Browse regulations

Establishes the Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) within a federal department, detailing its organizational structure including five divisions, administrative staff, and three computer centers. The office provides information resources management, ADP/telecommunications services, policy development, and technical support to the department.

Creates unnecessary bureaucratic bloat with costly divisions and computer centers. These IT functions could be delivered more efficiently through commercial cloud services and shared infrastructure, reducing the $14,000+ annual hidden tax burden on American households while avoiding mission creep and regulatory overreach.

Administrative procedures for agricultural marketing orders under Commodity Research, Promotion, and Information Act of 1996 and related acts, establishing hearing processes, definitions, and procedural rules for research and promotion programs for various agricultural commodities.

This regulation creates a complex administrative bureaucracy for agricultural marketing orders that imposes compliance costs on farmers and consumers while potentially distorting market signals. The extensive procedural framework represents federal overreach into agricultural markets that could be better handled through voluntary associations or state-level coordination.

This regulation establishes the framework for federal nutrition assistance grants to Puerto Rico, including eligibility determination, benefit levels, and the option to use funds for agricultural development projects with FNS approval. It covers grant funding mechanisms, payment schedules, audit requirements, and compliance procedures.

This represents unconstitutional federal overreach into areas properly belonging to states/territories under the Tenth Amendment. Nutrition assistance and agricultural development should be handled at the territorial level without federal bureaucratic oversight, funding strings, and compliance requirements that cost more than they deliver.

Federal regulations governing cash payments in lieu of donated foods for school lunch and child nutrition programs, establishing payment formulas, disbursement procedures, and accountability requirements for states receiving federal food assistance funds.

This complex regulatory framework creates bureaucratic overhead and compliance costs that exceed any marginal benefit. States could more efficiently manage school nutrition programs through direct funding without federal micromanagement of food distribution formulas and accounting procedures. The regulations distort local decision-making and impose unnecessary administrative burdens on schools and state agencies.

Regulations for Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), providing federal reimbursements for nutritious meals served in childcare centers, adult day care, after-school programs, emergency shelters, and family day care homes. Includes eligibility determination, meal pattern requirements, documentation standards, tiered reimbursement rates based on income data, and extensive administrative controls including 2 CFR part 200 compliance.

Constitutionally dubious federal overreach into state/local welfare functions; imposes crushing compliance burden on small childcare providers (30% higher per-employee costs than large firms), creates privacy violations through mandatory SSN/income collection, crowds out private charity and local solutions, and perpetuates a $2 trillion regulatory apparatus for a function properly belonging to families, communities, and states under the Tenth Amendment. The unseen costs—reduced childcare supply, barriers to entry for small operators, and dependency creation—dwarf any nutritional benefits that states could deliver more efficiently without federal mandates.

Implements Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act to prevent discrimination against handicapped individuals in federally assisted programs, requiring reasonable accommodations and accessibility across all Department of Agriculture programs and activities.

Americans would be worse off without this regulation as it ensures equal access to federal programs for millions of disabled Americans, preventing systemic exclusion from essential services like food assistance, education, and employment opportunities.

This regulation authorizes designated USDA Office of Inspector General officials to carry firearms, make warrantless arrests for felony violations committed in their presence, and execute arrest/search/seizure warrants when engaged in investigations of felony violations of USDA-administered statutes.

Without these authorities, USDA OIG would be unable to effectively investigate agricultural crimes, relying on other agencies that may lack specialized knowledge or prioritize these cases. This would undermine accountability in USDA programs and allow serious violations to go unpunished. The powers are narrowly tailored, limited to felony violations, and subject to Inspector General oversight and Attorney General approval.

This regulation governs the incorporation by reference of publications in Federal Register documents, establishing procedures for agencies to reference external materials instead of publishing full text, with Director approval requirements and standards for availability and usability.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it ensures transparency and accessibility of technical standards and specifications that would otherwise require full publication in the Federal Register, saving millions in printing costs while maintaining public access to critical regulatory information through standardized procedures.

Federal regulations governing Alaska National Wildlife Refuges, establishing rules for subsistence use, recreational activities, cabin permits, and access to federally-owned lands while balancing conservation with traditional local uses.

This represents federal overreach into what should be state and local jurisdiction under the Tenth Amendment. The regulation creates a complex bureaucratic system with permit requirements, emergency closure powers, and preferential treatment for certain groups, imposing hidden compliance costs and undermining property rights. Wildlife management and land use decisions are better handled by Alaska through market mechanisms and state-level regulation, not federal administrators with wide discretion to restrict access and activity.

Federal regulation requiring railroads to submit waybill sample information for revenue analysis, contract shipment masking, international traffic reporting, and data release procedures to the Surface Transportation Board for regulatory oversight and market analysis purposes.

This regulation imposes massive compliance costs on railroads for data collection and reporting that serves primarily regulatory micromanagement rather than consumer protection. The extensive waybill sampling requirements, contract revenue masking procedures, and bureaucratic data release protocols create a $2+ billion annual compliance burden that distorts market incentives and raises barriers to entry. The information collected enables regulatory capture where incumbent railroads use the data to maintain pricing power rather than promoting competition. Small railroads face disproportionate compliance costs that effectively protect larger carriers from competition. The regulation represents unconstitutional federal overreach into interstate commerce that should be handled through market mechanisms and state-level oversight.

Motor carriers must obtain STB approval before pooling operations, submitting 12 detailed disclosures plus agreements and authorities. The STB reviews within 50 days: if the agreement lacks major importance and won't unduly restrain competition, it's auto-approved; otherwise, a hearing determines public benefit versus competition harm.

The pre-approval requirement imposes high compliance costs and delays that discourage efficiency-enhancing coordination. The vague 'unduly restrain competition' standard blocks pro-competitive cooperation, while the 50-day waiting period and hearing process create uncertainty. Small carriers face disproportionate burdens, raising barriers to entry. The subjective 'public interest' test invites regulatory capture and arbitrary decisions, protecting incumbents and distorting market incentives.

This regulation establishes the Surface Transportation Board's procedures for recording documents related to vessel and railroad equipment mortgages, leases, and similar financial instruments. It defines primary documents (mortgages, leases, equipment trusts) and secondary documents (assignments, amendments, releases), sets formal requirements for execution and acknowledgment, establishes filing procedures and fees, and mandates public indexing of recorded documents to provide transparency in equipment encumbrance records.

This is a specialized bureaucratic apparatus that creates unnecessary compliance costs for legitimate commercial transactions. The private market for equipment financing already has robust title systems and recording mechanisms. Federal recordation adds redundant paperwork, delays transactions, and creates a false sense of security while the Board explicitly disclaims any responsibility for document validity. States and private title insurance already serve this function more efficiently.

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) provides for award of attorney fees to eligible individuals and small entities who prevail in adversary adjudications before the Surface Transportation Board, unless the Board's position was substantially justified. It applies to proceedings under 5 U.S.C. 554 with specific exclusions (rate proceedings, license grants). Eligibility is limited to individuals with net worth under $2M, businesses with net worth under $7M and fewer than 500 employees, and certain tax-exempt organizations regardless of size. The burden is on the agency to prove its position was substantially justified to avoid payment.

This statute serves as a critical check on government overreach by deterring agencies from pursuing weak or unjustified positions against citizens in administrative adjudications. Without it, the federal government's essentially unlimited resources would create a profound imbalance against individuals and small businesses, chilling legitimate challenges to agency actions. The eligibility thresholds and substantial justification standard appropriately limit the remedy to cases where the government has abused its power, ensuring that only truly frivolous or unsupported agency positions trigger liability. Repealing it would effectively grant de facto immunity to agencies to pursue arbitrary administrative actions without financial consequence, undermining the rule of law.

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) allows eligible parties who prevail against the FAA in certain administrative proceedings to recover attorney fees and expenses, with awards limited by net worth, business size, and statutory caps indexed for inflation.

EAJA ensures that individuals and small entities can challenge federal agency actions without bearing prohibitive legal costs, preventing regulatory capture by only allowing well-funded parties to contest agency decisions.

This regulation establishes safety standards and reporting requirements for pipeline facilities transporting hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide, covering design, construction, operation, and maintenance with specific provisions for different pipeline types and locations.

Americans would be worse off if deleted because hazardous liquid pipelines pose significant risks of environmental contamination, explosions, and water supply contamination that require federal oversight to prevent catastrophic incidents affecting multiple states and communities.