Browse regulations

Establishes grant administration procedures for policy research and telecommunications demonstration projects at HHS, including eligibility criteria, application processes, evaluation standards, and special provisions for human subjects, animals, and environmental compliance.

Creates a complex federal bureaucracy for grant administration that distorts research priorities, imposes compliance costs, and centralizes decision-making that should be handled by states or private sector. The extensive evaluation criteria and special provisions create regulatory capture opportunities while burdening small organizations with paperwork.

This regulation implements the Privacy Act of 1974 by establishing Department of Health and Human Services policies and procedures for maintaining, accessing, and disclosing personal records, including provisions for individual rights to notification, access, and correction of records, as well as disclosure rules and verification procedures.

Creates massive bureaucratic infrastructure for federal record-keeping that violates constitutional privacy principles and creates unnecessary compliance costs, while duplicating protections already available through common law and state mechanisms.

Department of Interior FOIA regulations establishing procedures for processing Freedom of Information Act requests, including definitions, fee structures, processing tracks, and exemptions.

Americans would be worse off without FOIA access to government records, transparency in decision-making, and ability to hold agencies accountable through information requests.

Federal training grants and traineeships for occupational safety and health personnel, providing funding for educational institutions and individuals to develop qualified workforce in fields like occupational medicine, industrial hygiene, and safety engineering.

Creates a permanent federal bureaucracy for training programs that should be handled by private industry and state governments. The compliance costs and administrative overhead far exceed any benefits, while distorting labor markets and creating dependency on federal funding.

This regulation governs wastewater discharges from oil-base ink production facilities using solvent-based tank washing systems. It establishes zero-discharge requirements for process wastewater pollutants to navigable waters and publicly owned treatment works, applying best practicable control technology (BPT) and best available technology economically achievable (BAT) standards.

The regulation's blanket zero-discharge mandate lacks flexibility and imposes extreme compliance costs disproportionate to environmental benefits. The rule fails to consider cost-effective alternatives like on-site treatment and reuse systems, and creates barriers to entry for small ink producers. Better outcomes could be achieved through technology-neutral performance standards that allow innovation rather than mandating a single solution.

This regulation imposes a zero-discharge requirement on process wastewater from oil-based paint production where tank cleaning uses solvents. It prohibits any discharge of pollutants to navigable waters or publicly owned treatment works, applying the same strict standard to existing sources (BPT/BAT) and new sources.

The zero-discharge mandate imposes excessive compliance costs through rigid command-and-control regulation, regardless of site-specific conditions or modern treatment technologies that could enable safe, limited discharges. It creates barriers to entry for small manufacturers, stifles innovation in pollution control, and represents federal overreach into matters better handled by states under the Clean Water Act's cooperative federalism framework. The unseen cost is preventing market-based solutions and tailored approaches that could achieve equivalent environmental protection at far lower economic burden.

EPA regulation imposing effluent limitations on producers of asphalt paving/roofing emulsions, asphalt concrete, asphalt roofing materials, and linoleum/printed asphalt felt floor coverings. It generally prohibits discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable waters for existing and new sources, applying BPT, BAT, and NSPS standards.

Hidden compliance costs exceed benefits, violating limited government principles. Federal zero-discharge mandate imposes disproportionate burden on small producers, raising barriers to entry. Unseen effects: stifled innovation, reduced output, higher prices. Transboundary water pollution is better addressed by state-level regulation and liability rules, allowing flexible, cost‑effective abatement without contributing to the $2 trillion regulatory drag.

This regulation governs effluent limitations for mining and processing various minerals, requiring best practicable control technology to prevent water pollution from process-generated wastewater and mine dewatering discharges. It establishes specific discharge limits, recycling requirements, and overflow containment standards based on precipitation events.

These regulations impose massive compliance costs on mining operations through complex monitoring, reporting, and infrastructure requirements. The unseen costs include reduced mineral supply, higher consumer prices, and barriers to entry for new mining ventures. Property owners lose control over their land use, and the regulatory burden creates artificial scarcity in critical materials. Market-based solutions and common law liability would better protect water resources while preserving economic freedom.

This regulation governs experimental use permits (EUPs) for testing unregistered pesticides or registered pesticides for new uses. It requires EPA approval for most field testing beyond small-scale lab/greenhouse trials, imposes labeling, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, and establishes a framework where both federal and state agencies can issue permits with EPA oversight.

Federal authority over pesticide experimentation violates Tenth Amendment federalism—properly a state police power. The permit regime imposes significant compliance costs and delays that disproportionately harm small innovators and academic researchers while protecting incumbent pesticide manufacturers from competition. The vague 'unreasonable adverse effects' standard grants EPA unbounded discretion to block experimentation. The same public health and environmental goals could be achieved more efficiently through state-level regulation, liability insurance requirements, and tort law, allowing market forces to discipline reckless experimentation without creating a centralized bureaucracy that suppresses innovation and concentrates market power.

Comprehensive drinking water quality regulations establishing maximum contaminant levels, monitoring requirements, and treatment standards for public water systems to protect public health from waterborne contaminants including lead, copper, and various chemical and biological pollutants.

Americans would be worse off without federal drinking water standards that prevent lead poisoning, waterborne diseases, and chemical contamination. The unseen costs of deregulation would include increased healthcare costs, developmental disabilities in children, and loss of public confidence in tap water safety.

This EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act requires manufacturers of fuels and fuel additives to register their products before sale. It mandates extensive chemical disclosure, analytical methods, purpose-in-use reporting, and annual production data. Special detailed requirements apply to deposit control additives, including strict composition variability limits and molecular weight analysis.

The registration system imposes substantial compliance costs and acts as a pre-market barrier to entry, disproportionately harming small manufacturers. It forces disclosure of trade secrets, stifles innovation through burdensome prescriptive testing, and protects incumbents from competition. These hidden costs exceed the marginal benefits, as the same emissions monitoring could be achieved more efficiently through post-market surveillance, liability rules, and existing warranty mechanisms without restricting market entry.

This regulation defines technical terms and procedures for designating Federal Reference Methods (FRM) and Federal Equivalent Methods (FEM) for measuring air pollutants, including particulate matter and gases, establishing testing requirements, quality systems, and application processes.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it ensures accurate, reliable air quality monitoring that protects public health. The standardized testing and quality control requirements prevent manufacturers from selling unreliable or inaccurate monitoring equipment, which could lead to undetected pollution levels that harm respiratory health, particularly in vulnerable populations like children and the elderly.

The regulation governs Disbursement Postal Money Orders, specialized instruments issued by the Postal Service to pay its own obligations. It defines the orders' unique characteristics (words of negotiability, specific phrasing, amounts in words and numbers), establishes endorsement requirements, payment procedures, reclamation rights, and processes for handling lost/damaged orders including indemnity requirements and substitute issuance.

This regulation creates unnecessary complexity for a niche payment instrument that serves a limited purpose within the Postal Service. The specialized rules for endorsement, indemnity, and substitute issuance add bureaucratic overhead without providing meaningful consumer protection or market efficiency. These functions could be handled through standard Treasury check procedures or eliminated entirely by modernizing the Postal Service's payment systems.

Postal Service records retention policy establishing schedules for official records, requiring disposal of duplicate copies and non-record materials, assigning responsibilities to Records Office and custodians, and mandating secure procedures for sensitive information disposal.

This regulation ensures proper recordkeeping for a federal agency, preventing both excessive accumulation of unnecessary documents and premature destruction of important records. Without it, the Postal Service could lose critical operational data, fail to comply with legal requirements, or create security vulnerabilities through improper disposal of sensitive information.

This regulation defines terms and establishes administrative rules for Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI) and Veterans' Group Life Insurance (VGLI) - federal group life insurance programs for military personnel and veterans. It covers eligibility, effective dates, conversions to individual policies, beneficiary designations, proceeds payment, and insurer qualifications. The regulation implements a voluntary, premium-funded insurance benefit rather than restricting private activity.

This is a voluntary, premium-funded insurance benefit program, not a regulatory mandate imposing compliance costs on citizens or businesses. Servicemembers can opt out. Eliminating it would harm military personnel and veterans who rely on this low-cost coverage. While the federal government should not be in the insurance business, this program's administrative framework does not create the hidden tax burden, regulatory labyrinth, or federalism erosion that plagues traditional regulations. The unseen costs of deletion—reduced coverage for those who serve—outweigh the minimal administrative burden of the program itself.