation implements Executive Order 12372, establishing procedures for intergovernmental review of EPA programs. It requires EPA to consult with state and local officials, provide comment periods, accommodate state concerns, and handle state process recommendations through single points of contact. The regulation explicitly states it is for EPA's internal management and creates no enforceable rights.

Creates bureaucratic overhead and program delays without delivering measurable public benefit. Internal agency management procedures belong in guidance, not binding regulations. States can provide input through existing political and administrative channels, and the 30-60 day comment periods impose real costs in delayed environmental protection and federal programs. The regulation's own disclaimer confirms it serves no legal purpose warranting CFR status.

EPA rules implementing the Equal Access to Justice Act (5 U.S.C. § 504) to award attorney fees and expenses to prevailing parties in specified adversary adjudications (e.g., Clean Air Act penalty hearings). Establishes eligibility based on net worth/employee limits, requires detailed documentation of fees, caps hourly rates ($75 for attorneys, $24.09 for experts), and sets 30-day filing deadlines. Scope explicitly limited to adjudications pending between October 1, 1981 and September 30, 1984.

Obsolete: applies only to 1981-1984 proceedings, making it a dead letter with no current effect. Keeping such irrelevant regulations swells the CFR's 185,000 pages, undermining the rule of law principle that laws must be knowable. Even conceptually, fee-shifting regimes encourage litigation and add bureaucratic overhead that outweigh any marginal benefit in checking agency overreach.

This regulation implements Executive Order 12372, requiring the USPS to consult with state and local officials before facility projects, establish single points of contact, provide notice, consider comments, and follow procedures when states disagree with USPS decisions.

This regulation imposes administrative burdens and delays on USPS facility projects, increasing costs for a financially-strained agency. The 60+ day comment periods and formal disagreement procedures create opportunities for obstruction and NIMBYism, potentially preventing needed postal infrastructure. These processes could be achieved through voluntary coordination without the rigid federal mandate, reducing unseen costs of delayed projects and increased overhead.

Implements intergovernmental review process for VA programs requiring consultation with state and local officials before federal financial assistance or development, to strengthen federalism and coordinate across jurisdictions.

Preserves federalism by ensuring state/local input on VA programs affecting them; deletion would centralize decisions and increase risk of ill-fitting federal mandates that disregard local conditions.

This regulation establishes a preferential relocation program for businesses and residents displaced by the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation's urban renewal project. It creates a 'List of Qualified Persons' who receive priority access to new commercial space in the development area, with developers required to provide 90-day exclusive negotiation periods and quarterly reporting on leasing to displaced persons.

This regulation creates a costly, complex bureaucracy that distorts market outcomes and raises development costs. The preferential treatment system forces developers to give displaced businesses artificial advantages over other potential tenants, reducing efficiency and creating deadweight losses. The extensive reporting requirements, exclusive negotiation periods, and administrative overhead impose significant compliance costs that ultimately fall on taxpayers and consumers. Small businesses not on the list face higher rents to subsidize this preferential program, while the regulatory framework itself becomes a barrier to development. The market would naturally provide relocation assistance through competitive rental rates without this costly federal intervention.

Federal regulations governing the Falls of the Ohio National Wildlife Conservation Area administered by the US Army Corps of Engineers, covering wildlife protection, recreational use, property management, and public conduct within designated boundaries.

Federal micro-management of a local conservation area violates constitutional federalism. States and localities should manage wildlife, recreation, and land use through existing state fish & game laws and zoning regulations. The Corps adds a costly bureaucratic layer for a 36 CFR-style local ordinance, creating friction without commensurate benefit.

Federal program to identify and designate National Historic Landmarks, providing recognition and preservation support while maintaining property rights of owners.

Preserves nationally significant historical sites without restricting private property rights, provides federal preservation grants and tax benefits, and creates a systematic framework for protecting America's heritage that would be difficult to replicate through voluntary market mechanisms alone.

Comprehensive regulations governing visitor conduct, resource protection, and traditional gathering rights in National Park System units, including prohibitions on wildlife disturbance, fishing/hunting rules, firearm restrictions, plant gathering, camping, and noise control.

Creates excessive bureaucratic control over traditional activities and imposes costly compliance burdens on visitors while restricting constitutional rights to bear arms in federal lands. The regulations federalize activities better managed by states and local authorities under the Tenth Amendment.

Comprehensive federal regulations governing all National Park System areas, establishing authority for protection of natural and cultural resources, public use management, safety protocols, and enforcement mechanisms across 400+ parks and monuments.

Massive regulatory overreach into state and local matters that properly belong to states under Tenth Amendment; compliance costs burden small businesses and local economies; complex labyrinth of 185,000+ pages of federal rules that no one can comprehend violates rule of law principles; creates federal bureaucracy that replaces local decision-making with Washington mandates; original intent of park protection has been twisted into federal control of local land use and economic activities.

This regulation implements Executive Order 12372, establishing a mandatory intergovernmental review process for federal financial assistance programs. It requires the Secretary to provide state and local officials with 30-60 day comment periods, accommodate their concerns, and accept state process recommendations through designated Single Points of Contact. The stated goal is fostering intergovernmental partnership and strengthening federalism.

Keeping this regulation imposes significant hidden costs: it adds billions in administrative overhead across agencies and states, delays funding for critical programs, and creates yet another bureaucratic layer that enables regulatory capture. It fundamentally misunderstands federalism by federalizing state review processes that should remain voluntary. The Constitution grants no enumerated power for the federal government to mandate how states coordinate with federal programs—this is pure administrative overreach. Any legitimate intergovernmental consultation occurs naturally through elected officials without regulatory compulsion, making this entire framework an unconstitutional exercise of administrative power that distorts incentives and protects incumbents from competitive grant-making.

This regulation implements Executive Order 12372 to establish an intergovernmental review process for federal programs, requiring coordination between federal agencies and state/local governments for federal financial assistance and development projects, with specific procedures for consultation, comment periods, and state process recommendations.

Creates bureaucratic overhead without constitutional justification - federal agencies should not require state approval for programs funded by federal tax dollars. The regulation imposes compliance costs on all federal actions while creating opportunities for state-level obstructionism that delays projects and increases costs. It violates principles of federalism by forcing federal agencies to defer to state processes rather than exercising their constitutional authority directly.

This regulation establishes traffic separation schemes, precautionary areas, deep-water routes, and other routing measures for vessels accessing U.S. ports. It defines specific geographic boundaries, creates one-way traffic lanes and separation zones, requires compliance with international collision regulations, and authorizes Coast Guard adjustments in emergencies or for special operations.

Maritime navigation creates severe coordination problems and collision externalities that markets cannot adequately solve. These designated routes prevent catastrophic loss of life, environmental disasters, and trade disruption. The minimal compliance burden—simply following marked lanes—is vastly outweighed by safety benefits. Uniform federal routing is essential given international shipping and interstate commerce; private alternatives would fail to achieve necessary coordination and could create conflicting systems, increasing rather than decreasing risk.

Regulations implementing 46 U.S.C. Chapter 700 "Ports and Waterways Safety" establishing vessel traffic services, safety zones, security zones, and notice-of-arrival requirements for vessels in U.S. navigable waters.

These regulations create extensive federal oversight of maritime navigation and port operations that should be handled by private port authorities, insurance companies, and voluntary industry standards. The costs of compliance - including mandatory reporting, vessel inspections, and traffic control - exceed the benefits while creating barriers to entry for smaller operators. State and local governments, or private entities, could provide safety services more efficiently without federal micromanagement of every vessel movement.