Browse regulations

Procedural rules governing practice and procedure before the Surface Transportation Board under 49 U.S.C. These rules establish general applicability rules and special rules for particular proceedings, with a construction favoring just, speedy, and inexpensive determinations.

Americans would be worse off if deleted because these procedural rules ensure the STB operates in a fair, efficient, and predictable manner. Without them, the agency's adjudications would become chaotic and arbitrary, undermining the rule of law and potentially harming the transportation industry through inconsistent decision-making. The 'just, speedy and inexpensive' mandate directly serves the public interest in efficient administration.

This regulation grants multiple exemptions from federal rail regulation (49 U.S.C. Subtitle IV) for: (1) miscellaneous commodities transportation, (2) boxcar traffic, (3) new highway trailers/containers, (4) protective service contracts, (5) equipment storage leases, and (6) industrial development payments/commitments. Carriers retain limited accounting/reporting obligations and Board jurisdiction over specific areas like car hire, interchange, and boxcar rates for small carriers.

Deleting this exemption would RE-IMPOSE the full regulatory regime these provisions waive—increasing compliance costs, restricting pricing freedom, and reducing market flexibility in rail transport. The exemptions promote competition and efficiency while preserving minimal oversight where public interest (anti-trust, small carrier protections) justifies it. Removing them would harm shippers, railroads, and ultimately consumers through higher costs and reduced service innovation.

Regulation establishes procedures for petitions and plans under the Automobile Fuel Efficiency Act of 1980, requiring detailed reporting on model types, fuel economy, manufacturing costs, domestic content, and employment impacts for companies seeking regulatory relief from fuel economy standards.

Creates massive compliance burden with extensive reporting requirements that disproportionately affects small manufacturers while providing little public benefit - the detailed domestic content calculations and employment impact assessments are costly administrative exercises that don't improve fuel efficiency outcomes.

Establishes procedures and qualification standards for State agencies to voluntarily participate in federal railroad safety inspection programs under FRA oversight. States may enter agreements or file annual certifications to conduct investigative and surveillance activities, but inspectors must meet federal training/experience requirements and operate under FRA coordination and monitoring.

This regulation federalizes railroad safety enforcement through a conditional State participation program, expanding the administrative state while undermining federalism. Though nominally voluntary, States that participate must surrender to federal qualification standards, oversight, and reporting requirements—precluding states from developing their own approaches or refusing participation without losing all safety authority. It layers bureaucracy (FRA-monitored state inspectors) atop existing federal regulations, increasing compliance costs for railroads and taxpayers while creating a unified enforcement apparatus that stifles policy experimentation. Railroad safety can be adequately enforced by States acting independently under their own laws or through the FRA alone without this entanglement.

Regulations covering Coast Guard approval requirements for buoyant apparatus, inflatable buoyant apparatus, flame safety lamps, and chain ladders, including material specifications, testing procedures, and marking requirements.

This is a complex web of federal regulations governing maritime safety equipment that creates substantial compliance costs for manufacturers and vessel operators. The extensive testing requirements, material specifications, and approval processes impose a hidden tax on maritime commerce. These regulations could be effectively handled by industry standards and voluntary certification programs, allowing market forces to drive safety innovation while reducing regulatory burden on small businesses in the maritime sector.

Comprehensive maritime safety regulations covering emergency alarm systems, communication equipment, engine order telegraphs, propeller indicators, rudder angle indicators, and steering failure alarms for vessels over 100 gross tons, with detailed technical specifications and installation requirements.

Excessive regulatory burden on maritime industry with over 10,000 words of technical specifications that could be handled by industry standards, insurance requirements, and voluntary best practices. The costs of compliance far exceed any marginal safety benefits, creating barriers to entry for smaller operators while large companies simply pass costs to consumers.

This subpart defines emergency lighting and power systems for vessels, establishing requirements for manual, automatic, temporary, and final emergency power sources, their capacities, locations, and operational procedures to ensure safety during emergencies.

Federal regulation of vessel emergency systems is a maritime safety matter that should be handled by the Coast Guard and industry standards, not general federal regulatory authority. The extensive technical requirements create unnecessary compliance costs for ship operators while duplicating existing safety frameworks. States and maritime authorities can better tailor these requirements to local conditions and vessel types.

Comprehensive safety regulations for electrical installations on vessels, covering equipment construction, installation, grounding, generators, batteries, transformers, motors, and switchboards. References industry standards (IEEE, NEC, IEC, ABS, NEMA) to prevent electrical hazards, ensure system integrity under extreme conditions (listing, trimming, temperature), and protect passengers, crew, and vessels from fire and electrocution.

Deleting these regulations would directly endanger lives through increased risk of electrocution, electrical fires, and catastrophic vessel failures. The standards enforce proven engineering practices that prevent disasters in the uniquely hazardous maritime environment where electrical failures can cause loss of life, environmental damage, and total vessel loss. Private market forces alone cannot overcome the high stakes of maritime safety where failures harm third parties and the costs of engineering judgment far exceed any compliance burden.

Comprehensive marine electrical safety regulations covering vessel installations, equipment standards, and safety protocols for various vessel types and hazardous environments

Creates excessive compliance burdens with 185+ pages of technical standards, incorporates 50+ external standards, and imposes disproportionate costs on small vessel operators while overlapping with existing maritime safety frameworks

This regulation establishes citizen ownership requirements and documentation procedures for vessels engaged in U.S. coastwise trade, including special provisions for manufacturing corporations, oil spill response cooperatives, and vessels under demise charter arrangements. It sets criteria for corporate citizenship, documentation requirements, and operational restrictions for coastwise trade.

This regulation creates a complex web of citizenship requirements and documentation procedures that effectively restricts international competition in U.S. maritime commerce. It imposes significant compliance costs on businesses, protects domestic incumbents through artificial barriers to entry, and violates principles of free trade by limiting who can participate in coastwise transportation based on nationality and corporate structure rather than economic efficiency.

This regulation governs ethical conduct and conflict of interest rules for National Science Foundation (NSF) employees, particularly those who move between academic/research positions and NSF employment. It establishes definitions for awards, employees, and institutions, then sets rules for maintaining research continuity when scientists temporarily work at NSF, requires substitute principal investigators to be designated, prohibits NSF employees from receiving compensation from NSF awards, and imposes a one-year post-employment restriction on representing others before NSF. The regulation also addresses appointment of substitute negotiators to ensure compliance with these restrictions.

This regulation protects the integrity of federal research funding by preventing conflicts of interest where NSF employees could influence decisions about their own research or that of their former institutions. The rules ensure that scientists can temporarily serve at NSF without abandoning their research programs, while preventing them from personally benefiting from NSF awards or using their position to advantage former colleagues. The post-employment restrictions prevent former employees from immediately leveraging their insider knowledge for personal gain, which is essential for maintaining public trust in the federal research grant process.

Implements Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, prohibiting disability discrimination in NSF-funded programs and requiring reasonable accommodations, accessibility, and grievance procedures.

Americans would be worse off if deleted because it ensures equal access to scientific research opportunities and educational programs for people with disabilities, preventing systematic exclusion from federally funded activities.

Defines eligibility for Cuban and Haitian entrants to receive cash and medical assistance via federal reimbursement to states, mirroring the refugee program under INA §412(a)(9).

Creates a discriminatory welfare entitlement based on nationality, expanding federal bureaucracy and distorting immigration incentives while violating equal protection and limited government principles.

This regulation establishes a consolidated grant system for insular areas (U.S. territories and associated states) to combine multiple federal grant programs into single applications, reducing administrative burden and allowing flexible use of funds across various health, social services, and welfare programs.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it significantly reduces administrative costs for small, resource-constrained territories. The consolidation allows these jurisdictions to redirect limited staff time and resources from paperwork to actual service delivery, particularly important for vulnerable populations in remote areas who rely on these health and social services.

Regulation 45 CFR Part 96 governs the administrative framework for multiple federal block grant programs administered by HHS, including community services, preventive health, mental health, substance abuse treatment, maternal/child health, social services, and low-income home energy assistance. It defines terms, establishes application procedures and deadlines for states and Indian tribes, outlines fiscal control and audit requirements, and provides special rules for direct tribal funding.

This regulation implements the block grant mechanism—the most constitutionally sound approach to federal welfare programs, devolving authority to states and localities while maintaining federal funding. Deleting it would either eliminate necessary assistance for vulnerable populations or force a reversion to more restrictive categorical grants with greater federal control and compliance burdens. The administrative requirements here are minimal and necessary for accountability in a federal system, and block grants, per Misean principles, minimize federal bureaucratic expansion and regulatory capture by empowering state innovation.