Browse regulations

Federal regulation governing claims procedures for lost/damaged property transported by interstate carriers (railroads, motor carriers, water carriers, freight forwarders). Sets mandatory filing deadlines, minimum claim requirements, carrier acknowledgment and investigation procedures, 120-day decision timeline with status updates, salvage handling rules, and special weight-based settlement rules for scrap metal.

This regulation imposes costly procedural mandates on private carriers for handling customer claims, representing federal overreach into contract enforcement. The detailed requirements (30-day acknowledgments, 120-day decisions, specific file numbering) create administrative burdens that raise compliance costs, disproportionately harm small carriers, and stifle market innovation. Contract and tort law already provide adequate remedies for bad faith, while competitive forces incentivize efficient claims processing. The hidden tax of regulatory compliance ultimately raises prices for consumers with no offsetting public benefit that justifies federal preemption of private agreements.

Administrative regulation requiring use of prescribed forms for applications under the Interstate Commerce Act and STB regulations, directing that forms include instructions and are available from the Office of Public Assistance.

This purely procedural mandate creates unnecessary compliance costs and barriers to entry by forcing regulated entities to use specific forms rather than accepting any clear written format. The requirement advantages incumbent railroad industry players familiar with the paperwork while disadvantaging small businesses and new entrants. Standardization can be achieved more efficiently without a mandate, and this regulation adds no substantive value beyond the underlying substantive rules—it is quintessential red tape that violates liberty and free enterprise principles by distorting market participation.

Mandates that states with rail fixed guideway public transportation systems establish FTA-certified State Safety Oversight (SSO) programs with independent agencies, specific staffing/training requirements, regular audits, safety event investigations, approval of transit agency safety plans, and minimum safety standards. FTA provides 80% grants and can impose penalties including withholding federal funds. Contains extensive procedural requirements for reporting, investigations, and oversight.

Unconstitutional federal commandeering of state police powers under Tenth Amendment. Compliance costs far exceed marginal safety benefits—states have strong market and legal incentives to maintain safe transit systems. Federal grants create moral hazard and distort state choices. One-size-fits-all rules raise barriers for smaller systems, invite regulatory capture, and add massive bureaucratic overhead. Safety better achieved through state flexibility, private certification, liability law, and market discipline without federal labyrinth.

This regulation implements the Public Transportation Safety Program for recipients of federal transit funding, mandating Safety Management Systems (SMS), granting FTA broad inspection/investigation/audit authority, enabling enforcement actions including withholding up to 25% of federal funds, and establishing a national safety plan with minimum standards for all federally-funded transit systems.

Federalizing local transit safety imposes heavy compliance costs and violates Tenth Amendment federalism. Market incentives and state-level oversight suffice without Washington bureaucracy. The SMS mandate creates barriers for small operators, stifles local innovation, and duplicates existing safety mechanisms. Transit systems accepting federal funds should be free to adopt locally-appropriate safety methods rather than bearing the $2 trillion national regulatory burden through this and similar mandates.

Requires FTA-funded transit agencies to certify that any new or significantly modified bus model has passed a comprehensive test at the government-designated Bus Testing Facility, covering eight performance categories with minimum standards and an aggregate score of at least 60.

Imposes substantial compliance costs that inflate bus prices, reduces competition by creating a barrier to entry for small manufacturers, duplicates existing NHTSA and EPA standards, and federalizes local procurement decisions. The mandatory testing regime stifles innovation, increases taxpayer burdens, and creates a captive gatekeeper prone to regulatory capture.

Mandates compliance with 49 CFR part 80, which implements the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA), for entities governed by this part.

TIFIA represents federal overreach that distorts infrastructure markets, imposes unnecessary compliance costs, and violates Tenth Amendment limits on federal power.

This regulation establishes a National Transit Asset Management System requiring public transit agencies receiving federal financial assistance to develop and implement transit asset management plans, maintain asset inventories, conduct condition assessments, set performance targets for state of good repair, and submit regular reports to the Federal Transit Administration.

The regulation imposes substantial hidden compliance costs on transit agencies, especially smaller operators, diverting resources from actual service delivery. It substitutes federal bureaucratic planning for local decision-making, creating rigidity and stifling innovation. The reporting burden fuels an expanding administrative state with questionable benefits that could be achieved more efficiently through market discipline, state oversight, or voluntary best practices. It violates Tenth Amendment federalism principles, and its compliance costs ultimately fall on taxpayers and riders through higher taxes, fares, or reduced service.

This regulation contains only cross-references to other CFR sections (23 CFR part 450, subparts B and C) for compliance requirements and definitions (subpart A), with no substantive rules of its own.

Cross-reference regulations increase complexity and hidden compliance costs by forcing navigation of multiple CFR sections without providing clear, stand-alone rules. They contribute to the uninterpretable regulatory labyrinth while adding no independent value, violating rule of law knowability principles.

This regulation sets federal safety standards for regrooved and regroovable tires sold in interstate commerce. It defines permissible tire types, mandates technical specifications (tread thickness, groove dimensions, fluid escape passages, and defect prohibitions), and requires specific labeling of regroovable tires.

The regulation imposes significant compliance costs on small tire businesses for a product that can be safely regulated through market mechanisms. Clear labeling, tort liability, state-level regulation, and consumer/insurance scrutiny already provide strong incentives for safety. The specific technical requirements (e.g., 3/32-inch tread cover, 90 linear inches of tread edges per foot) are arbitrary precision that stifles innovation and raises barriers to entry. No evidence shows these federal mandates outperform less restrictive alternatives, while violating principles of federalism by regulating a purely local commercial activity.

Establishes minimum lighting and marking standards for new agricultural equipment operated on public roads, incorporating ANSI/ASAE standards 279.14 and 390.4

Federal overreach into state domain; imposes one-size-fits-all standards that increase costs for small manufacturers and farmers without justification, while states are fully capable of regulating equipment safety on local roads based on their specific conditions and needs

Mandates fuel consumption standards for heavy-duty vehicles and engines through a credit trading compliance program administered by NHTSA.

Imposes substantial compliance costs passed to consumers, disproportionately burdens small businesses, distorts market innovation through technology mandates, and represents federal overreach into market-driven decisions. The $2 trillion annual regulatory burden should be reduced, not expanded, especially when market incentives already drive fuel efficiency.

Regulation requires NHTSA to display OMB control numbers for its information collection requirements, as mandated by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507(f)).

Deleting this transparency requirement would obscure which information collections have OMB approval, weakening the Paperwork Reduction Act's oversight and potentially allowing NHTSA to impose unauthorized paperwork burdens on the public.

This regulation details the internal organizational structure of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), including the chain of command, roles of senior officials (Administrator, Deputy Administrator, Chief Counsel, various Associate Administrators), and the delegation of authorities among them. It specifies succession procedures and reserves certain key powers to the Administrator.

This is pure bureaucratic internal housekeeping that should not exist as a federal regulation. Agency organization should be determined by internal management directives, not codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. Every page of the CFR that merely describes who reports to whom and how authority is delegated internally represents regulatory bloat that obscures actual rules with legal force. These procedural details belong in agency manuals accessible only to staff, not in the public-facing regulatory code that citizens and businesses must navigate. The 185,000-page CFR already suffers from insufficient knowability; regulations like this that describe nothing more than internal management structure violate the rule of law principle that laws must be comprehensible. Delete it and let NHTSA manage its own organization through internal orders.

Establishes Coast Guard authority to inspect, detain, and mark international shipping containers for safety compliance, with procedures for detention orders, notifications, compliance restoration, appeals, and cost liability.

Americans would be worse off without this regulation because unsafe containers pose unacceptable risks to port workers, cargo, and coastal communities from accidents, structural failures, or hazardous materials. The Coast Guard's inspection and detention authority is the only effective backstop against unsafe containers entering U.S. ports, as private market mechanisms cannot adequately police cross-border safety externalities or ensure minimum standards. The costs are narrowly targeted at non-compliant owners and are proportionate to the catastrophic risks prevented.

Regulation mandates periodic safety inspections for cargo containers to detect structural defects. Container owners must examine containers every 30 months (5 years for new ones) via detailed visual inspections by qualified personnel, document findings, and mark containers with next exam date. Allows alternative continuous examination programs with Coast Guard approval. Applies regardless of container location.

Deleting this regulation would risk unsafe containers causing workplace injuries, port accidents, and loss of life. The federal standard ensures uniform safety across interstate and international commerce, preventing inconsistent private inspections that could endanger workers. The modest compliance costs are far outweighed by the catastrophic consequences of structural failures.