Browse regulations

Federal regulation establishing IRB oversight and ethical requirements for human subjects research conducted, supported, or regulated by any federal agency. Requires informed consent, special protections for vulnerable populations, and compliance with Belmont Report principles. Creates complex administrative regime covering domestic and international research with extensive exemptions and waiver processes.

Imposes massive compliance costs that divert research funds to bureaucracy, disproportionately harming small institutions and delaying life-saving discoveries. Federal overreach replaces state-level and professional self-regulation with one-size-fits-all rules. Unseen consequence: defensive IRB practices block socially valuable research, while the administrative state expands its power through periodic reinterpretation of 'identifiable' data definitions.

Ethics regulation for Postal Regulatory Commission employees prohibiting ownership of securities in entities that appear before the Commission, compete with USPS, or have significant contracts with USPS; requires divestiture, prior approval for outside employment, and disqualification from conflicts.

Without these restrictions, regulators could financially benefit from decisions affecting specific companies, creating systemic risks of regulatory capture and biased rulings that would distort competition in the postal and package delivery markets. The personal investment limitations are a necessary trade-off to maintain integrity in an agency overseeing a government monopoly, ensuring decisions serve the public interest rather than private financial gain.

Defines terms and procedures for the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP), which resolves negotiation impasses between federal agencies and labor organizations when voluntary arrangements fail. Sets forth meanings for agency, labor organization, Executive Director, hearing, impasse, Panel, party, quorum, and voluntary arrangements.

This regulation implements federal-sector collective bargaining, forcing taxpayers to fund union negotiations and binding arbitration. It violates voluntary association principles by imposing a third-party decision-maker when parties cannot agree. The panel's existence distorts federal labor markets, creating a wedge between agency management and fiscal responsibility. Federal employees, unlike private-sector workers, compete with no market alternatives; their employers are monopolies funded by compulsory taxation. Collective bargaining in this context lacks the consent of the governed (taxpayers) who fund the outcomes. The unseen cost: $14,000+ per household in hidden regulatory burden extends to this labor relations infrastructure, forcing taxpayers to subsidize negotiations over how their money is spent. This should be resolved legislatively, not bureaucratically—or eliminated entirely to restore competitive, voluntary employment relationships in government.

Regulation establishes the Federal Labor Relations Authority's procedures for administering federal employee labor relations, including unit determination, elections, collective bargaining rights, unfair labor practice hearings, and arbitration under Chapter 71 of Title 5.

Institutionalizes costly public-sector unionization that inflates federal payrolls, protects underperforming workers, distorts management incentives, and imposes hidden compliance costs on taxpayers, ultimately reducing government efficiency.

States that ARC Federal Staff employees are subject to existing executive branch ethics (5 CFR 2635) and financial disclosure (5 CFR 2634) regulations.

Pure redundancy - all executive branch employees are already subject to these regulations by default. This adds zero new requirements while contributing to regulatory page count bloat.

Procedural rule authorizing service of Office of Special Counsel subpoenas by certified or registered mail in addition to other authorized methods.

Imposes no compliance costs on private parties; merely provides an efficient means for the agency to execute its subpoena power. Deleting it would create unnecessary friction in legitimate government investigations without any corresponding gain in liberty or reduction in regulatory burden.

Requires Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board employees to comply with executive branch-wide Standards of Ethical Conduct (5 CFR 2635), Board-specific supplemental regulations (5 CFR 8601), and financial disclosure requirements (5 CFR 2634).

Deletion would undermine ethical governance and public trust in the entity managing federal employee retirement savings. Standards of conduct and financial disclosure are essential for preventing conflicts of interest and self-dealing in positions handling trillions in retirement assets; these minimal compliance requirements are foundational to lawful administration and would be impossible to replace adequately if eliminated.

Requires OMB employees to adhere to executive branch ethics standards (5 CFR 2635), OMB-specific supplements (5 CFR 8701), and financial disclosure regulations (5 CFR 2634).

Deletion would eliminate preventive ethics controls, increasing corruption risk in OMB's budget/regulatory decisions that impact all Americans; criminal law alone is insufficient as a deterrent and lack of transparency would undermine accountability.

Mandates that the Chairman of the Board designate a presiding official to chair any Board of Review convened by the Secretary of Transportation to examine removal actions against air traffic controllers, following a written request from the Department.

Adds to regulatory complexity and bloat for a minor internal procedural matter that could be handled via agency management directives; codifying such minutiae inflates the CFR, reduces operational flexibility, and contributes to the unseen burden of uninterpretable rules.

OPM regulation establishes comprehensive procedures for medical evaluations, documentation standards, and fitness-for-duty determinations for federal job applicants and employees in competitive service and certain excepted positions. It defines medical standards, physical requirements, and waiver processes, mandates compliance with ADA/Rehabilitation Act, and outlines payment and record-keeping requirements.

imposes significant bureaucratic costs on taxpayers through mandatory medical review boards, OPM approvals, and detailed documentation standards while creating unnecessary barriers to federal employment for disabled Americans through invasive medical inquiries and complex waiver processes; duplicates statutory ADA protections and could be replaced with agency-specific guidelines and judicial oversight for discrimination

Establishes a Senior Executive Service within the Government Accountability Office to attract and retain competent executives, tie compensation to performance, ensure accountability, and maintain merit-based management.

Adds unnecessary bureaucratic complexity; internal personnel rules could be managed under existing civil service frameworks, with risks of entrenching a self-interested elite within an oversight agency, undermining its accountability mission.

This regulation establishes the National Capital Planning Commission's privacy program under the Privacy Act of 1974 and E-Government Act of 2002, governing the collection, maintenance, and disclosure of personal information. It mandates designation of privacy officers, record management procedures, privacy impact assessments, security safeguards, and individual rights to access, amend, and receive accountings of their personal records.

This regulation creates costly bureaucratic overhead with extensive compliance requirements that burden both the agency and individuals. Privacy protection is fundamentally a property right that should be handled through private contract law and civil torts, not federal regulation. The complex procedures undermine the rule of law by creating unknowable regulatory requirements, and the compliance costs disproportionately fall on taxpayers while crowding out more efficient market-based solutions for information protection.

This regulation establishes comprehensive procedures for the National Capital Planning Commission to process Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, including request submission, search and review processes, fee structures, expedited processing, confidentiality protections, and appeal mechanisms. It creates complex bureaucratic requirements for both the agency and requesters.

Americans would be worse off without this regulation because FOIA serves as a critical check on government power by enabling public access to agency records and decisions. While the implementation is complex, the transparency benefits of FOIA outweigh the administrative costs. The regulation establishes necessary safeguards for legitimate privacy and commercial confidentiality while maintaining public accountability. Without such procedures, government agencies could arbitrarily withhold information, undermining democratic oversight and the public's right to know how their government operates.

Regulation establishes NCPC-specific NEPA compliance procedures for projects in the National Capital Region, supplementing CEQ regulations with additional requirements for environmental documentation, agency coordination, timing schedules, and memoranda of understanding.

Duplicative of existing CEQ NEPA regulations, adds unnecessary bureaucratic layers and costs to projects in the National Capital Region, extends federal authority into state and local land use decisions, and creates barriers to development that disproportionately harm small projects and taxpayers.

Regulation sets procedures for disposing of surplus range animals (buffalo, longhorn cattle) and feral animals on wildlife refuges, allowing scheduled disposal or exigent circumstances; methods include donation to public agencies/institutions or sale on open market. Feral animals may be taken by authorized personnel or permit-holders.

Provides necessary, low-cost framework for efficient management of surplus animals, ensuring conservation goals, public benefit, and compliance with health laws; deletion would create uncertainty and risk ad hoc, potentially less effective disposal practices.