Browse regulations

Federal regulations governing maritime academies, including federal funding, training ship provision, curriculum standards, student subsidies, and operational requirements for state maritime schools that receive federal support.

Federal overreach into state education and maritime training creates regulatory capture, distorts market incentives, and imposes hidden compliance costs. State maritime academies should operate independently without federal subsidies and micromanagement, as the original constitutional framework intended.

Establishes standardized procedures for the U.S. Coast Guard to designate vessels as oceanographic research vessels, including application requirements, validity periods, and renewal processes.

Deletion would create legal uncertainty and arbitrary enforcement; the regulation provides clear, objective criteria essential for distinguishing legitimate scientific research from commercial operations, ensuring predictable regulatory treatment.

Regulation prohibits volunteers and employees in federally-funded senior service programs (Foster Grandparent, Senior Companion, RSVP) from engaging in electoral activities, voter registration, transportation to polls, and lobbying, with narrow exceptions for legislative requests. Requires sponsors to train, monitor, and report violations.

The regulation imposes disproportionate compliance costs on private nonprofit sponsors while overbroadly抑制 senior volunteers' civic participation. It restricts nonpartisan voter registration and legislative contact even when unrelated to federal funding, treating volunteers like full-time government employees. Simpler prohibitions on using federal funds for political purposes would suffice without burdening community service organizations or infringing volunteers' First Amendment rights during private civic engagement.

NEH regulation implementing the Federal Employees' Part-Time Career Employment Act, requiring agencywide annual plans with goals to promote part-time positions (16-32 hrs/week), mandating review of vacant positions for conversion, and setting counting and recruiting procedures.

Imposes unnecessary administrative burdens on a cultural agency, requiring annual planning, position reviews, and reporting that divert resources from NEH's core mission. Mandatory goals and centralized control create perverse incentives and could force suboptimal personnel decisions, exemplifying federal overreach into internal agency management that could be handled through agency discretion.

Implements Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, prohibiting disability discrimination in federally funded programs and requiring accessibility accommodations, reasonable modifications, and integrated settings for qualified handicapped persons in education, employment, and services.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it ensures equal access to education, employment, and public services for millions of disabled Americans who cannot compete on equal terms without accommodations. The regulation creates a level playing field that allows disabled individuals to contribute their talents to society rather than being excluded from participation in public life.

Federal regulations governing time limits and procedures for states to claim Federal Financial Participation (FFP) reimbursement for expenditures under Social Security Act programs (Medicaid, welfare, child support, etc.). Establishes 2-year claim filing deadlines, detailed cost allocation plan requirements, and extensive prior approval requirements for automated data processing acquisitions.

This represents federal overreach that commandeers state administrations through complex, costly mandates. The regulations impose one-size-fits-all federal administrative standards on states, creating massive compliance burdens that favor bureaucratic inertia over local innovation. The matching funds structure incentivizes states to spend beyond prudent levels while the complex rules distort administrative priorities toward federal compliance rather than efficient service delivery. The 185,000-page regulatory labyrinth makes the law unknowable to citizens, violating rule of law principles. These regulations federalize matters properly reserved to states under the Tenth Amendment and create barriers to policy experimentation across states.

HHS-specific employee conduct rules covering courtesy, proper use of government resources, anti-human trafficking training/reporting, foreign gifts, and political activity restrictions. Duplicates and supplements existing 5 CFR ethics standards.

Unnecessary duplication of existing 5 CFR regulations creates compliance burden, training costs, and enforcement complexity while contributing to CFR bloat that undermines rule of law. HHS can address department-specific needs through internal policies rather than adding another layer of binding regulations that restrict employee freedoms without clear marginal benefit.

Establishes the Departmental Appeals Board (DAB) procedures for appealing final written decisions in HHS grant and funding disputes, covering mandatory grant programs (Social Security Act titles, PHS), discretionary project grants, cost allocation disputes, and SSI agreements. Provides rules for filing appeals, developing records, informal conferences, hearings, and expedited processes for claims ≤$25,000, with Board discretion to modify procedures.

Keeping this regulation adds costly bureaucratic overhead while entrenching an unconstitutional administrative state that bypasses Article III courts, inflates compliance burdens, and legitimizes federal grant programs that distort incentives and infringe on state sovereignty.

Federal grant program providing 100% funding to states for emergency management training, requiring three-year plans and quarterly reporting.

100% federal funding eliminates state cost-benefit analysis, creating moral hazard. The program imposes significant compliance burdens while federalizing a core state responsibility, eroding federalism and creating permanent dependency that crowds out local innovation and accountability.

This regulation establishes a framework for voluntary agreements between government and industry to support national defense preparedness. It creates a structured process for developing, implementing, and terminating these agreements with oversight from the Attorney General, Federal Trade Commission, and FEMA. The rules require transparency through public meetings, record-keeping, and antitrust immunity provisions to encourage industry cooperation without violating competition laws.

This regulation creates a framework for government-industry collusion under the guise of 'voluntary' agreements. The antitrust immunity provisions effectively allow price-fixing, production quotas, and market allocation schemes that would normally be illegal. Even with oversight requirements, this system enables regulatory capture and creates artificial market distortions that harm consumers through higher prices and reduced competition. The national defense justification is a pretext for expanding government control over private industry.

BLM regulation prohibiting unpermitted fires (except properly managed campfires), burning of vegetation, entry into closed areas, and interference with firefighters on public lands. Authorizes fire prevention orders to close/restrict areas during high-risk periods with posting requirements, and provides a permit system for exempted activities. Violations punishable by up to $1,000 fine and/or 12 months imprisonment.

Wildfires impose massive uncompensated externalities—destroying lives, property, and public resources—that justify targeted preventive regulation on federal lands. The modest compliance costs (permit processes, fire safety precautions) are dwarfed by the avoided damages from catastrophic fires. The regulation's flexible, time-limited closure authority and permit system appropriately balance prevention with legitimate land use, avoiding the tragedy of the commons that would result from unregulated access during high-risk periods.

The regulation establishes a comprehensive framework for competitive oil and gas leasing in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve, including procedures for sealed bidding, antitrust review, environmental analysis, lease terms (10-year primary term, minimum $3/acre rental, royalties), bonding requirements, special area stipulations, transfers, and renewals.

Compliance burdens (bonds, rentals, reviews, stipulations) act as a hidden tax, distort market allocation via political acreage restrictions, and entrench federal control, violating federalism and free enterprise principles. Barriers to entry protect incumbents, reduce supply, and raise consumer energy prices while substituting bureaucratic for market calculation.

Establishes detailed procedural requirements for obtaining BLM approvals to use public lands via leases, permits, or easements, including application processes, cost recovery fees, environmental reviews, and competition/negotiation mechanisms.

Imposes significant compliance burdens and cost recovery fees that deter small operators and create barriers to entry; federalizes matters better left to states under the Tenth Amendment; the complex approval process stifles beneficial use of public resources and embodies regulatory overreach that prioritizes bureaucratic control over liberty and efficient market allocation.

These regulations establish procedures for processing Federal land withdrawal applications, including preapplication consultation, submission requirements, publication of notices, segregation periods, and final decision-making authority of the Secretary of the Interior.

Creates costly bureaucratic procedures for land use decisions that could be handled more efficiently by state/local authorities, adding compliance costs without clear benefits to public over existing statutory authority.

Regulation establishes procedures for Bureau of Land Management to exchange federal lands for non-federal lands on a discretionary, voluntary basis after determining the exchange serves the public interest and provides equal value. Includes requirements for appraisals, environmental reviews, public notices, and segregates lands during the process.

Creates a distortion in land markets by giving government a privileged trading mechanism that bypasses normal market forces. The 'public interest' determination is subjective and ripe for bureaucratic abuse, while the equal value requirement is inherently unenforceable by any central planner. Government should not be in the business of facilitating or arbitrating land exchanges - if it needs land, it should buy it on the open market; if it has surplus land, it should sell it. This process enables regulatory capture and misallocation of resources as governments cannot price land as well as private owners, violating the knowledge problem identified by Hayek.