Browse regulations

NASA's TDRSS policy provides tracking and data relay services to non-U.S. Government users, establishing reimbursement mechanisms for standard and mission-unique services with priority-based scheduling and contractual agreements.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because TDRSS provides critical space communications infrastructure that enables scientific research, commercial satellite operations, and national security capabilities. The user fee structure ensures cost recovery while maintaining access for legitimate users without taxpayer subsidies.

Regulation governing the issuance of free and reduced-rate transportation passes by air carriers, including mandatory free transport for security guards, FAA/NTSB inspectors, and postal employees; rules for employee/affiliate discounts; record-keeping requirements; and a special authorization process for exceptions.

This regulation imposes significant compliance costs through mandatory record-keeping, affiliate tracking, and tariff filing requirements while micromanaging private business pricing decisions. It forces airlines to provide free transportation to government personnel without compensation—an unfunded mandate that socializes costs onto other passengers. The complex categorical rules create administrative burdens and barriers to competition that ultimately raise prices for consumers. In a deregulated market, airlines should be free to determine their own pass policies and pricing without federal oversight.

Requires direct air carriers to waive Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses via the Montreal Agreement, establishing a $75,000 minimum liability for passenger injury/death and waiving the negligence defense. Carriers must file signed agreements, include terms in carriage contracts, and provide notice; compliance is a condition of operating authority.

The regulation imposes compliance costs, restricts contractual freedom, and reduces competition on liability terms. Market forces, insurance, and voluntary agreements can provide passenger protections without federal mandates, making this intervention unnecessary and harmful to innovation and entry.

This regulation establishes a comprehensive labor relations framework for Federal Reserve Bank employees. It defines eligible labor organizations (excluding those that assert a right to strike, advocate government overthrow, discriminate, or seek coercive support), grants employees the right to join labor organizations (with supervisory and professional/guard restrictions), outlines exclusive bargaining unit recognition procedures, sets up election processes via the American Arbitration Association with special tribunals, defines unfair labor practices, provides for grievance arbitration and mediation, and creates the Federal Reserve System Labor Relations Panel to oversee the system.

The regulation imposes costly federal overreach into labor relations—traditionally a state concern—creating a specialized administrative apparatus (special tribunals, elections via AAA, dedicated panel) that distorts labor markets and interferes with Federal Reserve management rights. Its elaborate provisions preempt state law and could lead to above-market compensation and rigidities, reducing the Fed's operational efficiency and adding hidden costs to the monetary system. The same objectives could be achieved through standard employment contracts or general federal labor laws without this burdensome, specialized regime.

Extends Federal Reserve margin requirements (Regulations T and U) to credit obtained abroad by US persons for purchasing US securities, and to willful violations for domestic credit, aiming to prevent regulatory arbitrage.

This regulation imposes significant extraterritorial compliance costs on US citizens and businesses, perpetuates market-distorting margin requirements that interfere with voluntary credit transactions, and creates barriers to international capital flows while offering negligible marginal benefit beyond existing regulations.

Establishes comprehensive security requirements for safeguarding Secret and Confidential Restricted Data related to atomic energy, including personnel access controls, physical security measures, classification procedures, and transmission protocols for access permittees.

Safeguarding nuclear weapons information and special nuclear material is critical for national security. These regulations establish necessary physical security, personnel vetting, and transmission controls to prevent unauthorized access to highly sensitive atomic energy data that could directly threaten public safety if compromised.

Implements Executive Order 12372 to foster intergovernmental partnership by requiring federal agencies to consult with state and local governments on federal financial assistance and development programs, using state processes for review and coordination.

Creates bureaucratic overhead without meaningful benefit - states already coordinate with federal agencies through existing channels, and this adds redundant consultation requirements that slow down federal programs without improving outcomes or protecting state sovereignty.

This regulation implements a standardized contract system where the Department of Energy provides nuclear waste disposal services to owners/generators of spent nuclear fuel. It imposes complex reporting, delivery scheduling, priority ranking based on waste age, and a fee structure (1 mill/kWh plus pre-1983 one-time fees) intended to fully recover costs through the Nuclear Waste Fund. The framework centralizes all nuclear waste management under federal control.

This federal program has failed catastrophically: after four decades and billions in collected fees, no permanent repository exists, yet utilities remain forced to pay for a service never delivered. The regulation's intricate administrative burdens—annual forecasts, delivery commitment schedules, deviation requests, and energy adjustment factor calculations—impose massive hidden compliance costs while stifling private or state-level innovation. The government's monopoly prevents market-driven solutions and leaves nuclear Utilities subsidizing a broken bureaucratic system.

Regulation establishes detailed procedures for conducting price-competitive sales of Strategic Petroleum Reserve petroleum, including mandatory standard sales provisions, notice requirements, and ineligibility sanctions for non-performing purchasers.

Creates unnecessary regulatory bureaucracy for government asset sales that duplicate standard procurement procedures; imposes compliance costs and barriers to entry for small businesses while expanding agency discretion over commercial transactions

These rules govern administrative enforcement proceedings under the Swine Health Protection Act. They allow the Administrator to settle cases via stipulation before formal complaints, requiring notice to the alleged violator, waiver of hearing, and agreement to penalties. Failure to pay stipulated penalties timely results in no credit toward subsequent assessments.

Americans would be worse off without this regulation because it provides a structured, efficient settlement mechanism that reduces bureaucratic burden and costs for both the agency and regulated parties. Deleting it would force either informal, potentially arbitrary negotiations or full formal hearings for every case, increasing delays and expenses. The rule ensures due process while enabling swift resolution that would be difficult to replicate through ad hoc processes.

USDA's uniform procedural rules for administrative enforcement proceedings, including stipulation mechanism for settling violations without formal complaint.

Deletion would undermine due process and lead to arbitrary enforcement. The uniform rules ensure consistent, fair procedures, preventing case-by-case variability that could violate rule of law principles. The stipulation mechanism provides efficient, cost-effective resolution of minor violations, saving agency resources and avoiding full litigation costs for regulated entities—outcomes that would be difficult to achieve through ad hoc decisions lacking transparency and predictability.

USDA administrative procedure allowing the Administrator to offer stipulation agreements for apparent violations, where individuals waive hearing rights and agree to pay a specified penalty; if paid on time, matter settled; if not, stipulated irrelevant to later penalties.

Coercive backdoor settlement mechanism undermining due process; gives Administrator unilateral power to extract penalties without formal adjudication; pressured waivers of hearing rights; violates rule of law by enabling penalties without determination of guilt; such negotiation replicable in judicial forums with proper safeguards.

USDA rules for administrative enforcement proceedings, outlining stipulation process for settling violations before formal complaint.

Unnecessary procedural thickening that increases regulatory burden and compliance costs, especially for small businesses. Discretionary settlement power enables regulatory capture and inconsistent enforcement, contrary to rule of law principles.

This regulation governs the standards and specifications for materials and equipment that Rural Utilities Service (RUS) borrowers must use when purchasing materials for electric systems. It establishes a comprehensive approval process through Technical Standards Committees, requires selection from a mandated 'List of Materials,' incorporates numerous industry standards by reference, and includes 'Buy American' preferences. RUS specifies detailed technical standards and conditional acceptance procedures, with appeals processes up to the Administrator.

This regulation imposes heavy-handed central planning on rural electric systems by mandating approved materials and Buy American preferences. It creates significant compliance burdens, stifles innovation by restricting new materials through a bureaucratic approval process, and increases costs for rural ratepayers. The knowledge problem is insurmountable—Washington bureaucrats cannot determine optimal materials for diverse local conditions across rural America. Market competition and professional engineering judgment would better serve quality, safety, and cost-effectiveness. The regulation protects incumbents through barriers to entry, benefits domestic manufacturers at the expense of consumers, and represents the type of administrative overreach that Mises, Hayek, and Friedman criticized as both economically inefficient and morally corrosive to individual liberty and local sovereignty.

This regulation governs USDA's river basin studies, floodplain management assistance, joint investigations with the Army Corps of Engineers, and interagency coordination of water resources activities, providing technical planning assistance to federal, state, and local governments for watershed management and flood control planning.

Creates a massive federal bureaucracy for watershed planning that should be handled by states/localities under federalism principles, imposes hidden costs through federal coordination requirements, and enables regulatory capture through interagency committees that distort water resource allocation away from market-based solutions.