Browse regulations

This regulation (39 CFR Part 266) implements the Privacy Act of 1974 for the U.S. Postal Service. It establishes procedures for individuals to access, amend, and receive accounting of their personal records in Postal Service systems. The rule creates a Privacy and Records Management Office, Records Custodians, a Data Integrity Board, and sets limits on disclosure of personal information. It also establishes fee structures and exemptions for certain law enforcement systems.

Deleting this regulation would leave Americans and Postal Service employees with no legal recourse to access, correct, or control their personal information held by the Postal Service—a massive agency that collects addresses, financial data, and personal details. The Privacy Act creates enforceable rights against government overreach and arbitrary recordkeeping. Without it, the Postal Service could secretly maintain inaccurate information, share personal data without constraint, and individuals would lack any mechanism to discover or remedy harms. The Data Integrity Board's oversight of computer matching programs prevents abuse of cross-agency data sharing. These procedural safeguards are essential to prevent a surveillance bureaucracy that would undermine individual autonomy and privacy—fundamental rights that predate government. While compliance costs exist, they are modest compared to the irreparable harm of unchecked government data power.

The Common Rule: Federal regulation requiring IRB review and ethical oversight for all federally-connected human subjects research, withdetailed standards, exemptions, and compliance mechanisms based on Belmont Report principles.

Massive compliance burden delays life-saving research, raises costs for taxpayers, and centralizes ethical oversight that should be handled by professional standards, state regulation, and tort liability. Unseen costs include slowed innovation, disadvantaged small researchers, and bureaucratic rigidity that cannot adapt to evolving research contexts as effectively as decentralized oversight.

Sets filing procedures for copyright owners to claim cable, satellite, and DART royalty fees from statutory compulsory license funds, including deadlines, electronic submission via eCRB, required information, and amendment/withdrawal rules.

Deletion would create chaos and litigation in distributing statutorily owed royalties, harming copyright owners and the creative industries that rely on predictable compensation; the regulation provides a low-cost, administrable framework that ensures orderly claims processing and prevents unpaid entitlements.

Implements the Presidential Records Act, governing preservation, disposal, and public access to presidential records. Establishes procedures for record appraisal, disposal notices, access restrictions, appeals, privilege claims, and coordination with Congress and law enforcement.

Americans would be worse off without these codified safeguards: arbitrary destruction or improper sealing of presidential records would undermine historical transparency and accountability. The regulation creates a predictable framework that balances legitimate executive confidentiality during term with public's right to know afterward, preventing government from operating in darkness. Without it, the historical record would be vulnerable to political manipulation.

Sets detailed technical design requirements for medical diagnostic equipment to ensure accessibility for patients with disabilities, including transfer surfaces, wheelchair spaces, supports, and operable parts. Enforced by DOJ and HHS as mandatory standards.

Imposes substantial hidden costs on manufacturers and healthcare providers, increasing equipment and care prices for all Americans. Federal mandate displaces state-level innovation and market-driven solutions. Accessibility can be achieved through less restrictive means: ADA's nondiscrimination requirement, state regulations, tort liability, and insurance incentives achieve equal access without the 'fatal conceit' of central planners dictating precise equipment dimensions.

The Health Education Assistance Loan (HEAL) program provides federal insurance for loans to graduate students in specific health fields (medicine, dentistry, veterinary, etc.) and some non-students. The insurance covers lender losses from borrower death, disability, bankruptcy, or default, with the government stepping in to collect after assignment. The regulation sets eligibility requirements, loan limits ($80,000 or $50,000), repayment terms (9-month grace, 10-25 year repayment), deferment options for further education or service, and interest rates tied to Treasury bills plus 3 points.

This program distorts health professions markets by artificially encouraging borrowing for targeted fields, creating moral hazard as taxpayers absorb lender losses. It violates Tenth Amendment federalism through federal intrusion into education financing, imposes hidden costs via insurance payouts, and adds compliance burdens on lenders and schools. The easy financing contributes to rising education costs while picking winners contradicts free market principles. The program should be terminated entirely.

This regulation establishes the Department of Defense's procedures for processing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, including how to submit requests, timelines for response, multi-track processing, consult/referral protocols between components and agencies, appeals processes, and protections for confidential commercial information.

Americans would be worse off without these rules because FOIA's transparency mandate would become unworkable—citizens would face unpredictable, inconsistent responses across DoD components with no guaranteed timelines, appeal rights, or coordination mechanisms. This procedural framework makes government accountability achievable while balancing legitimate needs to protect national security and commercial information, an equilibrium unlikely through ad hoc decisions.

This regulation implements the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act by blocking the property and interests in property of specific foreign persons responsible for human rights abuses, including those involved in Magnitsky's detention, abuse, or death, or extrajudicial killings/torture in Russia. It prohibits U.S. persons from dealing with blocked property, provides definitions and exceptions (personal communications, informational materials, travel, humanitarian donations), and establishes administrative requirements for handling blocked assets. The regulation delegates authority to OFAC to maintain a Specially Designated Nationals List and issue licenses.

This sanctions regime achieves a narrow, constitutionally legitimate foreign policy objective that cannot be readily accomplished through ordinary legislation. Congressional authorization (Magnitsky Act) provides clear statutory basis, and the regulatory framework is necessary to implement targeted financial blockades against specific foreign perpetrators of human rights atrocities. The administrative burden is minimal relative to the foreign policy utility, and the regulation includes appropriate humanitarian exceptions and procedural safeguards. Deleting it would dismantle a calibrated tool for holding human rights abusers accountable through financial isolation, a mechanism that operates within existing sanctions infrastructure without creating new regulatory edifice.

Implements the Age Discrimination Act for Treasury-administered federal financial assistance programs, prohibiting age discrimination with exceptions for age distinctions necessary to normal operation or statutory objectives. Requires recipient self-evaluations, record-keeping, compliance reviews, and establishes complaint mediation, investigation, and enforcement procedures including potential termination of funding.

Imposes significant compliance costs and administrative burden on recipients, disproportionately affecting small entities. Unseen effects include chilling legitimate age-based program design (e.g., youth or senior services), discouraging participation in federal programs, and duplicating state anti-discrimination frameworks. Federalizes a domain reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment, distorting local control and imposing a hidden tax on those accepting federal funds.

This CFR part documents federal approval of Mississippi's state surface mining program under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), lists approved amendments, and notes contact information for accessing program documents. It is primarily administrative—recording the federal government's determination that Mississippi's regulatory framework meets minimum federal standards.

The administrative burden of maintaining this federal approval process adds an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy that raises compliance costs for small mining operations while doing nothing to improve environmental outcomes. The federal-state cooperative program creates regulatory complexity and enables mission creep. Surface mining regulation, if any, should be determined by states without federal approval requirements, consistent with Tenth Amendment principles. This CFR part is merely the federal paperwork trail approving a state program—eliminating it would simplify the regulatory labyrinth without sacrificing reclamation standards, which states could maintain through their own legislation without federal oversight.

This regulation approves Maryland's state-specific surface mining regulatory program under the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. It administratively approves the state's program submission from 1980-1981, disapproves a specific state provision allowing mining suspensions as alternative penalties, and approves Maryland's Abandoned Mine Plan. The rule is largely procedural, specifying where program documents are available and setting requirements for future state amendments.

This represents federal administrative overreach into what should be state authority under the Tenth Amendment. Surface mining regulation, land use, and occupational standards for mining are traditional state and local police powers. The federal government has no constitutional business approving or disapproving state mining regulations—this is federalism erosion through expansive Commerce Clause interpretation. The disapproval of Maryland's alternative penalty provision specifically denies states flexibility to innovate beyond federal one-size-fits-all approaches. This duplicative federal layer adds compliance complexity and costs for Maryland miners with no constitutional justification, while creating an unnecessary bureaucratic bridge between Maryland and federal OSMRE offices. The regulation achieves nothing that Maryland couldn't do better on its own, while multiplying administrative overhead.

This CFR part documents and incorporates Louisiana's state surface mining regulations adopted under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). It records federal approval of Louisiana's program, amendment history, and availability of the rules, serving as the federal reference for the state's delegated regulatory scheme.

Federal documentation of an unconstitutional commandeering scheme that violates Tenth Amendment federalism, imposing hidden compliance costs, bureaucratic bloat, and undermining state autonomy over land-use decisions while failing to demonstrate independent benefits that justify centralized control.

Iowa-specific surface mining reclamation rules under federal SMCRA program, with state and federal office addresses; lists amendment dates and approvals from 1980-1983.

Federal commandeering of state environmental programs violates Tenth Amendment; creates compliance uncertainty and regulatory capture through complex state-federal jurisdictional overlap; imposes hidden costs on mining operators without clear evidence that a federally-administered program would be less effective than pure state regulation or private liability regimes.

Establishes cooperative federal-state agreement where Indiana's Department of Natural Resources assumes primary regulatory authority over surface coal mining and reclamation operations on Federal lands within the state. Governs permit applications, inspections, enforcement, performance bonds, reporting, and coordination with federal agencies including OSM, BLM, and land management agencies.

Imposes excessive compliance burdens that raise energy costs for American families, disproportionately harm small mining operators while protecting incumbent firms, and violates Tenth Amendment principles by federalizing land-use regulation. The unseen consequences include reduced coal supply, entrenched regulatory capture, and misallocation of resources toward permits and paperwork rather than production.

This regulation documents federal approval of Arkansas's surface coal mining regulatory program under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), including conditional and full approvals, disapproved amendments, and ongoing submission requirements for state program amendments to the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.

This represents federal overreach into a state police power matter violating Tenth Amendment federalism. The hidden costs include permanent bureaucratic entanglement, Arkansas's compliance expenses for maintaining federal approval, and the unseen damage of imposing uniform national standards that prevent state regulatory innovation. Surface mining regulation properly belongs to Arkansas under principles of subsidiarity; federal oversight creates a one-size-fits-all approach that stifles local experimentation and imposes a hidden tax on mining operations that ultimately raises costs for energy consumers.