[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 156 (Friday, August 14, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52792-52960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-16603]
[[Page 52791]]
Vol. 91
Friday,
No. 156
August 14, 2026
Part II
Regulatory Information Service Center
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions-2026
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 156 / Friday, August 14, 2026 /
Regulatory Plan
[[Page 52792]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
REGULATORY INFORMATION SERVICE CENTER
Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions-2026
AGENCY: Regulatory Information Service Center.
ACTION: Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Publication of the 2026 Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory
and Deregulatory Actions represents a key component of the regulatory
planning mechanism prescribed in Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866,
``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' (58 FR 51735, as amended) and
reaffirmed in E.O. 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review,'' (76 FR 3821) and E.O. 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation.'' The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies
publish semiannual regulatory agendas in the Federal Register
describing regulatory actions they are developing that may have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
(5 U.S.C. 602). The Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions (Unified Agenda) helps agencies fulfill all of
these requirements. All Federal regulatory agencies have chosen to
publish their regulatory agendas as part of this publication. The
complete publication of the 2026 Unified Agenda contains 78 Federal
agency regulatory agendas available to the public at www.reginfo.gov.
The 2026 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the Federal
Register includes the agency Regulatory Flexibility Agendas, in
accordance with the publication requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Agency Regulatory Flexibility Agendas contain only
those Agenda entries for rules that are likely to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and entries
that have been selected for periodic review under section 610 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
ADDRESSES: Regulatory Information Service Center (TTS), General
Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about specific
regulatory actions, please refer to the agency contact listed for each
entry. To provide comment on or to obtain further information about
this publication, contact: Amber Van Amburg, Director, Regulatory
Information Service Center (TTS), General Services Administration, 1800
F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, 703-795-0816. You may also send
comments to us by email at: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
Introduction to the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions
I. What is the Unified Agenda?
II. Why is the Unified Agenda published?
III. How is the Unified Agenda organized?
IV. What information appears for each entry?
V. Abbreviations
VI. How can users get copies of the plan and the agenda?
Agency Agendas
Cabinet Departments
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of War
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of State
Department of Transportation
Department of the Treasury
Department of the Veterans Administration
Other Executive Agencies
Appraisal Subcommittee of the FFIEC
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Agency for International Development
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Corporation for National and Community Service
Council on Environmental Quality
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of
Columbia
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Delta Regional Authority
Environmental Protection Agency
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Export-Import Bank of the United States
Farm Credit Administration
Federal Communications Commission
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Housing Finance Agency
Federal Labor Relations Authority
Federal Maritime Commission
Federal Mediation Conciliation Services
Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council
Federal Reserve System
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board
Federal Trade Commission
Institute of Museum and Library Services
General Services Administration
Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council
Marine Mammal Commission
Millennium Challenge Corporation
Merit Systems Protection Board
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Archives and Records Administration
National Credit Union Administration
National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
National Indian Gaming Commission
National Science Foundation
National Transportation Safety Board
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Government Ethics
Office of Management and Budget
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Office of the National Cyber Director
Office of Personnel Management
Peace Corps
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Postal Regulatory Commission
Presidio Trust
Railroad Retirement Board
Securities and Exchange Commission
Selective Service System
Small Business Administration
Social Security Administration
Surface Transportation Board
Tennessee Valley Authority
U.S. Agency for Global Media
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
U.S. Election Assistance Commission
Joint Authority
Department of War/General Services Administration/National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (Federal Acquisition Regulation)
Regulatory Flexibility Agendas
Cabinet Departments
Department of Agriculture
[[Page 52793]]
Department of Commerce
Department of War
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Homeland Security
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
Department of the Treasury
Other Executive Agencies
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Communications Commission
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Trade Commission
Institute of Museum and Library Services
General Services Administration
National Archives and Records Administration
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Management and Budget
Securities and Exchange Commission
Small Business Administration
Surface Transportation Board
Joint Authority
Department of War/General Services Administration/National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (Federal Acquisition Regulation)
INTRODUCTION TO THE UNIFIED AGENDA OF FEDERAL REGULATORY AND
DEREGULATORY ACTIONS
I. What is the Unified Agenda?
The Unified Agenda provides information about regulations that the
Government is considering or reviewing. The Unified Agenda has appeared
in the Federal Register since 1983 and has been available online since
1995. The complete Unified Agenda is available to the public at
www.reginfo.gov. The online Unified Agenda offers flexible search tools
and access to the historic Unified Agenda database dating back to 1995.
The complete online edition of the Unified Agenda includes regulatory
agendas from 78 Federal agencies. Agencies of the United States
Congress are not included.
The 2026 Unified Agenda publication appearing in the Federal
Register consists of the Regulatory Flexibility Agendas, in accordance
with the publication requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Agency Regulatory Flexibility Agendas contain only those Agenda entries
for rules that are likely to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities and entries that have been
selected for periodic review under section 610 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Printed entries display only the fields required by
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Complete Unified Agenda information for
those entries appears online in a uniform format at www.reginfo.gov.
The regulatory agendas for agencies not publishing Regulatory
Flexibility Agendas are listed below and are available to the public at
www.reginfo.gov.
Cabinet Departments
Department of Education
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of State
Department of Veterans Affairs
Other Executive Agencies
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Agency for International Development
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely
Disabled
Corporation for National and Community Service
Council on Environmental Quality
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of
Columbia
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Export-Import Bank of the United States
Federal Labor Relations Authority
Federal Mediation Conciliation Service
Merit Systems Protection Board
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
National Science Foundation
Office of Government Ethics
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Office of the National Cyber Director
Office of Personnel Management
Peace Corps
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Presidio Trust
Railroad Retirement Board
Selective Service System
Social Security Administration
Tennessee Valley Authority
U.S. Agency for Global Media
Appraisal Subcommittee of the FFIEC
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Delta Regional Authority
Farm Credit Administration
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Federal Housing Finance Agency
Federal Maritime Commission
Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council
Federal Reserve System
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board
Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council
Marine Mammal Commission
Millennium Challenge Corporation
National Credit Union Administration
National Indian Gaming Commission
National Transportation Safety Board
Postal Regulatory Commission
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
U.S. Election Assistance Commission
The Regulatory Information Service Center compiles the Unified
Agenda for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA),
part of the Office of Management and Budget. OIRA is responsible for
overseeing the Federal Government's regulatory, paperwork, and
information resource management activities, including implementation of
Executive Order 12866, as amended (incorporated in Executive Order
13563). The Center also provides information about Federal regulatory
activity to the President and his Executive Office, the Congress,
agency officials, and the public.
The activities included in the Agenda are, in general, those that
will have a regulatory action within the next 12 months. Agencies may
choose to include activities that will have a longer timeframe than 12
months. Agency agendas also show actions or reviews completed or
withdrawn since the last Unified Agenda. Executive Order 12866, as
amended, does not require agencies to include regulations concerning
military or foreign affairs functions or regulations related to agency
organization, management, or personnel matters.
Agencies prepared entries for this publication to give the public
notice of their plans to review, propose, and issue regulations. They
have tried to predict their activities over the next 12 months as
accurately as possible, but dates and schedules are subject to change.
Agencies may withdraw some of the regulations now under development,
and they may issue or propose other regulations not included in their
agendas. Agency actions in the rulemaking process may occur before or
after the dates they have listed. The Unified Agenda does not create a
legal obligation on agencies to adhere to schedules in this publication
or to confine their regulatory activities to those regulations that
appear within it.
[[Page 52794]]
II. Why is the Unified Agenda published?
The Unified Agenda helps agencies comply with their obligations
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and various Executive orders and
other statutes.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to identify those
rules that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Agencies meet that requirement
by including the information in their submissions for the Unified
Agenda. Agencies may also indicate those regulations that they are
reviewing as part of their periodic review of existing rules under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610). Executive Order 13272,
``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' signed
August 13, 2002 (67 FR 53461), provides additional guidance on
compliance with the Act.
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,''
September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51735), as amended, requires covered agencies
to prepare an agenda of all regulations under development or review.
The Order also requires that certain agencies prepare annually a
regulatory plan of their ``most important significant regulatory
actions,'' which appears as part of the fall Unified Agenda. Executive
Order 13497, signed January 30, 2009 (74 FR 6113), revoked the
amendments to Executive Order 12866 that were contained in Executive
Order 13258 and Executive Order 13422.
Executive Order 14192
Executive Order 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation,'' signed January 31, 2025, (90 FR 9065) requires that for
every one new regulation issued, at least ten prior regulations be
identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be
prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.
Executive Order 13563
Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review,'' January 18, 2011 (76 FR 3821) supplements and reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing contemporary
regulatory review that were established in Executive Order 12866, which
includes the general principles of regulation and public participation,
and orders integration and innovation in coordination across agencies;
flexible approaches where relevant, feasible, and consistent with
regulatory approaches; scientific integrity in any scientific or
technological information and processes used to support the agencies'
regulatory actions; and retrospective analysis of existing regulations.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' August 4, 1999 (64 FR
43255), directs agencies to have an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have ``federalism
implications'' as defined in the Order. Under the Order, an agency that
is proposing a regulation with federalism implications, which either
preempt State law or impose non-statutory unfunded substantial direct
compliance costs on State and local governments, must consult with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
regulation. In addition, the agency must provide to the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget a federalism summary impact statement
for such a regulation, which consists of a description of the extent of
the agency's prior consultation with State and local officials, a
summary of their concerns and the agency's position supporting the need
to issue the regulation, and a statement of the extent to which those
concerns have been met. As part of this effort, agencies include in
their submissions for the Unified Agenda information on whether their
regulatory actions may have an effect on the various levels of
government and whether those actions have federalism implications.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, title II)
requires agencies to prepare written assessments of the costs and
benefits of significant regulatory actions ``that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any 1 year.'' The
requirement does not apply to historically independent regulatory
agencies, nor does it apply to certain subject areas excluded by
section 4 of the Act. Affected agencies identify in the Unified Agenda
those regulatory actions they believe are subject to title II of the
Act.
Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' May 18,
2001 (66 FR 28355), directs agencies to provide, to the extent
possible, information regarding the adverse effects that agency actions
may have on the supply, distribution, and use of energy. Under the
Order, the agency must prepare and submit a Statement of Energy Effects
to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, for ``those matters
identified as significant energy actions.'' As part of this effort,
agencies may optionally include in their submissions for the Unified
Agenda information on whether they have prepared or plan to prepare a
Statement of Energy Effects for their regulatory actions.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (Pub. L.
104-121, title II) established a procedure for congressional review of
rules (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), which defers, unless exempted, the
effective date of a ``major'' rule for at least 60 days from the
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. The Act
specifies that a rule is ``major'' if it has resulted, or is likely to
result, in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
meets other criteria specified in that Act. The Act provides that the
Administrator of OIRA will make the final determination as to whether a
rule is major.
III. How is the Unified Agenda organized?
Agency regulatory flexibility agendas are printed in a single daily
edition of the Federal Register. A Regulatory Flexibility Agenda is
printed for each agency whose agenda includes entries for rules which
are likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities or rules that have been selected for periodic
review under section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Each
printed agenda appears as a separate part. The parts of the Unified
Agenda are organized alphabetically in four groups: Cabinet
departments; other executive agencies; the Federal Acquisition
Regulation, a joint authority (Agenda only); and historically
independent regulatory agencies. Agencies may in turn be divided into
subagencies. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing
the agency's printed entries that follow. Each agency's part of the
Agenda contains a preamble providing information specific to that
agency. Each printed agency agenda has a table of contents listing the
agency's printed entries that follow.
The online, complete Unified Agenda contains the preambles of all
[[Page 52795]]
participating agencies. Unlike the printed edition, the online Agenda
has no fixed ordering. In the online Agenda, users can select the
particular agencies' agendas they want to see. Users have broad
flexibility to specify the characteristics of the entries of interest
to them by choosing the desired responses to individual data fields. To
see a listing of all of an agency's entries, a user can select the
agency without specifying any particular characteristics of entries.
Each entry in the Agenda is associated with one of five rulemaking
stages. The rulemaking stages are:
1. Prerule Stage--actions agencies will undertake to determine
whether or how to initiate rulemaking. Such actions occur prior to a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and may include Advance Notices of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs) and reviews of existing regulations.
2. Proposed Rule Stage--actions for which agencies plan to publish
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking as the next step in their rulemaking
process or for which the closing date of the NPRM Comment Period is the
next step.
3. Final Rule Stage--actions for which agencies plan to publish a
final rule or an interim final rule or to take other final action as
the next step.
4. Long-Term Actions--items under development but for which the
agency does not expect to have a regulatory action within the 12 months
after publication of this edition of the Unified Agenda. Some of the
entries in this section may contain abbreviated information.
5. Completed Actions--actions or reviews the agency has completed
or withdrawn since publishing its last agenda. This section also
includes items the agency began and completed between issues of the
Agenda.
Long-Term Actions are rulemakings reported during the publication
cycle that are outside of the required 12-month reporting period for
which the Agenda was intended. Completed Actions in the publication
cycle are rulemakings that are ending their lifecycle either by
Withdrawal or completion of the rulemaking process. Therefore, the
Long-Term and Completed RINs do not represent the ongoing, forward-
looking nature intended for reporting developing rulemakings in the
Agenda pursuant to Executive Order 12866, section 4(b) and 4(c). To
further differentiate these two stages of rulemaking in the Unified
Agenda from active rulemakings, Long-Term and Completed Actions are
reported separately from active rulemakings, which can be any of the
first three stages of rulemaking listed above. A separate search
function is provided on www.reginfo.gov to search for Completed and
Long-Term Actions apart from each other and active RINs.
A bullet () preceding the title of an entry indicates that
the entry is appearing in the Unified Agenda for the first time.
In the printed edition, all entries are numbered sequentially from
the beginning to the end of the publication. The sequence number
preceding the title of each entry identifies the location of the entry
in this edition. The sequence number is used as the reference in the
printed table of contents. Sequence numbers are not used in the online
Unified Agenda because the unique Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) is
able to provide this cross-reference capability.
Editions of the Unified Agenda prior to fall 2007 contained several
indexes, which identified entries with various characteristics. These
included regulatory actions for which agencies believe that the
Regulatory Flexibility Act may require a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, actions selected for periodic review under section 610(c) of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and actions that may have federalism
implications as defined in Executive Order 13132 or other effects on
levels of government. These indexes are no longer compiled, because
users of the online Unified Agenda have the flexibility to search for
entries with any combination of desired characteristics. The online
edition retains the Unified Agenda's subject index based on the Federal
Register Thesaurus of Indexing Terms. In addition, online users have
the option of searching Agenda text fields for words or phrases.
IV. What Information Appears for Each Entry?
All entries in the online Unified Agenda contain uniform data
elements including, at a minimum, the following information:
Title of the Regulation--a brief description of the subject of the
regulation. In the printed edition, the notation ``Section 610 Review''
following the title indicates that the agency has selected the rule for
its periodic review of existing rules under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 610(c)). Some agencies have indicated completions of
section 610 reviews or rulemaking actions resulting from completed
section 610 reviews. In the online edition, these notations appear in a
separate field.
Priority--an indication of the significance of the regulation.
Agencies assign each entry to one of the following five categories of
significance.
(1) Economically Significant
As defined in Executive Order 12866, a rulemaking action that will
have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or will
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities. The definition of an ``economically significant'' rule is
similar but not identical to the definition of a ``major'' rule under 5
U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104-121). (See below.)
(2) Other Significant
A rulemaking that is not Economically Significant but is considered
Significant by the agency. This category includes rules that the agency
anticipates will be reviewed under Executive Order 12866, as amended,
or rules that are a priority of the agency head.
(3) Substantive, Nonsignificant
A rulemaking that has substantive impacts, but is neither
Significant, nor Routine and Frequent, nor Informational/
Administrative/Other.
(4) Routine and Frequent
A rulemaking that is a specific case of a multiple recurring
application of a regulatory program in the Code of Federal Regulations
and that does not alter the body of the regulation.
(5) Informational/Administrative/Other
A rulemaking that is primarily informational or pertains to agency
matters not central to accomplishing the agency's regulatory mandate
but that the agency places in the Unified Agenda to inform the public
of the activity.
Major--whether the rule is ``major'' under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L.
104-121) because it has resulted or is likely to result in an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more or meets other criteria
specified in that Act. The Act provides that the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will make the final
determination as to whether a rule is major.
Unfunded Mandates--whether the rule is covered by section 202 of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). The Act
requires that, before issuing an NPRM likely to result in a mandate
that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of more than
$100 million in 1 year, agencies, other than historically independent
regulatory agencies, shall prepare a written statement containing an
assessment of
[[Page 52796]]
the anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal mandate.
Legal Authority--the section(s) of the United States Code (U.S.C.)
or Public Law (Pub. L.) or the Executive order (E.O.) that authorize(s)
the regulatory action. Agencies may provide popular name references to
laws in addition to these citations.
CFR Citation--the section(s) of the Code of Federal Regulations
that will be affected by the action.
Relevant Executive Order--the top three to five EOs that direct or
necessitate the regulatory action. This excludes EOs of general
applicability such as E.O. 12866 or 14192.
Legal Deadline--whether the action is subject to a statutory or
judicial deadline, the date of that deadline, and whether the deadline
pertains to an NPRM, a Final Action, or some other action.
Abstract--a brief description of the problem the regulation will
address; the need for a Federal solution; to the extent available,
alternatives that the agency is considering to address the problem; and
potential costs and benefits of the action.
Timetable--the dates and citations (if available) for all past
steps and a projected date for at least the next step for the
regulatory action. A date displayed in the form 12/00/24 means the
agency is predicting the month and year the action will take place but
not the day it will occur. In some instances, agencies may indicate
what the next action will be, but the date of that action is ``To Be
Determined.'' ``Next Action Undetermined'' indicates the agency does
not know what action it will take next.
E.O. 14192 Designation--the preliminary E.O. 14192 designation as
defined by Guidance: ``deregulatory,'' ``regulatory,'' ``exempt,''
``waived,'' ``other.'' A similar menu will accompany Information
Collection Request (ICR) submissions.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required--whether an analysis is
required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
because the rulemaking action is likely to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities as defined by the Act.
Small Entities Affected--the types of small entities (businesses,
governmental jurisdictions, or organizations) on which the rulemaking
action is likely to have an impact as defined by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. Some agencies have chosen to indicate likely effects
on small entities even though they believe that a Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis will not be required.
Government Levels Affected--whether the action is expected to
affect levels of government and, if so, whether the governments are
State, local, tribal, or Federal.
International Impacts--whether the regulation is expected to have
international trade and investment effects, or otherwise may be of
interest to the Nation's international trading partners.
Federalism--whether the action has ``federalism implications'' as
defined in Executive Order 13132. This term refers to actions ``that
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
Historically independent regulatory agencies are not required to supply
this information.
Included in the Regulatory Plan--whether the rulemaking was
included in the agency's current regulatory plan published in the fall
2024.
Agency Contact--the name and phone number of at least one person in
the agency who is knowledgeable about the rulemaking action. The agency
may also provide the title, address, fax number, email address, and TDD
for each agency contact.
Some agencies have provided the following optional information:
RIN Information URL--the internet address of a site that provides
more information about the entry.
Public Comment URL--the internet address of a site that will accept
public comments on the entry.
Alternatively, timely public comments may be submitted at the
Governmentwide e-rulemaking site, www.regulations.gov.
Additional Information--any information an agency wishes to include
that does not have a specific corresponding data element.
Compliance Cost to the Public--the estimated gross compliance cost
of the action.
Affected Sectors--the industrial sectors that the action may most
affect, either directly or indirectly. Affected sectors are identified
by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes.
Energy Effects--an indication of whether the agency has prepared or
plans to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for the action, as
required by Executive Order 13211 ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' signed May
18, 2001 (66 FR 28355).
Related RINs--one or more past or current RIN(s) associated with
activity related to this action, such as merged RINs, split RINs, new
activity for previously completed RINs, or duplicate RINs.
Statement of Need--a description of the need for the regulatory
action.
Summary of the Legal Basis--a description of the legal basis for
the action, including whether any aspect of the action is required by
statute or court order.
Alternatives--a description of the alternatives the agency has
considered or will consider as required by section 4(c)(1)(B) of
Executive Order 12866.
Anticipated Costs and Benefits--a description of preliminary
estimates of the anticipated costs and benefits of the action.
Risks--a description of the magnitude of the risk the action
addresses, the amount by which the agency expects the action to reduce
this risk, and the relation of the risk and this risk reduction effort
to other risks and risk reduction efforts within the agency's
jurisdiction.
V. Abbreviations
The following abbreviations appear throughout this publication:
ANPRM--An Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is a preliminary
notice, published in the Federal Register, announcing that an agency is
considering a regulatory action. An agency may issue an ANPRM before it
develops a detailed proposed rule. An ANPRM describes the general area
that may be subject to regulation and usually asks for public comment
on the issues and options being discussed. An ANPRM is issued only when
an agency believes it needs to gather more information before
proceeding to a notice of proposed rulemaking.
CFR--The Code of Federal Regulations is an annual codification of
the general and permanent regulations published in the Federal Register
by the agencies of the Federal Government. The Code is divided into 50
titles, each title covering a broad area subject to Federal regulation.
The CFR is keyed to and kept up to date by the daily issues of the
Federal Register.
E.O.--An Executive order is a directive from the President to
Executive agencies, issued under constitutional or statutory authority.
Executive orders are published in the Federal Register and in title 3
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
FR--The Federal Register is a daily Federal Government publication
that provides a uniform system for publishing Presidential documents,
all
[[Page 52797]]
proposed and final regulations, notices of meetings, and other official
documents issued by Federal agencies.
FY--The Federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.
NPRM--A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is the document an agency
issues and publishes in the Federal Register that describes and
solicits public comments on a proposed regulatory action. Under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), an NPRM must include, at a
minimum: A statement of the time, place, and nature of the public
rulemaking proceeding;
Legal Authority--A reference to the legal authority under which the
rule is proposed; and either the terms or substance of the proposed
rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.
Pub. L.--A public law is a law passed by Congress and signed by the
President or enacted over his veto. It has general applicability,
unlike a private law that applies only to those persons or entities
specifically designated. Public laws are numbered in sequence
throughout the 2-year life of each Congress; for example, Public Law
112-4 is the fourth public law of the 112th Congress.
RFA--A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is a description and
analysis of the impact of a rule on small entities, including small
businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and certain small not-
for-profit organizations. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.) requires each agency to prepare an initial RFA for public
comment when it is required to publish an NPRM and to make available a
final RFA when the final rule is published, unless the agency head
certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
RIN--The Regulation Identifier Number is assigned by the Regulatory
Information Service Center to identify each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda, as directed by Executive Order 12866 (section
4(b)). Additionally, OMB has asked agencies to include RINs in the
headings of their Rule and Proposed Rule documents when publishing them
in the Federal Register, to make it easier for the public and agency
officials to track the publication history of regulatory actions
throughout their development.
Seq. No.--The sequence number identifies the location of an entry
in the printed edition of the Unified Agenda. Note that a specific
regulatory action will have the same RIN throughout its development but
will generally have different sequence numbers if it appears in
different printed editions of the Unified Agenda. Sequence numbers are
not used in the online Unified Agenda.
U.S.C.--The United States Code is a consolidation and codification
of all general and permanent laws of the United States. The U.S.C. is
divided into 50 titles, each title covering a broad area of Federal
law.
VI. How can users get copies of the Unified Agenda?
Copies of the Federal Register issue containing the printed edition
of the Unified Agenda (agency regulatory flexibility agendas) are
available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Publishing Office, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954.
Telephone: (202) 512-1800 or 1-866-512-1800 (toll-free). Copies of
individual agency materials may be available directly from the agency
or may be found on the agency's website. Please contact the particular
agency for further information. All editions of The Regulatory Plan and
the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions since
fall 1995 are available in electronic form at www.reginfo.gov, along
with flexible search tools. The Government Publishing Office's GPO
GovInfo website contains copies of the Agendas and Regulatory Plans
that have been printed in the Federal Register. These documents are
available at www.govinfo.gov.
David Cochennic On behalf of Amber Van Amburg,
Director.
Introduction to the 2026 Regulatory Plan
Thanks to President Donald J. Trump's historic deregulatory efforts
to kick off his second term in office, a new era of American prosperity
is upon us. After four years of stifling overregulation and astonishing
government weaponization, 2025 marked the first chapter of the latest
American comeback story under President Trump. Now, the President is
writing the next chapter. America is in a new Golden Age.
This 2026 Unified Regulatory Agenda and Regulatory Plan details the
many ways that the Trump Administration is continuing to put America--
and Americans--first. Taken together, the deregulatory actions in this
Regulatory Plan will achieve extraordinary cost savings for Americans
that will underscore the President's unmatched deregulatory record.
Equally important, the Trump Administration's Regulatory Plan will
promote liberty, unleash American energy dominance, preserve products
consumers love, and eradicate the ideology of Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion (DEI).
The North Star of this Regulatory Plan is improving the lives of
Americans. At its core, this document outlines how the Trump
Administration is promoting economic growth, jobs, and affordability.
The President's bold deregulatory efforts yielded $211.8 billion in
cost savings for Americans in Fiscal Year 2025--a level of regulatory
savings never before achieved in American history. Yet Fiscal Year 2026
will go far beyond even that number with a record-setting $1.5 trillion
in projected cost savings.
President Trump is improving the American people's lives beyond
economic cost savings. The federal government has imposed onerous
restrictions on everything from the cars that Americans may drive to
the appliances that they can use in their homes. This Regulatory Plan
will continue President Trump's heroic restoration of our immigration
laws and sealing of the border, end DEI in federal regulations, and
restore sanity to the operations of government.
President Trump's Regulatory Plan advances an affirmative vision of
American greatness. In the 250 years since the signing of the
Declaration of Independence, the United States has grown from a loose
collection of colonies to the greatest Nation that the world has ever
known. And in this 250th year, as America marks yet another great
milestone in her history, this Regulatory Plan embodies the spirit of
the Declaration: our rights come from God, not government. I am
therefore proud to share President Trump's Regulatory Plan for 2026,
which offers a window into how the Trump Administration plans to
continue solidifying America's Golden Age as we look ahead to the
Republic's next 250 years.
Mark Paoletta
General Counsel Performing the Delegated Duties of the OIRA
Administrator
[[Page 52798]]
Department of Agriculture
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................. Revise Conditions for 0579-AE79 Final Rule Stage.
Payment of Indemnity and
Compensation for HPAI.
2............................. Streamlining the 0575-AD20 Final Rule Stage.
Community Facilities
Regulation, 7 CFR 3570,
Subpart E (Servicing).
3............................. Strengthening Integrity 0584-AE71 Proposed Rule Stage.
and Reducing Retailer
Fraud in the
Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program
(SNAP).
4............................. Enhancing Electronic 0584-AE99 Proposed Rule Stage.
Benefit Transfer (EBT)
Card Security Measures.
5............................. Supplemental Nutrition 0584-AF09 Proposed Rule Stage.
Assistance Program:
Modification to Work
Requirements for Able-
Bodied Adults.
6............................. Supplemental Nutrition 0584-AF10 Proposed Rule Stage.
Assistance Program:
Reforming Categorical
Eligibility.
7............................. Amendment of definition 0584-AF14 Proposed Rule Stage.
of ``eligible food'' in
the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP).
8............................. Supplemental Nutrition 0584-AF23 Proposed Rule Stage.
Assistance Program:
Alien Eligibility.
9............................. Enhancing Integrity in 0584-AF24 Proposed Rule Stage.
Non-Congregate Meal
Service in the Summer
Meal Programs.
10............................ Combating Fraud in the 0584-AF25 Proposed Rule Stage.
Child and Adult Care
Food Program and the
Summer Food Service
Program.
11............................ Special Supplemental 0584-AF26 Proposed Rule Stage.
Nutrition Program for
Women, Infants and
Children (WIC) Program
Integrity.
12............................ Special Supplemental 0584-AE85 Final Rule Stage.
Nutrition Program for
Women, Infants and
Children (WIC): WIC
Online Ordering and
Transactions and Food
Delivery Revisions to
Meet the Needs of a
Modern, Data-Driven
Program.
13............................ Updated Staple Food 0584-AF12 Final Rule Stage.
Stocking Standards for
Retailers in the
Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program.
14............................ Maximum Line Speed Rates 0583-AE01 Proposed Rule Stage.
for Young Chicken and
Turkey Establishments
Operating Under the New
Poultry Inspection
System.
15............................ Maximum Line Speed under 0583-AE02 Proposed Rule Stage.
the New Swine Slaughter
Inspection System (NSIS).
16............................ Modernization of Beef 0583-AE08 Proposed Rule Stage.
Slaughter Inspection.
17............................ Revision of the Nutrition 0583-AD56 Final Rule Stage.
Facts Labels for Meat
and Poultry Products and
Updating Certain
Reference Amounts
Customarily Consumed.
18............................ Special Areas: Roadless 0596-AD66 Proposed Rule Stage.
Area Conservation Repeal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Commerce
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19............................ Endangered and Threatened 0648-BN70 Proposed Rule Stage.
Wildlife and Plants;
Regulations for Listing
Species and Designating
Critical Habitat.
20............................ Endangered and Threatened 0648-BN79 Proposed Rule Stage.
Wildlife and Plants;
Interagency Cooperation
Regulations.
21............................ Setting and Adjusting 0651-AD88 Proposed Rule Stage.
Patent Fees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of War
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22............................ Solicitation Provisions 0790-AK52 Final Rule Stage.
and Contract Clauses.
23............................ National Industrial 0790-AL52 Final Rule Stage.
Security Program
Operating Manual
(NISPOM); Second
Amendment.
24............................ Cybersecurity Maturity 0790-AM01 Final Rule Stage.
Model Certification
(CMMC) Program.
25............................ Updated Definition of 0710-AB59 Proposed Rule Stage.
``Waters of the United
States''.
26............................ TRICARE Removal of 0720-AB85 Final Rule Stage.
Temporary Regulation
Change and Freestanding
End-Stage Renal Disease
(ESRD) Facilities as
TRICARE-Authorized
Institutional Providers
and Reimbursement
Methods for ESRD
facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Education
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27............................ Elimination of Disparate 1870-AA20 Final Rule Stage.
Impact Theory Under
Title VI of the 1964
Civil Rights Act.
28............................ Implementation of Title 1870-AA23 Final Rule Stage.
IX based on Definition
of ``Sex'' Identified in
EO 14168.
29............................ Documentation of Foreign 1840-AD50 Prerule Stage.
Source Gifts and
Contracts, Section 117
of the Higher Education
Act of 1965.
30............................ Reducing Anti-Competitive 1840-AE01 Prerule Stage.
Regulatory Barriers.
31............................ Addressing Title IV 1840-AE04 Prerule Stage.
Eligibility Issues.
32............................ Accreditation Issues..... 1840-AD82 Proposed Rule Stage.
[[Page 52799]]
33............................ Equity in IDEA 1820-AB84 Proposed Rule Stage.
(Individuals with
Disabilities Education
Act).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Energy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34............................ Procedures, 1904-AF72 Proposed Rule Stage.
Interpretations, and
Policies for
Consideration in New or
Revised Energy
Conservation Standards
and Test Procedures for
Consumer Products and
Commercial/Industrial
Equipment.
35............................ Petroleum-Equivalent Fuel 1904-AG09 Final Rule Stage.
Economy Calculation.
36............................ Worker Safety and Health 1901-AB74 Proposed Rule Stage.
Requirements to Support
Reform of Nuclear
Reactor Testing.
37............................ Energy Dominance 1901-AB72 Final Rule Stage.
Financing Amendments.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Health and Human Services
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38............................ Privacy Act Regulations.. 0991-AC05 Proposed Rule Stage.
39............................ Petition Process for 0991-AC43 Final Rule Stage.
Rulemaking and
Regulatory Review.
40............................ Making Technical Changes 0945-AA24 Proposed Rule Stage.
and Clarifying How OCR
Addresses Conscience
Authorities in Health
Care; Delegation of
Authority.
41............................ HIPAA Privacy Rule: 0945-AA00 Final Rule Stage.
Changes to Support
Coordinated Care and
Individual Engagement
and Reduce Regulatory
Burdens.
42............................ Nondiscrimination on the 0945-AA27 Final Rule Stage.
Basis of Disability in
Programs or Activities
Receiving Federal
Financial Assistance.
43............................ Health Data, Technology, 0955-AA10 Proposed Rule Stage.
and Interoperability:
Application Programming
Interfaces and
Information Blocking.
44............................ Control of Communicable 0920-AA87 Proposed Rule Stage.
Diseases; Foreign
Quarantine: Dog
Importation.
45............................ Administrative Detention 0910-AI05 Proposed Rule Stage.
of Tobacco Products.
46............................ Modernizing Regulations 0910-AI50 Proposed Rule Stage.
to Promote Electronic
Submission and Reduce
Paper Submission.
47............................ Substances Generally 0910-AJ02 Proposed Rule Stage.
Recognized as Safe.
48............................ Transparency in Direct-to- 0910-AJ14 Proposed Rule Stage.
Consumer Advertising.
49............................ Proactive Disclosure of 0910-AJ16 Proposed Rule Stage.
Complete Response
Letters.
50............................ Electronic Labeling for 0910-AJ17 Proposed Rule Stage.
Medical Devices.
51............................ Nutrient Content Claims 0910-AJ20 Proposed Rule Stage.
for Added Sugars.
52............................ Modification of Certain 0910-AJ26 Proposed Rule Stage.
Terminology in Title 21.
53............................ Amendments to 21 CFR 0910-AJ30 Proposed Rule Stage.
Parts 56 and 312;
Expedited
Investigational New Drug
Application for Phase 1
Clinical Trial Reform.
54............................ Strengthening Regulatory 0906-AB34 Proposed Rule Stage.
Oversight of the Organ
Procurement and
Transplantation Network
to Ensure Patient Safety.
55............................ Human Research 0937-AA16 Proposed Rule Stage.
Protections: Exemptions
and Clarifying
Provisions Related to
Institutional Review
Board Oversight.
56............................ Interoperability 0938-AV44 Proposed Rule Stage.
Standards and Prior
Authorization for Drugs
(CMS-0062).
57............................ Strengthening the 0938-AV70 Proposed Rule Stage.
Integrity of Medicaid
and CHIP Managed Care,
Financing, and Access to
Care (CMS-2450).
58............................ CY 2027 Revisions to 0938-AV82 Proposed Rule Stage.
Payment Policies under
the Physician Fee
Schedule and Other
Revisions to Medicare
Part B (CMS-1848).
59............................ Comprehensive Regulations 0938-AV97 Proposed Rule Stage.
to Uncover Suspicious
Healthcare (CRUSH) (CMS-
6098).
60............................ Strengthening Oversight 0938-AU88 Final Rule Stage.
of Accrediting
Organizations (AO),
Burden Reduction, and
Related Provisions (CMS-
3367).
61............................ Establishing State 0938-AV98 Final Rule Stage.
Community Engagement
Requirements for Certain
Individuals Under
Section 1902(xx) of the
Social Security Act (CMS-
2454).
62............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD29 Proposed Rule Stage.
Burden in the Child Care
and Development Fund
(CCDF).
63............................ Modernize the Head Start 0970-AD30 Proposed Rule Stage.
Program by Reducing
Requirements and
Enhancing Alignment with
State and Local Systems.
64............................ Reforming Federal 0970-AD32 Proposed Rule Stage.
Reporting and
Assessments in Child
Welfare.
65............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD37 Proposed Rule Stage.
Burden for Children,
Youth and Families.
66............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD38 Proposed Rule Stage.
Burden for Family
Assistance Programs.
67............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD39 Proposed Rule Stage.
Burden for Child Support
Enforcement.
68............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD41 Proposed Rule Stage.
Burden in Community
Services.
69............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD42 Proposed Rule Stage.
Burden in Family
Violence and Prevention
Services.
70............................ Reducing Bureaucracy and 0970-AD28 Final Rule Stage.
Burden for Refugee
Resettlement Programs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52800]]
Department of Homeland Security
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
71............................ Improving the Process of 1615-AD07 Proposed Rule Stage.
Certification of Form N-
648, Medical
Certification for
Disability Exceptions.
72............................ Naturalization 1615-AD08 Proposed Rule Stage.
Application Fee
Adjustments.
73............................ Protecting the Integrity 1615-AD13 Proposed Rule Stage.
of Naturalization
through Enhanced
Educational Standards.
74............................ Sponsor Reimbursement and 1615-AD15 Proposed Rule Stage.
Deeming 8 CFR Sec.
213a.
75............................ Clarification of Certain 1625-AC48 Proposed Rule Stage.
Mariner Training
Requirements.
76............................ Shipping Safety Fairways 1625-AC57 Proposed Rule Stage.
Along the Atlantic Coast.
77............................ Electronic Chart and 1625-AC74 Final Rule Stage.
Navigation Equipment
Carriage Requirements.
78............................ Advance Passenger 1651-AB43 Final Rule Stage.
Information System:
Electronic Validation of
Travel Documents.
79............................ Automated Commercial 1651-AB52 Final Rule Stage.
Environment (ACE)
Electronic Export
Manifest for Rail Cargo.
80............................ Vetting of Certain 1652-AA69 Final Rule Stage.
Surface Transportation
Employees.
81............................ Minimum Standards for 1652-AA78 Final Rule Stage.
Driver's Licenses and
Identification Cards
Acceptable by Federal
Agencies for Official
Purposes; Procedures for
Remote Application and
Issuance.
82............................ Normalizing Unmanned 1652-AA80 Final Rule Stage.
Aircraft Systems Beyond
Visual Line of Sight
Operations.
83............................ Establishing a Fixed Time 1653-AA95 Final Rule Stage.
Period of Admission and
an Extension of Stay
Procedure for
Nonimmigrant Academic
Students, Exchange
Visitors, and
Representatives of
Foreign Information
Media.
84............................ Removal of Updates to 1660-AB18 Final Rule Stage.
Floodplain Management
and Protection of
Wetlands Regulations.
85............................ Cyber Incident Reporting 1670-AA04 Final Rule Stage.
for Critical
Infrastructure Act
(CIRCIA) Reporting
Requirements.
86............................ Electronic Bond 1685-AA24 Final Rule Stage.
Transmission.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Housing and Urban Development
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
87............................ Housing and Community 2501-AE16 Final Rule Stage.
Development Act of 1980:
Verification of Eligible
Status (FR-6524).
88............................ Revising the Definition 2502-AJ80 Proposed Rule Stage.
of ``Manufactured Home''
to Lower Housing Costs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Interior
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
89............................ Offshore Wind Regulatory 1010-AE38 Proposed Rule Stage.
Reform.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Justice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
90............................ Special Registrations for 1117-AB40 Final Rule Stage.
Telemedicine and Limited
State Telemedicine
Registrations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Labor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
91............................ Rescission of Executive 1250-AA17 Final Rule Stage.
Order 11246 Implementing
Regulations.
92............................ Employee or Independent 1235-AA46 Proposed Rule Stage.
Contractor Status Under
the Fair Labor Standards
Act, Family and Medical
Leave Act, and Migrant
and Seasonal
Agricultural Worker
Protection Act.
93............................ Joint Employer Status 1235-AA48 Proposed Rule Stage.
Under the Fair Labor
Standards Act, Family
and Medical Leave Act,
and Migrant and Seasonal
Agricultural Worker
Protection Act.
94............................ Application of the Fair 1235-AA51 Final Rule Stage.
Labor Standards Act to
Domestic Service.
95............................ Improving Wage 1205-AC30 Proposed Rule Stage.
Protections for the
Temporary and Permanent
Employment of Certain
Foreign Nations in the
United States.
96............................ Adverse Effect Wage Rate 1205-AC24 Final Rule Stage.
Methodology for the
Temporary Employment of
H-2A Nonimmigrants in
Non-Range Occupations in
the United States.
[[Page 52801]]
97............................ Rescission of Final Rule: 1205-AC25 Final Rule Stage.
Improving Protections
for Workers in Temporary
Agricultural Employment
in the United States.
98............................ Prudence and Loyalty in 1210-AC37 Proposed Rule Stage.
Selecting Plan
Investments and
Exercising Shareholder
Rights.
99............................ Fiduciary Duties In 1210-AC38 Proposed Rule Stage.
Selecting Designated
Investment Alternatives.
100........................... Improving Transparency 1210-AB37 Final Rule Stage.
into Pharmacy Benefit
Manager Fee Disclosure.
101........................... Transparency in Coverage. 1210-AC30 Final Rule Stage.
102........................... Respirable Crystalline 1219-AC22 Proposed Rule Stage.
Silica.
103........................... Lock-Out/Tag-Out Update.. 1218-AD00 Proposed Rule Stage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Transportation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
104........................... Commercial Driver's 2126-AD03 Proposed Rule Stage.
License (CDL) Standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Veterans Affairs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
105........................... Removing Barriers to 2900-AS24 Proposed Rule Stage.
Service Connection by
Updating Hypertension
Notes.
106........................... Expanding Options for 2900-AS78 Proposed Rule Stage.
Veterans to Avoid Home
Foreclosures.
107........................... Schedule for Rating 2900-AQ72 Final Rule Stage.
Disabilities: Ear, Nose,
Throat, and Audiology
Disabilities; Special
Provisions Regarding
Evaluation of
Respiratory Conditions;
Schedule for Rating
Disabilities:
Respiratory System.
108........................... Schedule for Rating 2900-AQ73 Final Rule Stage.
Disabilities:
Neurological Conditions
and Convulsive Disorders.
109........................... Schedule for Rating 2900-AQ82 Final Rule Stage.
Disabilities: Mental
Disorders.
110........................... Amendments to the Program 2900-AR96 Final Rule Stage.
of Comprehensive
Assistance for Family
Caregivers.
111........................... Telehealth Grant Program. 2900-AS20 Final Rule Stage.
112........................... Implementing Regulation 2900-AS33 Final Rule Stage.
for National
Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA): Environmental
Effects of the
Department of Veterans
Affairs Actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Protection Agency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
113........................... Amendments to the Model 2060-AW83 Proposed Rule Stage.
Year 2027 and Later
Heavy-Duty Highway
Engine Criteria
Pollutant Program.
114........................... Revision to ``Begin 2060-AW84 Proposed Rule Stage.
Actual Construction'' in
the New Source Review
Preconstruction
Permitting Program.
115........................... Revision of Tier 4 Phase- 2060-AW96 Proposed Rule Stage.
in Schedule for Light-
Duty and Medium-Duty
Vehicles.
116........................... Formaldehyde; Regulation 2070-AL22 Proposed Rule Stage.
under the Toxic
Substances Control Act
(TSCA).
117........................... Perchloroethylene (PCE); 2070-AL39 Proposed Rule Stage.
Amendments to Regulation
Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act
(TSCA).
118........................... Trichloroethylene (TCE); 2070-AL41 Proposed Rule Stage.
Amendments to Regulation
Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act
(TSCA).
119........................... Carbon Tetrachloride 2070-AL42 Proposed Rule Stage.
(CTC); Amendments to
Regulation under the
Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA).
120........................... Accidental Release 2050-AH37 Proposed Rule Stage.
Prevention Requirements:
Risk Management Programs
Under the Clean Air Act;
Common Sense Approach to
Chemical Accident
Prevention.
121........................... Hazardous and Solid Waste 2050-AH39 Proposed Rule Stage.
Management System:
Disposal of Coal
Combustion Residuals
from Electric Utilities;
Legacy/CCRMU Amendments.
122........................... Clean Water Act Effluent 2040-AG10 Proposed Rule Stage.
Limitations Guidelines
and Standards for PFAS
Manufacturers Under the
Organic Chemicals,
Plastics and Synthetic
Fibers Point Source
Category.
123........................... Steam Electric Effluent 2040-AG41 Proposed Rule Stage.
Limitations Guideline
Reconsideration Rule.
124........................... Rescission of Regulatory 2040-AG53 Proposed Rule Stage.
Determinations and
Removal of Related
Provisions for Four PFAS
Substances (PFHxS, PFNA,
HFPO-DA (GenX), and the
mixture of these three
PFAS plus PFBS).
125........................... Carbon Pollution 2060-AW55 Final Rule Stage.
Standards Repeal.
126........................... Reconsideration of the 2060-AW76 Final Rule Stage.
Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program.
127........................... Procedures for Chemical 2070-AL27 Final Rule Stage.
Risk Evaluation Under
the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA).
[[Page 52802]]
128........................... Perfluoroalkyl and 2070-AL29 Final Rule Stage.
Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances (PFAS) Data
Reporting and
Recordkeeping under the
Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA); Revision to
Regulation.
129........................... Updated Definition of 2040-AG44 Final Rule Stage.
``Waters of the United
States''.
130........................... Updating the Water 2040-AG47 Final Rule Stage.
Quality Certification
Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
131........................... Rescission of EEO-1, EEO- 3046-AB37 Proposed Rule Stage.
2, EEO-3, EEO-4, EEO-5,
And Reporting
Requirement Under Title
VII, the ADA, GINA, and
the PWFA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
132........................... Implementation of the 2700-AE79 Proposed Rule Stage.
Administrative False
Claims Act.
133........................... Procedures for 2700-AE80 Final Rule Stage.
Implementing the
National Environmental
Policy Act.
134........................... Nondiscrimination in 2700-AE89 Final Rule Stage.
Federally-Assisted
Programs of NASA--
Effectuation of Title VI
of the Civils Rights Act
of 1964.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Archives and Records Administration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
135........................... Interagency Security 3095-AC30 Proposed Rule Stage.
Classification Appeals
Panel Bylaws, Rules, and
Appeals Procedures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Personnel Management
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
136........................... Recruitment and Selection 3206-AO24 Proposed Rule Stage.
Through Competitive
Examination.
137........................... Personnel Management in 3206-AO77 Proposed Rule Stage.
Agencies: Strategic
Human Capital Management.
138........................... Attorney Fees and 3206-AO87 Proposed Rule Stage.
Personnel Action
Coverage under the Back
Pay Act.
139........................... Federal Employees 3206-AO93 Proposed Rule Stage.
Benefits: Enrollment
Integrity.
140........................... Determining Rate of Basic 3206-AO95 Proposed Rule Stage.
Pay for Certain General
Schedule Positions.
141........................... Reduction in Force....... 3206-AO86 Final Rule Stage.
142........................... Managing Senior 3206-AO88 Final Rule Stage.
Professional Performance.
143........................... Suitability Action 3206-AO97 Final Rule Stage.
Appeals.
144........................... Reduction in Force 3206-AO99 Final Rule Stage.
Appeals.
145........................... Elimination of Time in 3206-AP05 Final Rule Stage.
Grade.
146........................... Performance Management 3206-AP06 Final Rule Stage.
Systems for General
Schedule, Prevailing
Rate, and Certain Other
Employees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Security Administration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
147........................... Standardizing Requesting 0960-AJ01 Proposed Rule Stage.
and Scheduling Hearings
Before an Administrative
Law Judge.
148........................... Revised Medical Criteria 0960-AI43 Final Rule Stage.
for Evaluating
Cardiovascular Disorders.
149........................... Ticket to Work: 0960-AJ08 Final Rule Stage.
Rescission of Obsolete
Regulatory Provisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
150........................... Personal Financial Data 3170-AB39 Proposed Rule Stage.
Rights Reconsideration.
[[Page 52803]]
151........................... Small Business Lending 3170-AB40 Final Rule Stage.
Data Collection Under
the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act
Reconsideration.
152........................... Equal Credit Opportunity 3170-AB54 Final Rule Stage.
Act (Regulation B).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Product Safety Commission
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
153........................... Safety Standard for 3041-AE10 Proposed Rule Stage.
Lithium-Ion Batteries
Used in Micromobility
Products.
154........................... Safety Standard for 3041-AC36 Final Rule Stage.
Portable Generators.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
155........................... Basel III Revisions: 3064-AF29 Proposed Rule Stage.
Amendments to the
Capital Rule for Large
Banking Organizations.
156........................... Prohibition on Use of 3064-AG12 Proposed Rule Stage.
Reputation Risk by
Regulators.
157........................... Regulatory Capital Rule: 3064-AG17 Proposed Rule Stage.
Revisions to the
Community Bank Leverage
Ratio Framework.
158........................... GENIUS Act Requirements 3064-AG19 Proposed Rule Stage.
for FDIC-Supervised
Permitted Payment
Stablecoin Issuers.
159........................... Resolution Plans Required 3064-AG21 Proposed Rule Stage.
for Insured Depository
Institutions with $100B
or More in Total Assets;
Informational Filings
Required for IDIs with
at Least $50B but Less
Than $100B in Total
Assets.
160........................... Unsafe or Unsound 3064-AG16 Final Rule Stage.
Practices, Matters
Requiring Attention.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Securities and Exchange Commission
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation
Sequence No. Title Identifier No. Rulemaking stage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
161........................... Evaluating the 3235-AN54 Prerule Stage.
Consolidated Audit Trail.
162........................... Crypto Assets............ 3235-AN38 Proposed Rule Stage.
163........................... Enhancement of Emerging 3235-AN40 Proposed Rule Stage.
Growth Company
Accommodations and
Simplification of Filer
Status for Reporting
Companies.
164........................... Registered Offerings 3235-AN41 Proposed Rule Stage.
Reform.
165........................... Amendments to the Custody 3235-AN46 Proposed Rule Stage.
Rules.
166........................... Crypto Market Structure 3235-AN49 Proposed Rule Stage.
Amendments.
167........................... Semiannual Reporting..... 3235-AN58 Proposed Rule Stage.
168........................... Enhancing Retail Exposure 3235-AN59 Proposed Rule Stage.
to Private Markets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millennium Challenge Corporation
Millennium Challenge Corporation is proposing companion revisions
to the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) proposed updates to
Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Subtitle A Office of
Management and Budget Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance.
Consistent with the review requirements in 2 CFR 200.109, the intent of
these proposed revisions in Subtitle B Federal Agency Regulations for
Grants and Agreements is to improve transparency, accountability, and
oversight for Federal awards across the Federal Government by ensuring
continued alignment with Administration priorities, revising indirect
cost policy, reducing burden, and converting guidance to regulation.
U.S. Department Of Agriculture
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is dedicated to
supporting American agriculture, farmers, ranchers, foresters, and
rural communities, while ensuring the efficient delivery of services.
For the upcoming year, USDA's regulatory focus will promote innovation,
strengthening markets for U.S. agricultural products, enhancing program
integrity, and improving operational efficiency. These priorities align
with the Administration's emphasis on fostering economic growth,
reducing regulatory burdens, and ensuring effective, lawful governance.
USDA's regulatory agenda reflects its commitment to implementing
Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, and
Executive Order 14219, Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's ``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory
Initiative. Additionally, USDA will continue to implement the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) to enhance program payments, strengthen farm
security, and provide long-term certainty for American farmers and
ranchers.
Key Regulatory Priorities
The Administration is pursuing goals in four key areas: enhancing
oversight, strengthening eligibility standards, streamlining regulatory
burden(s), and promoting American energy.
[[Page 52804]]
Enhancing Oversight
USDA will pursue rulemakings to strengthen oversight, reduce fraud,
and improve program integrity through the following actions:
Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act (AFIDA). To
strengthen the federal government's ability to monitor and safeguard
U.S. farmland from foreign adversarial interests, USDA initiated an
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) to modernize the reporting
requirements under the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act
(AFIDA). This action supports the Administration's National Farm
Security Action Plan and reflects a renewed emphasis on farmland
security as a matter of national interest. The ANPR solicits public
input on how to close longstanding gaps in foreign ownership reporting,
improve data accuracy and timeliness, and enhance USDA's coordination
with federal partners. By updating and expanding the scope of 7 CFR
part 781, USDA will replace a regulation that has not been revised
since 2006 and ensure the Department has the tools necessary to detect,
deter, and disclose foreign acquisitions of U.S. agricultural land.
Strengthening Integrity and Reducing Retailer Fraud in the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). To strengthen program
integrity and reduce retailer fraud in the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP), this rule proposes new requirements designed
to deter fraud, abuse, and non-compliance. The proposed regulations
would enhance oversight for SNAP retailers and improve the program's
overall integrity for all stakeholders.
Enhancing Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) Card Security
Measures. USDA is advancing measures to strengthen Electronic Benefit
Transfer (EBT) card security and protect program participants against
fraud. Implementing Section 501(a)(2) of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) will
modernize EBT requirements to combat card skimming, cloning, and
similar fraudulent activities. These improvements will safeguard
taxpayer funds and streamline program administration by reducing fraud
and enhancing system integrity.
Enhancing Integrity in the Summer Meal Programs. USDA will
propose strengthening oversight of summer meal programs to ensure
benefits reach children as intended while reducing waste and abuse.
Building on recent experiences, the Department will update regulations
for non-congregate meal service under the Summer Food Service Program
(SFSP) and the Seamless Summer Option (SSO). These updates will tighten
integrity controls, promote accountability, and focus participation on
providers best equipped to deliver meals efficiently and responsibly.
Combating Fraud in Child and Adult Care Food Program and
Summer Food Service Program. This rulemaking proposes significant
changes to combat fraud in the Child and Adult Care Food Program
(CACFP) and the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP). The proposed
changes are intended to minimize false and fraudulent claims, providing
state agencies and sponsoring organizations with new tools to identify
and remove fraudulent operators. The proposed rule will protect
taxpayer dollars through strengthened integrity measures, including
reciprocal disqualification procedures as mandated by Section 12(r) of
the National School Lunch Act. Additionally, oversight is enhanced
through modified monitoring and recordkeeping requirements.
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants
and Children (WIC) Program Integrity. To strengthen program integrity
in the WIC program, this proposed rule modernizes vendor integrity
requirements by shifting from paper-based to electronic benefits
transfer (EBT) processes nationwide. The regulations will protect WIC
participants' personal information and taxpayer funds. Furthermore, the
rule enhances state agency vendor selection criteria and investigation
techniques to reduce vendor fraud, abuse, and waste. Stronger
regulatory requirements for vendor investigations, violations, and
sanctions will significantly improve oversight.
Strengthening Eligibility Standards
USDA will refine eligibility requirements to ensure programs
responsibly serve their intended populations:
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Modification to
Work Requirements for Able-Bodied Adults. This proposed rule refines
eligibility requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP) to ensure it serves its intended population. It codifies
provisions of Public Law 119-21 that includes modifying which
participants are subject to the time limit and changes to the waiver
requirements to ensure that exemptions from work requirements are
provided only in appropriate circumstances.
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Reforming
Categorical Eligibility. This proposal refines SNAP eligibility
requirements by reforming categorical eligibility to serve households
that have demonstrated a need for assistance. Under the proposed rule,
categorical eligibility would be limited to households that receive
cash or other substantial assistance from the Temporary Assistance to
Needy Families (TANF) program. This change would align categorical
eligibility with its statutory purpose of streamlining program
administration while ensuring only households truly in need are deemed
eligible.
Updated Staple Food Stocking Standards for Retailers in
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. This final rule refines
the eligibility requirements for retailers participating in the SNAP
program in accordance with a provision of the Agricultural Act of 2014
that increases the minimum number of varieties for staple foods from
three to seven. These changes aim to ensure that authorized retailers
can effectively serve the intended population of SNAP participants by
offering a wider variety of staple foods. The rule also provides some
flexibility for retailers while simplifying the overall criteria.
Amendment of definition of ``eligible food'' in the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). In support of the
Administration's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiative, USDA
proposes to update the definition of ``eligible foods'' under SNAP to
better align program benefits with national nutrition goals. This
action reinforces SNAP's statutory purpose--helping low-income
households obtain a more nutritious diet--by promoting access to
wholesome foods and discouraging purchases inconsistent with dietary
health. Through this reform, USDA will strengthen the program's role as
a cornerstone of the MAHA movement to improve health outcomes, reduce
diet-related disease, and advance self-sufficiency.
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Alien
Eligibility. Consistent with the Administration's commitment to restore
lawful governance and ensure that federal benefits serve their intended
recipients, USDA will refine eligibility standards for aliens in the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). By implementing
provisions of Public Law 119-21, this action reaffirms that SNAP
benefits are reserved for U.S. citizens and certain lawfully present
aliens, as established by federal law.
Revise Conditions for Payment of Indemnity and
Compensation for HPAI. To strengthen disease prevention and ensure
taxpayer-funded indemnities reward responsible producers, USDA
[[Page 52805]]
will finalize the conditions for payment related to highly pathogenic
avian influenza (HPAI) announced in the earlier interim final rule.
These regulations will require commercial poultry premises to pass a
biosecurity audit before receiving compensation, thereby ensuring that
payments are directed only to operations that have implemented robust
measures to prevent the spread of disease. By tying eligibility to
compliance, this action promotes accountability, protects animal
health, and reduces the overall risk of future outbreaks.
Eligibility Requirement to Serve on a Farm Service Agency
(FSA) County Committee. USDA is strengthening standards for service on
Farm Service Agency (FSA) county committees to ensure these bodies
operate with integrity, professionalism, and respect. Under this
update, any individual who has been formally restricted or banned from
entering an FSA office--for example, due to misconduct or harassment--
will be ineligible to serve on a county committee. This safeguard
ensures that committee members can fully and safely participate in
meetings, protects staff and producers, and upholds public confidence
in the program's administration.
Streamlining Regulatory Burden(s)
To modernize and streamline its regulatory processes, USDA is
proposing several changes to improve efficiency and reduce unnecessary
burdens.
Modernize food safety inspection: USDA is modernizing meat
and poultry inspection to strengthen food safety outcomes, reduce
cross-contamination risks, and improve operational efficiency for
industry and inspectors alike. The Food Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS) will propose updates allowing establishments under the New Swine
Inspection System and New Poultry Inspection System to increase line
speeds where process control is maintained, supporting innovation
without compromising safety. FSIS will also remove outdated inspection
procedures--such as the incision of mandibular lymph nodes and
palpation of viscera--that research shows are unnecessary and can
increase contamination risk. Finally, the agency will update staffing
standards to reflect actual operational needs, ensuring resources are
deployed effectively to safeguard the food supply.
Removal of Standard of Identity for Canned ``Tripe with
Milk'': To reduce redundant regulatory requirements, FSIS is proposing
to remove the standards of identity for canned ``Tripe with Milk,
eliminating needless rules while not impacting food safety. FSIS has
determined that the existing standard for the finished canned article
is unnecessary.
WIC program modernization: FNS is proposing to modernize
the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and
Children (WIC) regulations to provide greater program flexibility. This
includes updating outdated regulations, incorporating electronic
benefits transfer (EBT), and streamlining processes to better align
with the changing retail marketplace and improve customer service.
Outdated regulatory removal: FNS plans to remove multiple
outdated or duplicative regulatory provisions to simplify the program
and reduce administrative burden.
Streamlined regulations for loan and grant programs: Rural
Development is consolidating and simplifying regulations for several
programs to improve efficiency and customer experience.
[cir] Community Facilities (CF) Program: The CF Program will move
from seven separate regulations to a single, streamlined rule, which
will improve loan servicing options for borrowers.
[cir] Single Family Housing (SFH) Direct Programs: The Rural
Housing Service (RHS) is proposing changes to its SFH programs to
create a more efficient application process and simplify regulations
that impose burdensome requirements on borrowers and applicants. This
will improve regulatory efficiencies and customer service.
[cir] SFH Self-Help Technical Assistance Grants: Proposed
improvements aim to streamline and simplify requirements, reduce
paperwork, and improve processes for organizations that assist low-
income families in constructing their own homes.
Unleashing American Energy
To advance the goals of Executive Order 14153, ``Unleashing
Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential,'' and Executive Order 14154,
``Unleashing American Energy,'' USDA is modernizing several regulations
to increase resource development, improve energy independence, and
streamline processes.
Advancing Alaskan Resource Development
Special Areas: Roadless Area Conservation Repeal: The
Forest Service is repealing the rule that established prohibitions on
road construction and timber harvesting in inventoried roadless areas
on National Forest System lands. This change, which is consistent with
Executive Order 14153, will allow management requirements to be guided
by individual land management plans, supporting sustainable communities
in Southeast Alaska through increased management flexibility.
Expanding American Energy and Mineral Production
Oil and Gas Resource Revision: USDA will modernize and
streamline the framework governing oil and gas activities on National
Forest System lands to reduce delays, improve coordination, and support
responsible energy development. Consistent with Executive Orders 14154
and 14153, the revised approach will clarify leasing consent and
surface use permitting processes, align analytical requirements with
other federal agencies, and eliminate duplicative reviews. These
improvements will provide regulatory certainty for operators and
advance the Administration's goal of unleashing American energy. USDA
published a final rule on January 28, 2026, 91 FR 3643.
Update and Clarification of the Locatable Minerals
Regulations: USDA will modernize and clarify the framework governing
locatable mineral activities on National Forest System lands to deliver
timelier, more predictable reviews for critical mineral projects.
Consistent with Executive Order 14154, this action will improve
coordination with partner agencies, align procedures across the federal
government, and remove outdated or duplicative requirements. These
improvements will enhance efficiency, strengthen consistency, and
support the Administration's goal of expanding domestic critical
mineral production to bolster national defense and economic prosperity.
Unleashing American Energy and Economic Prosperity under
the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP): USDA will streamline and
simplify the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) to help
agricultural producers and rural small businesses access affordable
energy solutions more efficiently. Consistent with Executive Order
14154, these improvements will reduce compliance burdens, accelerate
processing times, and promote cost-effective investments in renewable
energy systems and energy efficiency upgrades. By modernizing program
delivery, USDA will expand participation, lower energy costs, and
advance rural prosperity while supporting the Administration's goal of
unleashing American energy.
[[Page 52806]]
Conclusion
USDA's regulatory priorities for the coming year reflect its
commitment to supporting American agriculture, ensuring program
integrity, and improving operational efficiency. By focusing on
oversight, eligibility, and streamlined implementation, USDA will
continue to deliver on its mission to serve farmers, ranchers, and
rural communities while reducing regulatory burdens and promoting
economic growth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. REVISE CONDITIONS FOR PAYMENT OF INDEMNITY AND COMPENSATION FOR HPAI
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8301, et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 13771; 14249; 14303
CFR Citation: 9 CFR 53
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
amended the regulations pertaining to conditions for payment of
indemnity for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) to require
commercial poultry premises to successfully pass a biosecurity audit
for HPAI-infected premises intending to restock and for buffer zone
(uninfected) premises that wish to request that poultry be moved onto
the premises.
Statement of Need: Conditioning restocking of poultry flocks on
passing a biosecurity audit will help reduce introduction of HPAI virus
from wild bird populations, particularly chronically noncompliant ``hot
spots'' that can serve as reservoir for the spread of HPAI.
Summary of Legal Basis: Animal Health Protection Act.
Alternatives: APHIS considered alternatives to the interim rule.
APHIS considered a more traditional rulemaking process, or utilizing
the NPIP biennial rulemaking process, which involves industry
participation. However, the extended timeline associated with this
approach made it unsuitable when APHIS has identified a need for
immediate action. Immediate action is necessary to incentivize
commercial poultry producers to implement critical biosecurity measures
to reduce the risk of introduction of HPAI and avoid actions that
contribute to its spread. Lastly, APHIS considered a proposal that
would tie indemnity payments to a tiered system based on performance in
the biosecurity audit. However, this approach lacked sufficient
scientific backing.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: APHIS estimated costs of producers
to comply with the interim final rule will result in $0.49 to $0.79
million in time, materials, and recordkeeping costs. Examples of costs
include time and labor to implement improvements to current biosecurity
practices, time to complete and pass biosecurity audits, delays to
restocking, and costs associated with the purchase of or upgrade to
equipment needed to conduct a virtual audit, if the producer wishes to
have a virtual audit. APHIS expects the benefits of reduced infections
from HPAI will outweigh the aforementioned costs associated with this
interim rule.
APHIS estimates that this interim rule will reduce overall costs to
APHIS and State partners between $39.56 million and $88.66 million.
These estimates include reductions in indemnity and response costs,
less costs incurred by APHIS and State partners for buffer zone
movement audits and previously infected premises audits. Overall, APHIS
estimates that this rule will have a net benefit of between $38.55 and
$87.65 million. In addition to these quantified benefits, APHIS also
anticipates that this interim rule will have small unquantified effects
on international trade, consumer prices, animal welfare, public health,
and producer welfare.
Risks: Some premises are becoming reinfected multiple times with
HPAI within a short period of time. For example, since 2022, some
premises have now experienced five HPAI introductions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 12/31/24 89 FR 106981
Interim Final Rule Effective........ 12/31/24 .......................
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 03/14/25 90 FR 12105
Reopened.
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 04/14/25 .......................
End.
Final Rule.......................... 10/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: Additional information about APHIS and its
programs is available on the internet at http://www.aphis.usda.gov.
Agency Contact: Leonardo Sevilla, DVM, Veterinary Medical Officer,
Poultry Health Team, Strategy & Policy, VS, Department of Agriculture,
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 920 Main Campus Drive,
Raleigh, NC 27606
Phone: 984 766-1528
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0579-AE79
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--Rural Housing Service (RHS) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. STREAMLINING THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES REGULATION, 7 CFR 3570,
SUBPART E (SERVICING)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 U.S.C. 1989
Relevant Executive Orders: 14247; 14222; 14219
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 3570 subpart E
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Community Facilities (CF) Program currently utilizes
seven existing regulations to service the CF Direct Loans (7 CFR part
1951, subparts E, F, and 0; 7 CFR part 1955, subparts A, B, and C; and
7 CFR part 1956, subpart C). The CF Program will be removed from the
existing seven regulations. The Agency will place all regulations for
servicing the loans and grants of the CF program into one streamlined
regulation; that regulation will apply solely to the CF Program. While
this proposed regulation consolidates seven existing regulations, it
does not remove any of the servicing options currently available. All
authorities authorized in the Consolidated Farm and Agricultural Act
are included in this proposed regulation. The proposed regulation will
provide internal and external users with a single regulation to
implement all authorities available, providing more streamlined
service.
Statement of Need: The service regulation covering only CF policies
and the proposed changes will result in one streamlined, user-friendly
document. The servicing regulation will improve the Agency's ability to
service its portfolio and ensure that the Government's investment is
protected and maximized.
Summary of Legal Basis: This action will not raise any novel legal
or policy issues and this action is not in conflict with Executive
Order 12866.
Alternatives: The other alternative is to stay status quo and not
change the rule. This alternative would not be in the best interest of
the Government.
[[Page 52807]]
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: There are no expected long-term
costs associated with this change as it will incorporate information,
Administrative Notices and Unnumbered Letters that have been issued and
reissued for many years. Some modifications to forms and systems will
be required, but costs will be minimal. Savings may be realized in more
efficient and timely servicing options, which may reduce the number of
delinquencies and foreclosures.
Risks: The proposed action will have no financial impact on the
public or the Agency.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule With Comment............. 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Lauren Cusick, Department of Agriculture, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250
Phone: 202 720-1414,
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0575-AD20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--Food and Nutrition Administration
(FNA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. STRENGTHENING INTEGRITY AND REDUCING RETAILER FRAUD IN THE
SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SNAP)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 113-79; Pub. L. 115-334
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 271; 7 CFR 274; 7 CFR 278
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule would implement statutory provisions
of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 Farm Bill),
the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (the 2018 Farm Bill), and other
language intended to deter retailer fraud, abuse, and non-compliance in
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Stakeholders are
SNAP retailers and communities in which SNAP retailers provide SNAP
participants access to food, other Programs that require SNAP
authorization or where reciprocal actions impact participation, and
SNAP participants.
Statement of Need: Current USDA SNAP regulations do not allow for
the assessment of financial penalties in conjunction with periods of
disqualification for SNAP violations. Additionally, existing regulatory
requirements do not directly address a number of retailer integrity
concerns, such as firms that fail to report changes of ownership, firms
that conspire to commit unauthorized redemptions, and firms that
violate SNAP equal treatment provisions.
Summary of Legal Basis: This would implement statutory provisions
of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, and the Federal
Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment of 2015.
Alternatives: Unavailable
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed rule is expected to
increase the penalties assessed against firms found committing
violations by FNS and, as a result, deter violations in SNAP. FNS
expects that the administrative costs associated with this proposed
rule are minimal.
Risks: N/A
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 10/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AE71
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. ENHANCING ELECTRONIC BENEFIT TRANSFER (EBT) CARD SECURITY MEASURES
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. Law
No: 117-328)
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule implements Division HH, title IV,
section 501(a)(2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023. Under
section 501(a)(2), the Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service (FNS) is instructed to promulgate regulations through the
notice and comment process that require State agencies to implement new
card security measures to protect against card skimming, card cloning,
and other similar fraudulent means.
Statement of Need: This proposed rule implements Division HH, Title
IV, section 501(a)(2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023.
Under section 501(a)(2), the Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Service (FNS) is instructed to promulgate regulations through
the notice and comment process that require State agencies to implement
new card security measures to protect against card skimming, card
cloning, and other similar fraudulent means.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal authority can be found in the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328).
Alternatives: No reasonable alternative is known.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The anticipated costs and benefits
will be discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis which will
accompany the rule.
Risks: If there are any associated risks, those would be discussed
in the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AE99
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: MODIFICATION TO
WORK REQUIREMENTS FOR ABLE-BODIED ADULTS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
[[Page 52808]]
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 119-21; 7 U.S.C. 2011 to 2036
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 273
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule codifies provisions of Public Law 119-
21. These changes include modifying the list of exceptions from the
time limit; updating requirements for areas to qualify for waivers for
the time limit; and adding the temporary good faith exemptions in
Alaska and Hawaii. Additionally, this rule would strengthen
requirements for requesting waivers of the time limit.
Statement of Need: Changes are needed to codify provisions of
Public Law 119-21 that expand the scope of participants subject to time
limits, as well as changes to the requirements for States seeking
waivers from time limits. The proposed changes would reflect that
exemptions and exceptions from work requirements are consistent with
Federal statute and provided to the appropriate populations.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this proposed rule can
be found in Public Law 119-21, Section 10102, ``Modifications to SNAP
work requirements for able-bodied adults''.
Alternatives: No reasonable alternative is known, given the
requirements of the statute.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The anticipated costs and benefits
will be discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis which will
accompany the rule.
Risks: Any associated risks will be discussed in the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF09
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: REFORMING CATEGORICAL
ELIGIBILITY
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2011 to 2036
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 273
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Under section 5(a) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008,
households in which all members receive benefits under a State program
funded by the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program are
categorically eligible to participate in the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP). This proposal would change the regulations
at 7 CFR 273.2(j)(2) pertaining to categorically eligible TANF
households by limiting categorical eligibility to certain households
that receive cash TANF or other substantial assistance from TANF. The
proposed revisions would create a clearer and more consistent
nationwide policy that ensures categorical eligibility is extended only
to households that have sufficiently demonstrated eligibility by
qualifying for ongoing and substantial benefits from TANF-funded
programs designed to assist households and move them towards self-
sufficiency.
Statement of Need: This proposal refines SNAP eligibility
requirements by reforming categorical eligibility to better serve
households that have demonstrated a need for assistance. Under the
proposed rule, categorical eligibility would be limited to households
that receive cash or other substantial assistance from the Temporary
Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program. This change would create a
clearer, more consistent nationwide policy that ensures only households
truly in need and on a path to self-sufficiency are deemed eligible.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this proposed rule can
be found in 7 U.S.C. 2011-2036.
Alternatives: The Department considered alternative approaches
including the ongoing and substantial framework proposed in the 2019
proposed rule. The Department believes the current proposed rule best
aligns with Congressional intent for categorical eligibility; however,
the Department is seeking public comment on the proposed approach.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The anticipated costs and benefits
will be discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis which will
accompany the rule.
Risks: Any associated risks will be discussed in the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. AMENDMENT OF DEFINITION OF ``ELIGIBLE FOOD'' IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL
NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SNAP)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2013(a)
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 271.2
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Food and Nutrition Service is proposing to amend the
definition of ``eligible foods'' in SNAP to align with the program's
purpose of assisting low-income households in obtaining a more
nutritious diet and advance USDA's goal to ``Make America Healthy
Again.''
Statement of Need: To ensure the SNAP program effectively serves
its intended population of low-income households by providing a
nutritious diet, the Food and Nutrition Service is proposing to amend
the definition of ``eligible foods.'' This change aligns the program
with its purpose of promoting better nutrition and supports USDA's goal
to ``Make America Healthy Again.''
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this proposed rule can
be found at 7 U.S.C. 2013(a).
Alternatives: Retaining the current definition is an alternative to
this reform, but the proposal better aligns the program with its
purpose of promoting better nutrition.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated costs and benefits will
be discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis which will accompany the
rule.
[[Page 52809]]
Risks: Any associated risks will be discussed in the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA
22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: ALIEN
ELIGIBILITY
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 119-21 (7 U.S.C. 2015(f))
Relevant Executive Orders: 14218
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 271; 7 CFR 273
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Federal law and regulations limit eligibility for SNAP
benefits to U.S. citizens and certain lawfully present aliens. This
proposed rule implements provisions of Public Law 119-21 which changes
alien eligibility.
Statement of Need: This proposed rule would conform SNAP
regulations with Public Law 119-21 and refine the eligibility
requirements for aliens to ensure the SNAP program effectively serves
its intended population. These changes restrict the eligibility and
participation of certain aliens, building on existing Federal policy
that limits SNAP benefits to U.S. citizens and certain lawfully present
aliens.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this proposed rule can
be found in Public Law 119-21, Section 10108. Alien SNAP eligibility.
Alternatives: There are no known alternatives that effectively
implement the requirements of the statute.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated costs and benefits will
be discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis which will accompany the
rule.
Risks: Any associated risks will be discussed in the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: State
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF23
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. ENHANCING INTEGRITY IN NON-CONGREGATE MEAL SERVICE IN THE
SUMMER MEAL PROGRAMS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1761
CFR Citation: 7 CFR parts 225, 226
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking proposes changes to streamline program
operations and enhance program integrity related to non-congregate meal
service operations under the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and the
National School Lunch Program's Seamless Summer Option (SSO). These
updates are intended to assist State and local Program operators
overcome operational challenges that limit their ability to manage
these Programs efficiently and effectively. The proposed rule also
includes provisions to strengthen oversight controls and ensure that
summer non-congregate meal service is operated by sponsors who are best
equipped to maintain program integrity.
Statement of Need: Would implement provisions of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) authorizing a rural non-
congregate meal service option in the Summer Food Service Program
(SFSP). This would codify the flexibility for rural program operators
to provide non-congregate meal service in the SFSP. Implementation
would expand the reach of FNS's summer nutrition programs, providing
greater access for communities and families whom the traditional SFSP
cannot reliably reach.
Summary of Legal Basis: Section 502 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328), amended section 13 of the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761, to
establish a non-congregate meal service option in the Summer Food
Service Program.
Alternatives: None.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Implementation is expected to add to
current program costs at the Federal, State, and local levels.
Implementation is anticipated to benefit families with children by
enabling families access to critical nutrition assistance for their
children.
Risks: N/A.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Action........................ 09/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. COMBATING FRAUD IN THE CHILD AND ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM
AND THE SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a; 42 U.S.C. 1760(r); 42 U.S.C. 1761,
1766
CFR Citation: 7 CFR parts 225, 226
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking proposes changes to minimize false and
fraudulent claims in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and
the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP). The proposed changes are
intended to provide State agencies and sponsoring organizations with
additional tools needed to effectively and efficiently identify and
remove fraudulent operators and protect taxpayer dollars in CACFP and
SFSP. As an additional integrity measure, this rule also proposes to
apply reciprocal disqualification procedures to school meal programs,
CACFP, and SFSP as required by Section 12(r) of the National School
Lunch Act (NSLA) (42 U.S.C.
[[Page 52810]]
1760(r)). Finally, this rule proposes changes to the monitoring of day
care homes and modifies recordkeeping requirements.
Statement of Need: The rule is consistent with the Administration's
priority to promote fiscal responsibility and minimize fraudulent
claims in the Child and Adult Care Food Program and the Summer Food
Service Program by providing State agencies and sponsoring
organizations with new tools to effectively identify and remove
fraudulent operators.
Summary of Legal Basis: Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act.
Alternatives: None identified.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs to State agencies and program
operators to be determined are expected to be outweighed by minimizing
false and fraudulent claims and strengthen integrity measures to save
taxpayer dollars.
Risks: None identified.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Action........................ 11/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS
AND CHILDREN (WIC) PROGRAM INTEGRITY
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 89-642
CFR Citation: 7 CFR part 246.2, 246.4, 246.7, 246.12; 246.1
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The proposed rule would modernize vendor integrity
requirements by reflecting the WIC program's nationwide implementation
of electronic benefits transfer (EBT) and its move away from paper-
based processes. It would advance security requirements to protect WIC
participants' personal information and taxpayers in a modern
marketplace. Further, it would enhance requirements regarding State
agency vendor selection criteria and investigation techniques to reduce
vendor fraud, abuse, and waste. The rule would also strengthen vendor
investigation, violation, and sanction regulatory requirements.
Statement of Need: To strengthen program integrity in the WIC
program, this proposed rule modernizes vendor integrity requirements by
shifting from paper-based to electronic benefits transfer (EBT)
processes nationwide. The regulations will protect WIC participants'
personal information and taxpayer funds. Furthermore, the rule enhances
state agency vendor selection criteria and investigation techniques to
reduce vendor fraud, abuse, and waste. Stronger regulatory requirements
for vendor investigations, violations, and sanctions will significantly
improve oversight.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this proposed rule can
be found in Public Law 89-642.
Alternatives: There are no known alternatives that prevent program
abuse and enhance integrity in the modern electronic benefits transfer
operational environment as effectively as the proposed rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated costs and benefits will
be discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis which will accompany the
rule.
Risks: Any associated risks will be discussed in the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 09/00/26 .......................
Final Action........................ 03/00/28 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AF26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS AND
CHILDREN (WIC): WIC ONLINE ORDERING AND TRANSACTIONS AND FOOD DELIVERY
REVISIONS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF A MODERN, DATA-DRIVEN PROGRAM
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. Law 111-296
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 246.2; 7 CFR 246.4; 7 CFR 246.12
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This ``final rule with comment'' addresses key regulatory
barriers to online ordering in the WIC Program by making changes to the
provisions that prevent online transactions and types of online capable
stores from participating in the Program. This rule will also allow FNS
to modernize WIC vendor regulations that do not reflect current
technology and facilitate the Program's transition to Electronic
Benefit Transfer (EBT). The final rule is responsive to prior proposed
rule public comments from WIC state, public and private industry
stakeholders to ensure that the final rule reflects their substantive
feedback as online shopping and FNS' modernization efforts are made
permanent.
Statement of Need: USDA FNS will set forth final rulemaking to
reduce barriers to WIC Program services, foster innovation in the
retail market, and provide the best possible customer service to
participants. The retail grocery industry has changed over the past
several years. Online shopping has become an increasingly common method
for purchasing groceries. Pursuing online ordering in WIC will ensure
that WIC participants have access to a broader array of shopping
options and are not left behind as the industry continues to innovate.
Households that participate in WIC should have the opportunity to shop
for foods, especially those needed to address nutritional deficits, the
way others shop for food, by ordering online. State agencies have been
able to request and receive waivers from these regulatory barriers as a
result of shorter-term statutory flexibilities. A long-term solution is
required in order to continue to support modernization of the WIC
program.
Summary of Legal Basis: Pub. L. 111-296
[[Page 52811]]
Alternatives: None identified at this time.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This will be discussed in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis to accompany the regulation.
Risks: Risks, if any, would be discussed in the regulation.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/23/23 88 FR 11516
NPRM Comment Period End............. 05/24/23
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact:, Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0584-AE85
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FNA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. UPDATED STAPLE FOOD STOCKING STANDARDS FOR RETAILERS IN THE
SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 113-79; 7 U.S.C. 2011 to 2036
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212
CFR Citation: 7 CFR 271; 7 CFR 278
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Agricultural Act of 2014 amended the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 to increase the requirement that certain
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) authorized retail food
stores have available on a continuous basis at least three varieties of
items in each of food staple food categories, to a mandatory minimum of
seven varieties. This final rule would provide some retailers
participating in SNAP as authorized food stores with more flexibility
in meeting the enhanced SNAP eligibility requirements while also
simplifying the criteria.
Statement of Need: This final rule refines the eligibility
requirements for retailers participating in the SNAP program. The
updated standards implement the Agricultural Act of 2014 by increasing
the minimum number of varieties for food staples from three to seven.
These changes aim to ensure that authorized retailers can effectively
serve the intended population of SNAP participants by offering a wider
variety of staple foods. The rule also provides some flexibility for
retailers while simplifying the overall criteria.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this rule can be found
in the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79), as codified at 7
U.S.C. 2011-2036.
Alternatives: There are no known alternatives that implement the
enhanced stocking requirements of Pub L. 113-79 in ways that are
practical and flexible for SNAP-authorized retailers.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits:
Benefits: The proposed rule will increase the variety of staple
food products offered for sale at SNAP-authorized firms, which will
help to ensure that SNAP households have access to healthier foods on a
continuous basis.
Costs: The Department has estimated the proposed rule's total cost
to the Federal Government as approximately $4 million in fiscal year
(FY) 2027, and to incur no further costs after implementation. The cost
to currently authorized retailers is estimated to be approximately $55
million in the first year and about $2 million per year over the
following four years.
Risks: Any associated risks will be discussed in the rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 09/25/25 90 FR 46081
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lynn Gilbert, Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 305-1615
Email: [email protected]
Richard Lucas, Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Administration, 1320 Braddock Place, Room 555, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: 703 457-6797
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 0584-AE27
RIN: 0584-AF12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--Food Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. MAXIMUM LINE SPEED RATES FOR YOUNG CHICKEN AND TURKEY
ESTABLISHMENTS OPERATING UNDER THE NEW POULTRY INSPECTION SYSTEM
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 451, et. seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14267
CFR Citation: 9 CFR part 381
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is
proposing to amend the regulations that prescribe the maximum line
speed rates under the New Poultry Inspection System (NPIS) to allow
NPIS young chicken and turkey establishments to operate at more
efficient line speeds.
Statement of Need: This proposed rule is needed to give poultry
slaughter establishments the ability to operate under inspection
systems and at line speeds that would allow them slaughter birds more
efficiently without the need for a regulatory waiver while continuing
to ensure food safety and effective FSIS online carcass inspection.
Summary of Legal Basis: FSIS has been delegated the authority to
exercise the functions of the Secretary (7 CFR 2.18, 2.53), as
specified in the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C 451 et
seq.). This statute mandates that FSIS protect the public by verifying
that poultry products are safe, wholesome, unadulterated, and properly
labeled and packaged. The PPIA also requires, among other things, that
[t]he Secretary [of Agriculture], whenever processing operations are
being conducted, shall cause to be made by inspectors postmortem
inspection of the carcasses of each bird processed (21 U.S.C. 455(b)).
The PPIA provides that the Secretary shall promulgate such other rules
and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of the
statutes (21 U.S.C. 463(b)).
Alternatives: FSIS may consider alternatives during the development
of the proposed rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Overall, this proposed rule would
benefit establishments that slaughter poultry, other than ratites, by
ending the need for certain waivers. The proposed rule would allow
certain poultry establishments to increase efficiency and decrease
production costs by eliminating unnecessary barriers efficiency while
maintaining or even improving food safety.
Allowing additional NPIS young chicken and young turkey
[[Page 52812]]
establishments to operate at more efficient line speeds would likely
result in cost savings through reducing their production costs by using
resources more efficiently and optimizing their production process.
Further, allowing non-NPIS establishments that slaughter poultry
classes other than ratites to operate under NPIS or SIS would give
industry additional flexibility to choose the inspection system that is
best suited for their operations.
If NPIS establishments currently operating without a line speed
waiver choose to increase their line speeds, they would likely incur
costs associated with hiring additional labor, training, and Hazard
Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) plan reassessment. An
establishment would only incur these costs if the benefits outweigh the
costs, since the choice to operate at increased line speeds is a
voluntary business decision.
Risks: If the Agency does not proceed with the proposed poultry
line speed rule, establishments may continue to be unable to operate at
full capacity. This could limit the number of birds processed each day,
slow production, and create inefficiencies across the supply chain.
Without a clear regulatory framework to increase line speeds,
establishments may delay investments in modernization and may not
operate under NPIS, which could reduce productivity, make it harder for
the industry to respond to market demand, and increase Agency costs.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/19/26 91 FR 7926
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/20/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, Director, Regulations Development
Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250
Phone: 202 286-2255
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0583-AE01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FSIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. MAXIMUM LINE SPEED UNDER THE NEW SWINE SLAUGHTER INSPECTION SYSTEM
(NSIS)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601, et. seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14267
CFR Citation: 9 CFR part 310
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is
proposing to amend the pork products inspection regulations to
eliminate line speed limits for NSIS establishments and allow NSIS
establishments to determine their line speeds based on their ability to
maintain process control. FSIS intends to republish 9 CFR 310.26(c)
(previously struck down by the U.S. District Court of the District of
Minnesota) to eliminate the existing maximum line speed of 1,106 head
per hour (hph) for NSIS establishments. The worker safety study found
that line speed is not a leading factor for work-related
musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in swine slaughter establishments.
Statement of Need: In October 2019, FSIS established the NSIS (84
FR 52300). The NSIS regulations, among other things, eliminated the
existing maximum line speed of 1,106 hph for NSIS establishments and
authorized establishments to determine their own line speeds based on
their ability to maintain process control and food safety.
On June 30, 2021, based on a court decision, all NSIS
establishments had to return to a maximum linespeed of 1,106 hph,
unless an establishment has obtained a regulatory waiver from FSIS.
In November 2021, in response to a court decision, FSIS announced
that the agency, in collaboration with OSHA, developed a time-limited
trial (TLT) that allowed existing NSIS establishments to experiment
with ergonomics, automation, and crewing to create custom work
environments that will both protect food safety and worker safety while
increasing productivity. The TLT has allowed six NSIS establishments to
operate at increased line speeds under regulatory waivers. During the
TLT, third-party contractors that the Agency hired to conduct a worker
safety study in NSIS establishments collected data that measures how
evisceration line speeds impact work-related MSD risk.
In January 2025,USDA published the contractor's report on the
linespeed worker safety study.The study concluded that piece rate
(i.e., the number of hog parts handled per minute by a worker) is a
better measure of MSD risk than line speed and that all establishments,
regardless of current or anticipated future increased line speed, can
mitigate MSD risk by increasing job-specific staffing levels,
decreasing job-specific line speeds, or both. On March 17, 2025, USDA
announced that it would extend the waivers and that rulemaking to
propose line speed increases would begin immediately.
Summary of Legal Basis: FSIS has been delegated the authority to
exercise the functions of the Secretary (7 CFR 2.18, 2.53), as
specified in the FMIA. This statute mandates that FSIS protect the
public by verifying that meat products are safe, wholesome,
unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged. The Act also
prohibits the distribution in commerce of any meat products that are
adulterated or misbranded. The FMIA gives FSIS broad authority to
promulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out
provisions of the Act (21 U.S.C. 621).
Alternatives: FSIS may consider alternatives during the development
of the proposed rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Republishing and amending 9 CFR
310.26(c) to eliminate maximum linespeeds at NSIS establishments would
reduce regulatory uncertainty and allow industry to operate more
efficiently, likely reducing their production costs by optimizing their
production process without compromising food safety.
This proposed rule, if finalized, would benefit NSIS establishments
operating with a line speed waiver by eliminating potential regulatory
uncertainty regarding the duration of the waivers. Allowing NSIS
establishments currently operating without a line speed waiver to
operate without a line speed limit would likely result in cost savings
through reducing their production costs. This proposed rule may also
benefit non-NSIS establishments that voluntarily choose to switch to
NSIS and operate at more efficient line speeds.
If an NSIS establishment currently operating without a line speed
waiver chooses to increase their line speeds, they would likely incur
costs associated with hiring additional labor, training, and Hazard
Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) plan reassessment. Non-NSIS
establishments that voluntarily choose to convert to NSIS would incur
costs for hiring additional labor, training, ready to cook
requirements, and HACCP plan reassessment. An establishment would only
incur these costs if the benefits outweigh the costs, since the choice
to operate at increased line speeds is a voluntary business decision.
Risks: If the Agency does not proceed with the proposed swine line
speed rule, establishments may continue to be
[[Page 52813]]
unable to operate at full capacity. This could limit the number of
animals processed each day, slow production, and create inefficiencies
across the supply chain. Without a clear regulatory framework to
increase line speeds, establishments may delay investments in
modernization and may not operate under NSIS, which could reduce
productivity, make it harder for the industry to respond to market
demand, and increase Agency costs.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/19/26 91 FR 7905
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/20/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, Director, Regulations Development
Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250
Phone: 202 286-2255
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0583-AE02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FSIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. MODERNIZATION OF BEEF SLAUGHTER INSPECTION
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14267
CFR Citation: 9 CFR parts 301, 307, and 310
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) intends to
propose amendments to the Federal meat inspection regulations to create
an optional new inspection system for beef slaughter establishments.
The system is expected to help FSIS use its resources more efficiently
while still providing a level of public health protection equivalent to
the current inspection system. It would also remove unnecessary
regulatory obstacles to innovation. Establishments that do not opt in
would continue under their current inspection system. FSIS also intends
to propose changes that would apply to all beef slaughter
establishments, giving them more flexibility to design sampling plans
that fit their operations and improve how they monitor process control.
Statement of Need: The proposed action is necessary to make better
use of the Agency's resources and remove unnecessary regulatory
obstacles to innovation.
Summary of Legal Basis: FSIS has been delegated the authority to
exercise the functions of the Secretary (7 CFR 2.18, 2.53), as
specified in the FMIA. This statute mandates that FSIS protect the
public by verifying that meat products are safe, wholesome,
unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged. The Act also
prohibits the distribution in commerce of any meat products that are
adulterated or misbranded. The FMIA gives FSIS broad authority to
promulgate such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out
provisions of the Act (21 U.S.C. 621).
Alternatives: FSIS may consider alternatives during the development
of the proposed rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed regulations are
expected to benefit beef slaughter establishments by removing
unnecessary regulatory obstacles to innovation and allowing
establishments more flexibility in how they configure their slaughter
lines. The proposed changes are also expected to reduce establishments'
sampling costs. FSIS anticipates that the proposed actions would make
better use of the Agency's resources, which may reduce personnel and
training costs. Establishments may incur increased labor and
recordkeeping costs as a result of the proposed requirements.
Risks: If FSIS does not move forward with this rulemaking,
establishments may continue to face regulatory requirements that limit
their ability to adjust line configurations or adopt new technologies.
Without changes to the current regulations, establishments may also
continue to incur higher sampling costs and have fewer options for
tailoring their food safety procedures to their specific operations. In
addition, FSIS may need to maintain higher staffing levels and continue
investing in training for inspection procedures that could be
streamlined. This could limit the Agency's ability to use its resources
more efficiently and respond to changing inspection needs across the
industry.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, Director, Regulations Development
Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250
Phone: 202 286-2255
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0583-AE08
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--FSIS Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. REVISION OF THE NUTRITION FACTS LABELS FOR MEAT AND POULTRY
PRODUCTS AND UPDATING CERTAIN REFERENCE AMOUNTS CUSTOMARILY CONSUMED
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.; 21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212
CFR Citation: 9 CFR part 317; 9 CFR part 381; 9 CFR part 413
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Consistent with the changes that the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) finalized, the Food Safety and Inspection Service
(FSIS) is amending the Federal meat and poultry products inspection
regulations to update and revise the nutrition labeling requirements
for meat and poultry products to reflect recent scientific research and
dietary recommendations and to improve the presentation of nutrition
information to assist consumers in maintaining healthy dietary
practices.
Statement of Need: On May 27, 2016, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) published two final rules: (1) ``Food Labeling:
Revision of the Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels'' (81 FR 33742);
and (2) ``Food Labeling: Serving Sizes of Foods that Can Reasonably be
Consumed at One Eating Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling; Updating,
Modifying, and Establishing Certain Reference Amounts Customarily
Consumed; Serving Size for Breath Mints; and Technical Amendments'' (81
FR 34000). FDA finalized these rules to update the Nutrition Facts
label to reflect new nutrition and public health research, to reflect
recent dietary recommendations from expert groups, and to improve the
presentation of nutrition information to help consumers make more
informed choices and maintain healthy dietary practices. FSIS has
reviewed FDA's analysis and, to ensure that nutrition information is
presented consistently across the food supply, FSIS is amending the
nutrition labeling regulations for meat and poultry products to
parallel, to the extent possible, FDA's regulations. This approach will
help increase clarity of information for consumers and will improve
efficiency in the marketplace.
[[Page 52814]]
Summary of Legal Basis: Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act
(FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601-695, at 607), the Poultry Products Inspection Act
(PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 451-470, at 457), and the Egg Products Inspection Act
(21 U.S.C. 1031-1056, at 1036) (the Acts), the labels of meat, poultry,
and egg products must be approved by the Secretary of Agriculture, who
has delegated this authority to FSIS, before these products can enter
commerce. The Acts prohibit the sale or offer for sale by any person,
firm, or corporation of any article in commerce under any name or other
marking or labeling that is false or misleading or in any container of
a misleading form or size (21 U.S.C. 607(d); 21 U.S.C. 457(c)). The
Acts also prohibit the distribution in commerce of meat or poultry
products that are adulterated or misbranded. The FMIA and PPIA give
FSIS broad authority to promulgate such rules and regulations as are
necessary to carry out the provisions of the Acts (21 U.S.C. 621 and
463(b)).
To prevent meat and poultry products from being misbranded, the
meat and poultry product inspection regulations require that the labels
of meat and poultry products include specific information, such as
nutrition labels, and that such information be displayed as prescribed
in the regulations (9 CFR parts 317 and 381). The nutrition labeling
requirements for meat and meat food products are in 9 CFR 317.300-
317.400, and the nutrition labeling requirements for poultry products
are in 9 CFR 381.400-381.500.
Alternatives: FSIS considered five alternatives in the proposed
rule: (1.) No action; (2.) A 24-month compliance period for large
manufacturers and a 36-month compliance period for small manufacturers
(as proposed); (3.) A 42-month compliance period for all manufacturers;
(4.) A 24-month compliance period for all manufactures; or (5.) A 12-
month compliance period for large manufacturers and a 24-month
compliance period for small manufacturers.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: These regulations are expected to
benefit consumers by increasing and improving dietary information
available in the market. Firms will incur a one-time cost for
relabeling, recordkeeping costs, and costs associated with voluntary
reformulation. Many firms have voluntarily begun using the FDA format,
which will reduce costs.
Risks: None
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 01/19/17 82 FR 6732
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/19/17
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, Director, Regulations Development
Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-3700
Phone: 202 286-2255
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0583-AD56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA--Forest Service (FS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. SPECIAL AREAS: ROADLESS AREA CONSERVATION REPEAL
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 472, 551, and 1604; 42 U.S.C. 4321
Relevant Executive Orders: 14308; 14153; 14219
CFR Citation: 36 CFR 294
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The rulemaking would repeal 36 CFR 294 subpart B, which
established prohibitions on road construction, road reconstruction, and
timber harvesting in inventoried roadless areas on National Forest
System lands. With the repeal, management requirements for inventoried
roadless areas would be guided by individual land management plans.
This rulemaking is in accordance with Executive Order 14153, Unleashing
Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential, section 3(c), which directs
the Secretary of Agriculture to reinstate the 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule
(85 FR 68688). By removing the nationwide roadless standard under the
2001 Roadless Rule, a Tongass National Forest exemption under the 2020
Alaska Roadless Rule is no longer needed.
Statement of Need: The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is
proposing this rule to establish a more effective and efficient
administrative framework for managing the National Forest System's
(NFS) inventoried roadless areas (IRAs). The current 2001 Roadless Rule
established a single, nationwide set of prohibitions on road
construction, road reconstruction, and timber harvesting in IRAs. The
Department believes that this ``one-size-fits-all'' approach is no
longer appropriate given changing resource conditions and shifts in
policy priorities.
The promulgation of this rule will:
1. Address Evolving Conditions and Policy Priorities: Resource
conditions within and adjacent to NFS lands have dramatically changed
since 2001, including the expansion of the wildland-urban interface,
growing impacts of extreme wildfire, drought, and insect and disease
infestations. Management flexibility is required for the Agency to
achieve its multiple-use conservation mission, including wildfire
suppression and fuel reduction treatments.
2. Align with National Directives: This action is being proposed in
accordance with Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation, to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens. It also
responds to Executive Order 14153, Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary
Resource Potential, which directs the Secretary of Agriculture to
reinstate the 2020 Alaska Roadless Rule (the effect of which is
achieved by rescinding the nationwide rule).
3. Restore Local Management Flexibility: Rescinding the 2001
Roadless Rule would return discretion for local land managers to tailor
management, as appropriate, to local land conditions. Conservation and
management of roadless area characteristics can be more effectively
achieved through the robust public process and site-specific analysis
inherent in the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) forest planning
framework. This approach addresses longstanding administrative and
policy challenges that have created uncertainty since 2001.
4. Enable Economic Development: The rule aims to enable job
creation and economic development in rural America through responsible
timber production and promotion of direct and indirect forest-related
jobs.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Secretary of Agriculture has broad
authority to protect and administer the National Forest System (NFS)
through regulation. The legal basis for this rulemaking stems primarily
from:
The Organic Administration Act of 1897 (Organic Act): This
Act provides the Secretary with the authority to issue rules and
regulations to ``regulate the occupancy and use of the forests and to
preserve them from destruction''.
The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (MUSYA): This
Act mandates the Forest Service to manage NFS lands for multiple uses
and sustained yield of renewable surface
[[Page 52815]]
resources to meet the needs of the American people.
The National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA): This
statute requires the Forest Service to prepare comprehensive land and
resource management plans (forest plans) for each NFS unit. The
decision to rescind the national prohibition is an exercise of the
Secretary's discretion to determine the proper uses within any area.
This proposed rule is an exercise of the Secretary of Agriculture's
discretion to determine the most appropriate administrative process for
balancing competing values and uses in IRAs.
Alternatives: The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) being
prepared to analyze this proposal will evaluate the effects of the
proposed action and a reasonable range of alternatives. The
alternatives generally include:
1. Proposed Action (Rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule): The USDA
proposes to rescind the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (36 CFR
Subpart B), including its application to the Tongass National Forest,
while maintaining the state-specific roadless conservation rules for
Idaho (36 CFR Subpart C) and Colorado (36 CFR Subpart D). This action
would remove the nationwide prohibitions on road construction, road
reconstruction, and timber harvesting on IRAs, returning decision-
making authority to local land managers guided by existing Forest-level
land management plans.
2. No Action Alternative: This alternative would retain the 2001
Roadless Rule in its current form. This maintains the designation of
9,368,000 acres of IRAs on the Tongass (as established in 2001) and
continues the prohibitions on timber harvest and road construction/
reconstruction nationwide, with limited exceptions. The No Action
Alternative serves as the baseline condition for comparison.
3. Other Alternatives for Roadless Area Conservation: The EIS will
study alternatives for roadless area conservation on NFS lands,
including the Tongass National Forest, in the context of multiple-use
management.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The benefits and costs associated
with rescinding the 2001 Roadless Rule are largely programmatic and are
generally described qualitatively.
Anticipated Benefits:
Increased Management Flexibility: Provides local land
managers the flexibility needed to respond to changing local
conditions, such as reducing the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire
effects and addressing insect and disease infestations.
Economic Opportunity: Potentially expands the land base
available for timber harvest and offers greater flexibility in locating
and designing timber sales. This improved flexibility could improve the
Forest Service's ability to offer economic sales that contribute to
rural economies.
Infrastructure and Development: Benefits for the
transportation, infrastructure, and mineral development sectors are
anticipated due to the rescission of prohibitions on road building.
Local Decision-making: Returns decision-making authority
to the local forest level, potentially enhancing local collaboration
and aligning management with regional goals.
Anticipated Costs:
Loss of Roadless Values: Increased development (road
construction/reconstruction and timber harvest) resulting from the
proposed rule could adversely affect the scenic beauty of roadless
areas, water quality, fisheries, wildlife, and associated recreation
opportunities. Road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvest
pose the greatest risks of altering and fragmenting natural landscapes.
Increased Administrative Costs: The proposed rule may
result in increased administrative costs related to the necessary
maintenance of any new roads constructed.
Distributional Effects: While the overall change in
resource availability across most regions is expected to be small,
effects may be more pronounced in specific regions (e.g., Alaska).
Risks: The programmatic nature of this rulemaking means that
specific on-the-ground risks are difficult to quantify, but potential
risks include:
1. Environmental Degradation: The primary risk is the loss of the
ecological and social values afforded by IRAs, such as high quality or
undisturbed soil, water, and air; sources of public drinking water;
diversity of plant and animal communities; and habitat for sensitive
species.
2. Increased Public Controversy and Litigation: The rule is
expected to generate significant public interest, including strong
opposition from some state and local governments, Tribal communities,
and environmental groups concerned about diminished protections. There
is ongoing litigation related to roadless areas, particularly
concerning the Tongass National Forest. Rescinding the rule may
exacerbate controversy by replacing national uniformity with varying,
localized management approaches.
3. Impacts on Subsistence Uses (Tongass Context): In the context of
the Tongass, removing the 2001 Roadless Rule protections increases the
risk of adverse effects to subsistence uses due to increased
competition for resources or impacts on resource distribution and
abundance, particularly deer habitat.
4. Compliance and Consultation Risk: Although the agency maintains
commitment to consultation, the rulemaking must ensure compliance with
requirements such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Executive
Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation), as programmatic rules affecting vast
areas carry inherent risk regarding potential effects on threatened and
endangered species or Tribal interests.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Nathan Morris, Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, 201 14th Street SW, Washington, DC 20024
Phone: 202 205-0833
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0596-AD66
BILLING CODE 3410-90-P
Department Of Commerce
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
Established in 1903, the Department of Commerce (Commerce or
Department) is one of the oldest Cabinet-level agencies in the Federal
Government. Commerce's mission is to create the conditions for economic
growth and opportunity across American communities by promoting
innovation, entrepreneurship, competitiveness, national security, and
environmental stewardship. Commerce has 13 operating units, which
manage a diverse portfolio of programs and services ranging from export
controls, trade promotion, and improved broadband access to overseeing
the National Weather Service, developing standards for the U.S. and the
world, and producing statistical data. The Department executes the
census, oversees the Patent and Trademark Office, and take care of the
nation's oceans and fisheries. Across these varied activities, Commerce
seeks to provide a foundation for a more dynamic, resilient, and
globally competitive economy.
To fulfill its mission, Commerce works in partnership with
businesses,
[[Page 52816]]
educational institutions, community organizations, government agencies,
and individuals to:
Innovate by developing new ideas through cutting-edge
science and technology, from advances in nanotechnology to ocean
exploration to broadband deployment, and by protecting and
incentivizing American innovations through the patent and trademark
system;
Promote entrepreneurship and commercialization by
strengthening capital markets, incentivizing growth, facilitating
community development, and empowering small businesses.
Maintain U.S. economic competitiveness in the global
marketplace by promoting exports and foreign direct investment,
securing a level playing field for U.S. businesses, and ensuring that
technology transfer is consistent with our nation's economic and
security interests;
Provide effective management and stewardship of our
nation's resources and assets to ensure sustainable economic
opportunities; and
Make informed policy decisions and enable better
understanding of the economy and our communities by providing timely,
accessible, and accurate economic and demographic data.
Commerce's Regulatory Plan tracks the most important regulations
that the Department anticipates issuing to implement these policy and
program priorities and foster new and sustainable growth. Of Commerce's
13 primary operating units, three bureaus--the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO), and the Bureau of Industry and Security
(BIS)--issue the vast majority of the Department's regulations, and
these three bureaus account for all the planned actions that are
considered the Department's most important significant pre-regulatory
or regulatory actions for FY 2026.
Consistent with Executive Order 14094, moreover, the Department and
its bureaus routinely seek to inform their rulemaking with meaningful
opportunities for public input. The efforts of NOAA, USPTO, and BIS to
promote public engagement are discussed in their respective sections,
below.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOAA's mission is built on three pillars: science, service, and
stewardship--to understand and predict changes in climate, weather,
oceans, and coasts; to share that knowledge and information with
others; and to conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and
resources.
NOAA seeks to conserve our lands, waters, and natural resources,
protecting people and the environment now and for future generations.
As part of Commerce, moreover, NOAA recognizes that environmental
stewardship must go hand-in hand with economic growth. For example,
with respect to the nation's fisheries, NOAA looks simultaneously to
ensure sustainability and optimize resources in order to boost long-
term economic growth and competitiveness in the vital fisheries sector
of the U.S. economy. In doing so, we are guided by the ambitious agenda
to revitalize our U.S. fisheries set forth by the President in E.O.
14276, ``Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness.'' Similarly,
national marine sanctuaries both protect important natural resources
and also are significant drivers of eco-tourism and local recreation.
Within NOAA, the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) and the
National Ocean Service (NOS) are the components that most often
exercise regulatory authority to implement NOAA's mission. NMFS
oversees the management and conservation of the nation's marine
fisheries; protects marine mammals and Endangered Species Act (ESA)-
listed marine and anadromous species; authorizes incidental take of
marine mammals and provides consultations for interagency partners when
ESA-listed species may be affected by certain activities that are
important to the economy, national security, or other reasons; and
promotes economic development of the U.S. fishing industry. NOS
supports the coastal states in their management of land and ocean
resources in their coastal zones, including estuarine research
reserves; manages national marine sanctuaries; monitors marine
pollution; and directs the national program for deep-seabed minerals
and ocean thermal energy.
In FY 2025, the agency finalized 5 deregulatory actions (RINs 0648-
BN45, 0648-BN64, 0648-BN51, 0648-BN18, and 0648-BN36) as defined under
E.O. 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation'' and
anticipates finalizing approximately 14 more in FY 2026 (RINs 0648-
BL64, 0648-BM54, 0648-BN70, 0648-BN52, 0648-BN90, 0648-BM08, 0648-BN68,
0648-BN55, 0648-BN43, 0648-BI10, 0648-BN60, 0648-BN24, 0648-BN59, and
0648-BN95).
Many of NOAA's rulemakings, of which roughly 13 are expected to be
significant rulemakings, as defined in Executive Order 12866, are
issued pursuant to the following key statutes:
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-
Stevens Act) rulemakings concern the conservation and management of
fishery resources in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (generally 3-200
nautical miles from shore). Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NOAA
manages the nation's fisheries with input from eight regional Fishery
Management Councils (Councils). The Councils are comprised of
representatives from the commercial and recreational fishing sectors,
environmental groups, academia, and Federal and State government. Under
the Act, the Councils prepare fishery management plans (FMPs) and
amendments to FMPs, and they recommend implementing regulations for
each managed fishery. With certain exceptions, rulemakings under the
Magnuson-Stevens Act are usually recommended by the actions of the
Councils. FMPs address a variety of issues, including maximizing
fishing opportunities on healthy stocks, rebuilding overfished stocks,
and addressing gear conflicts. In turn, after considering the Councils'
recommendations in light of the standards and requirements set forth in
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws, NOAA (exercising
delegated authority) makes decisions on whether to issue regulations to
implement the proposed FMPs and FMP amendments. This collaboration with
the Councils gives NMFS the flexibility to incorporate local level
input to develop management strategies appropriate for each region's
unique fisheries, challenges, and opportunities. It also provides for a
robust public process. Throughout the Council process, there is
significant opportunity for public engagement, including participating
on advisory panels, providing testimony at public hearings, and
commenting on Council actions. After considering the Councils'
recommendations in light of the standards and requirements set forth in
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and in other applicable laws, NOAA may issue
regulations to implement the proposed FMPs and FMP amendments. As
itemized in the Unified Agenda, NOAA plans to take several hundred
actions in FY 2026 under Magnuson-Stevens Act authority to achieve
optimum yield for our fisheries.
[[Page 52817]]
Marine Mammal Protection Act
The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA) provides the
authority for the conservation and management of marine mammals under
U.S. jurisdiction. The MMPA expressly prohibits, with certain
exceptions, the intentional take of marine mammals. The MMPA allows,
upon request and subsequent authorization, the incidental take of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity
(e.g., offshore energy-related activities, scientific research) within
a specified geographic region. NMFS authorizes incidental take under
the MMPA if it finds that the taking would be of small numbers, have no
more than a ``negligible impact'' on those marine mammal species or
stock, and would not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
availability of the species or stock for ``subsistence'' uses. NMFS
also initiates rulemakings under the MMPA to establish a management
regime to reduce marine mammal mortalities and injuries as a result of
interactions with fisheries. In addition, the MMPA allows NMFS to
permit the take or import of wild animals for scientific research or
public display or to enhance the survival of a species or stock.
Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) provides for the
conservation of species that are determined to be ``endangered'' or
``threatened,'' and the conservation of the ecosystems on which these
species depend. NMFS and the Department of Interior's Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) jointly administer the provisions of the ESA: NMFS
manages marine and several anadromous species, and FWS manages land and
freshwater species. NMFS rulemaking actions under the ESA are focused
on determining whether any species under its jurisdictional
responsibility is endangered or threatened and whether those species
must be added to the List of Threatened and Endangered Species. NMFS is
also responsible for designating, reviewing and revising critical
habitat for any listed species. One of the agency's priorities under
the ESA is a joint action with FWS to rescind the definition of
``harm'' (0648-BN93). The existing regulatory definition of ``harm,''
which includes habitat modification, runs contrary to the best meaning
of the statutory term ``take.'' This action will adhere to the single,
best meaning of the ESA.
The National Marine Sanctuaries Act
The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) authorizes the Secretary
of Commerce to designate and protect as national marine sanctuaries
areas of the marine environment with special national significance due
to their conservation, recreational, ecological, historical,
scientific, cultural, archeological, educational, or aesthetic
qualities. The primary objective of the NMSA is to protect marine
resources, such as coral reefs, sunken historical vessels, or unique
habitats.
NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), within NOS,
has the responsibility for management of national marine sanctuaries.
Regulations issued pursuant to NMSA describe and define the boundaries
of the designated national marine sanctuaries, and set up a system of
permits to allow the conduct of certain types of activities that would
otherwise not be allowed.
These regulations can, among other things, regulate and restrict
activities that may injure natural resources, including all extractive
and destructive activities, consistent with community-specific needs
and NMSA's purpose to ``facilitate to the extent compatible with the
primary objective of resource protection, all public and private uses
of the resources of these marine areas.'' In FY 2025, NOAA published
three regulatory actions under NMSA.
Coastal Zone Management Act
The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) was passed in 1972 to
preserve, protect, and develop and, where possible, to restore and
enhance the resources of the nation's coastal zone. The CZMA creates a
voluntary state-federal partnership, where coastal states (States in,
or bordering on, the Atlantic, Pacific or Arctic Ocean, the Gulf of
America, Long Island Sound, one or more of the Great Lakes, and Pacific
and Caribbean U.S. territories and commonwealths), may elect to develop
comprehensive programs that meet federal approval standards. Currently,
34 of the 35 eligible entities are implementing a federally approved
coastal management plan approved by NOAA.
Of the numerous regulatory actions that NOAA is planning for this
year and that are included in the Unified Agenda, the Department
describes three below.
NOAA's Regulatory Plan Actions
1. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for
Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat (0648-BN70): This
action responds to the E.O. 14154, titled ``Unleashing American
Energy,'' which directed all departments and agencies to immediately
review agency actions that potentially impose an undue burden on the
identification, development, or use of domestic energy resources, and,
as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, consider suspending,
revising, or rescinding agency actions that conflict with this national
objective. The Department of Interior (DOI) issued Secretarial Order
(SO) 3418 to implement E.O. 14154 and requires that the FWS, in
cooperation with NMFS, take action to suspend, revise, or rescind the
ESA regulations that were revised in 2024. E.O. 14219 also directs all
departments and agencies to review and rescind unlawful regulations
that are ``based on anything other than the best reading of the
underlying statutory authority.''
2. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Interagency
Cooperation (0648-BN79): This action responds to the E.O. 14154, titled
``Unleashing American Energy,'' which directed the removal of
impediments imposed on the development and use of the country's energy
and natural resources by the previous administration's regulations, and
the Department of Interior (DOI) Secretarial Order (SO) 3418, to
implement E.O. 14154 which specifically requires that the FWS, in
cooperation with the NMFS take action to suspend, revise, or rescind
the ESA regulations that were revised in 2024. E.O. 14219 also directs
all departments and agencies to review and rescind unlawful regulations
that are ``based on anything other than the best reading of the
underlying statutory authority.''
3. Deep Seabed Mining: Revisions to Regulations for Exploration
License and Commercial Recovery Permit Applications (0648-BN96): This
action is to revise NOAA's regulations (15 CFR parts 970 and 971) that
implement the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act, 30 U.S.C. 1401,
et. seq., (DSHMRA or the Act). DSHMRA is an important part of the
President's directive, E.O. 14285, ``Unleashing America's Offshore
Critical Minerals and Resources,'' to establish policies to advance
U.S. leadership in seabed mineral exploration and responsible
commercial recovery. Currently, the DSHMRA regulations require a
sequential process. Applicants must first obtain an exploration license
from NOAA before they can submit a commercial recovery permit
application. When NOAA promulgated the DSHMRA regulations in the 1980s,
this sequential approach was appropriate due to the nascent stage of
deep seabed mining technology and
[[Page 52818]]
the data needed for a commercial recovery application. However, at that
time NOAA reserved a section of the regulations for a consolidated
review once the industry matured. See 51 FR 26794, 26796 (July 25,
1986).
The United States Patent and Trademark Office
The USPTO's mission is to foster innovation, competitiveness, and
economic growth, domestically and abroad, by delivering high quality
and timely examination of patent and trademark applications, guiding
domestic and international intellectual property policy, and delivering
intellectual property information and education worldwide.
Major Programs and Activities
The USPTO is responsible for granting U.S. patents and registering
trademarks. This system of secured property rights, which has its
foundation in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the Constitution
(providing that Congress shall have the power to ``promote the Progress
of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors
and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries'') has enabled American industry to flourish. New products
have been invented, new uses for old ones discovered, and employment
opportunities created for millions of Americans. The continued demand
for patents and trademarks underscores the importance to the U.S.
economy of effective mechanisms to protect new ideas and investments in
innovation, as well as the ingenuity of American inventors and
entrepreneurs.
In addition to granting patents and trademarks, the USPTO advises
the President of the United States, the Secretary of Commerce, and U.S.
government agencies on intellectual property (IP) policy, protection,
and enforcement; and promotes strong and effective IP protection around
the world. The USPTO furthers effective IP protection for U.S.
innovators and entrepreneurs worldwide by working with other agencies
to secure strong IP provisions in free trade and other international
agreements. It also provides training, education, and capacity building
programs designed to foster respect for IP and encourage the
development of strong IP enforcement regimes by U.S. trading partners.
Of the rulemaking actions that the USPTO is planning for this year
and that are included in the Unified Agenda, outlined below is the
USPTO's most important upcoming regulatory action for this year.
The USPTO's Regulatory Plan Actions
1. Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees (0651-AD88): This final rule
would set and adjust Patent fee amounts to provide the Office with
sufficient aggregate revenue to recover its aggregate cost of
operations thereby maintaining a sustainable funding model.
Bureau of Industry and Security
BIS advances U.S. national security, foreign policy, and economic
objectives by administering and enforcing export controls, conducting
Section 232 investigations, and performing various other functions to
strengthen national security and the defense industrial base.
Major Programs and Activities
BIS administers five sets of regulations.
The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) regulate
exports and reexports to protect national security, foreign policy, and
short supply interests. The EAR includes the Commerce Control List
(CCL), which describes commodities, software, and technology that are
subject to licensing requirements for specific reasons for control. The
EAR also regulates U.S. persons' participation in certain boycotts
administered by foreign governments.
The National Security Industrial Base Regulations (NSIBR)
provide for prioritization of certain contracts and allocations of
resources to promote the national defense, require reporting of foreign
government-imposed offsets in defense sales, provide for surveys to
assess the capabilities of the industrial base to support the national
defense, and address the effect of imports on the defense industrial
base.
The Chemical Weapons Convention Regulations implement
declaration, reporting, and on-site inspection requirements in the
private sector necessary to meet United States treaty obligations under
the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty.
The Additional Protocol Regulations implement similar
requirements for certain civil nuclear and nuclear-related items with
respect to an agreement between the United States and the International
Atomic Energy Agency.
The ICTS Transaction Review Regulations (ICTS-R) are
administered by the Office of Information and Communications Technology
and Services (OICTS) and implement the authority to prohibit or
mitigate any acquisition, importation, transfer, installation, dealing
in, or use of any information or communications technology and service
(ICTS) that has been designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by
persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or
direction of foreign adversaries that pose undue or unacceptable risk
to the U.S. national security or U.S. persons' safety. The BIS ICTS
program reviews and addresses ICTS transactions, including classes of
transactions, that pose undue or unacceptable risks in the United
States, which involves vetting and prioritizing referrals, compiling
intelligence, and other information, conducting investigations into
transactions, performing risk-based analysis, and recommending
mitigation measures and/or prohibitions to the Secretary of Commerce.
BIS also has an enforcement component with nine offices covering
the United States, as well as BIS export control officers stationed at
several U.S. embassies and consulates abroad. BIS works with other U.S.
Government agencies to promote coordinated U.S. Government efforts in
export controls and other programs. BIS participates in U.S. Government
efforts to strengthen multilateral export control regimes and promote
effective export controls through cooperation with other governments.
In FY 2026, BIS plans to publish a number of proposed and final
rules amending the EAR. These rules will cover a range of issues,
including EAR controls for artificial intelligence and Unmanned
Aircraft Systems. BIS also continues to identify and propose controls
for emerging and foundational technologies. BIS also plans to publish
proposed and final rules amending the NSIBR, including establishing a
Copper Tariffs Inclusions Process for including additional derivative
copper articles within the scope of the ad valorem duties as authorized
by the President under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962,
as amended (Section 232).
Outlined below are BIS's most important upcoming regulatory actions
for this year.
BIS's Regulatory Plan Actions
1. Implementation of the AI Action Plan Through Export Controls
(RIN 0694-AJ90): This interim final rule (IFR) will formally rescind
the ``Framework for Artificial Intelligence Diffusion'' rule issued by
the Biden Administration in January 2025--which BIS has already stopped
enforcing. The IFR will also establish a new, streamlined framework to
enable the secure spread of U.S. technology around the globe consistent
[[Page 52819]]
with U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.
2. Copper Tariffs Inclusions Process (RIN 0694-AK36): Establishes a
process for including additional derivative copper articles within the
scope of the ad valorem duties authorized by the President under
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (Section
232).
3. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (0694-AJ72): This rule will reduce
export controls on drones exported to certain U.S. partners and allies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOC--National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS; REGULATIONS FOR
LISTING SPECIES AND DESIGNATING CRITICAL HABITAT
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14219
CFR Citation: 50 CFR 424
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This is a joint rulemaking with the Department of the
Interior to rescind or revise regulations in 50 CFR part 424 that were
promulgated in 2024 regarding classification of species and the
designation of critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act.
Statement of Need: This action responds to the Executive Order
(E.O.) 14154, titled ``Unleashing American Energy,'' which directed all
departments and agencies to immediately review agency actions that
potentially impose an undue burden on the identification, development,
or use of domestic energy resources, and, as appropriate and consistent
with applicable law, consider suspending, revising, or rescinding
agency actions that conflict with this national objective. The
Department of Interior (DOI) issued Secretarial Order (SO) 3418 to
implement E.O. 14154 and requires that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), in cooperation with National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), take action to suspend, revise, or rescind the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) regulations that were revised in 2024. E.O. 14219
also directs all departments and agencies to review and rescind
unlawful regulations that are ``based on anything other than the best
reading of the underlying statutory authority.''
Summary of Legal Basis: This action is authorized under 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.
Alternatives: This is a joint rulemaking by NMFS and USFWS
(collectively referred to as the Services) to amend portions of the
regulations in 50 CFR 424 that implement section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. A final rule revising these same
regulations in 50 CFR 424 was published on April 5, 2024, and became
effective on May 6, 2024 (89 FR 24300). Based on a review of the 2024
rule in response to E.O. 14154, E.O. 14219, and DOI Secretarial Order
3418, the Services are proposing to revise the regulations that were
addressed in the 2024 final rule. The regulations proposed in this rule
would provide criteria or otherwise clarify the processes by which the
Services will interpret and implement various statutory requirements
set forth in section 4 of the Act. Prior to developing and issuing a
final rule, the Services will review and consider public comments
received.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This proposed rule would revise and
clarify requirements for the Services in classifying species and
designating critical habitat under the ESA. The proposed regulations
would not expand the reach of species protections or designations of
critical habitat. NMFS and FWS are the only entities that would be
directly affected by this rule, because they are the only entities that
list species or designate critical habitat. No external entities,
including any small businesses, small organizations, or small
governments, will experience any direct economic impacts from this
proposed rule. Anticipated benefits of this regulatory revisions
include increased clarity in implementing section 4 of the ESA.
Risks: This action is expected to receive a significant amount of
public comment from a diverse set of interested parties. The 2024 rule
is also subject to ongoing litigation.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/21/25 90 FR 52607
NPRM Comment Period End............. 12/22/25 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Kim Damon-Randall, Director, Office of Protected
Resources, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: 301 427-8400
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0648-BN70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOC--NOAA Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS; INTERAGENCY
COOPERATION REGULATIONS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Not subject to, not significant
Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14219
CFR Citation: 50 CFR 402
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (collectively referred to as the Services) propose to
amend portions of our regulations that implement section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A final rule revising the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Interagency Cooperation Regulations at 50
CFR 402 was published on April 5, 2024, and became effective on May 6,
2024. Pursuant to a review of this rule under E.O. 14154 and DOI
Secretarial Order 3418, the Services are proposing to revise provisions
of the 2024 final rule (89 FR 24268). The resulting rulemaking action
will clarify, interpret, and implement portions of section 7 of the ESA
concerning interagency cooperation procedures. This rulemaking would
revise existing procedures for federal agencies, including the Services
under section 7 of the ESA. Federal agencies would be the only entities
directly affected by this rulemaking.
Statement of Need: This action responds to the Executive Order
(E.O.) 14154, titled ``Unleashing American Energy,'' which directed the
removal of impediments imposed on the development and use of the
country's energy and natural resources by the previous administration's
regulations, and the Department of Interior (DOI) Secretarial Order
(SO) 3418, to implement E.O. 14154 which specifically requires that the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), in cooperation with the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) take action to suspend,
revise, or rescind the ESA regulations that were revised in 2024. E.O.
14219 also directs all departments and agencies to review and rescind
unlawful regulations that are ``based on anything other than the best
reading of the underlying statutory authority.''
[[Page 52820]]
Summary of Legal Basis: This action is authorized under 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.
Alternatives: This is a joint rulemaking by NMFS and USFWS
(collectively referred to as the Services) to amend portions of our
regulations that implement section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. A final rule revising the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) Interagency Cooperation Regulations at 50 CFR 402 was published
on April 5, 2024, and became effective on May 6, 2024. Pursuant to a
review of this rule under E.O.14154, E.O. 14219, and DOI Secretarial
Order 3418, the Services are proposing to revise provisions of the 2024
final rule (89 FR 24268). The resulting rulemaking action will revise,
interpret, and implement portions of section 7 of the ESA concerning
interagency cooperation procedures. This rulemaking would revise
existing procedures for Federal agencies, including the Services under
section 7 of the ESA. Prior to developing and issuing a final rule, the
Services will review and consider public comments received.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The rulemaking revises existing
requirements for Federal agencies, including the Services, under
section 7 of the ESA. Federal agencies are the only entities affected
by this rule. We do not anticipate significant costs associated with
the rule. This rule is intended to revise the standards with which we
evaluate proposed Federal agency actions pursuant to section 7 of the
ESA.
Risks: This action addresses the ESA Interagency Cooperation
provisions in the Services' joint ESA implementing regulations. This
action will receive a significant level of scrutiny and attention by a
diverse set of constituents. The 2024 rule is subject to ongoing
litigation and this rulemaking may influence that process. Overall, the
proposed changes will reduce the risk to ESA-listed species and
designated critical habitat associated with ensuring Federal action
agencies do not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat and continue to
provide for the conservation of ESA resources.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/21/25 90 FR 52600
NPRM Comment Period End............. 12/22/25 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Kim Damon-Randall, Director, Office of Protected
Resources, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: 301 427-8400
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0648-BN79
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOC--Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. SETTING AND ADJUSTING PATENT FEES
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 112-29
CFR Citation: 37 CFR 1; 37 CFR 41; 37 CFR 42
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or
Office) takes this action to set and adjust Patent fee amounts to
provide the Office with sufficient aggregate revenue to recover its
aggregate cost of operations thereby maintaining a sustainable funding
model.
Statement of Need: The purpose of this rule is to set and adjust
patent fee amounts to modernize the patent fee structure. To this end,
this rule may create new or change existing fees for patent services.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA),
enacted in 2011, provided USPTO with the authority to set and adjust
its fees for patent and trademark services. Since then, USPTO has
conducted an internal biennial fee review, in which it undertook
internal consideration of the current fee structure, and considered
ways that the structure might be improved, including rulemaking
pursuant to the USPTO's fee setting authority. This fee review process
involves public outreach, including, as required by the Act, public
hearings held by the USPTO's Public Advisory Committees, as well as
public comment and other outreach to the user community and public in
general.
Alternatives: This rulemaking action is currently in development
and alternatives have not yet been determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This rulemaking action is currently
in development and aggregate annual economic impacts have not yet been
determined.
Risks: This rulemaking action is currently in development and risks
have not yet been determined.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/00/26 .......................
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Action Effective.............. 05/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Organizations
Government Levels Affected: None
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Agency Contact: C. Brett Lockard, Director, Forecasting and
Analysis, Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Phone: 571 272-0928
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0651-AD88
BILLING CODE 3410-12-P
Department Of War
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
Background
The Department of War (DoW) is the largest Federal department,
employing over 2.8 million people (including 1,326,211 active duty
military personnel; 767,774 Reserve/Guard; and 770,132 Appropriated
Funds civilian positions) with operations all over the world. DoW's
enduring mission is to provide combat-credible military forces needed
to protect the security of our nation. To guide this mission, the
Secretary of War has outlined three top priorities, which are to revive
the warrior ethos, rebuild our military, and reestablish deterrence.
Because of this expansive and diversified mission and reach, DoW
regulations can address a broad range of matters and have an impact on
varied members of the public, as well as other Federal agencies.
Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (September 30, 1993) and Executive Order 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review'' (January 18, 2011), the DoW issues
this Regulatory Plan and Agenda to provide notice about the DoW's
regulatory and
[[Page 52821]]
deregulatory actions. Consistent with current Administration policy,
the Department places primary emphasis on deregulatory actions and
regulatory restraint. Regulatory actions are advanced only where
required by statue, necessary to implement higher-level policy
direction, or essential to national security and mission execution.
Deregulatory Policy and Compliance
In accordance with Executive Order 14192, the DoW evaluates all
existing and proposed regulatory actions to identify opportunities to
reduce regulatory burden, eliminate unnecessary or duplicative
requirements, and achieve measurable cost savings.
The Department requires Components to demonstrate Executive Order
14192 compliance for any regulatory action proposed for inclusion in
the Unified Agenda. This includes identification of deregulatory
actions or offsets, documentation of anticipated cost savings or burden
reductions, and confirmation that the action does not exceed
Administration-wide cost caps. Actions that do not meet Executive Order
14192 criteria are not prioritized and may be deferred or withdrawn.
Deregulatory Governance and Oversight
The DoW maintains centralized oversight of deregulatory actions
through its regulatory governance framework. Proposed actions are
reviewed for Executive order compliance, cost impacts, and alignment
with the Secretary's priorities prior to submission to the Office of
Management and Budget. This oversight ensures consistent application of
deregulatory policy across all Components and supports defensible,
date-driven decision-making.
Retrospective Review of Existing Regulations Under Executive Order
14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's
``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory Initiative''
(February 19, 2025), the Department conducts coordinated, Department-
wide reviews to identify regulations suitable for repeal,
consolidation, or modification. These reviews focus on reducing
compliance burden, improving clarity, and enhancing operational
flexibility while maintaining statutory and national security
requirements.
Pursuant to section 6 of Executive Order 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review'' (January 18, 2011), the Department
continues to review existing regulations with a goal to eliminate
outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective regulations; account for the
currency and legitimacy of each of the Department's regulations; and
ultimately reduce regulatory burden and costs.
Public Participation and Community Outreach
As the DoW develops our regulations, we seek to increase public
participation and community outreach to be better informed of and
address issues from members of the public affected by our regulations.
The following provides examples of our specific outreach and public
participation efforts. The Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of
War for Public Affairs/Community Engagement Directorate, via its
Opinion Leader Engagement portfolio, provides public affairs support to
leaders throughout the Office of the Secretary of War (OSW) who are
responsible for regulatory activities. This support includes convening
roundtables and similar engagements for national stakeholder
organizations to meet with OSW leaders to discuss and share information
about DoW policies and programs that are governed by Federal
regulations. For example, regular engagements with leaders of national
military and veteran supporting organizations include topics such as
military benefits, housing, healthcare, compensation, and sexual
assault prevention and response, which are governed by law and Federal
regulation. These meetings allow the regulating authorities in OSW an
opportunity to dialogue with national organizations with a stakeholder
interest in the impact and effect of DoW regulations.
DoW engages with the public on procurement-related regulations that
will affect the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) in several ways. In addition to publishing abstracts of and
anticipated publication dates for upcoming rules in the biannual
Unified Agenda, members of the public can track the progress of any
open and pending DFARS regulation via the Open DFARS Cases Report,
which is publicly available at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/case_status.html. The report is updated on a weekly basis and includes
the following information: a case number, title, DFARS parts
anticipated to be impacted by the regulation, a summary of the basis
for the regulation, and the status of the regulation. Members of the
public who are interested in a particular DFARS case are encouraged to
monitor the Open DFARS Cases Report to track the progress of a
particular regulation through the rulemaking process.
DoW also meets with industry associations on a quarterly basis.
Industry associations that regularly participate in these quarterly
discussions include the Council of Defense and Space Industry
Associations, the Professional Services Council, the Aerospace
Industries Association, and the National Defense Industrial
Association. During these meetings, DoW often provides updates on open
DFARS cases.
While developing certain DFARS regulations, DoW may seek input from
the public by publishing in the Federal Register an early engagement
opportunity, an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR), or a
general request for information (RFI). Notices for early engagement
opportunities usually pertain to a recent law, such as the annual
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and request input on
implementation of the law in the DFARS. ANPRs and RFIs may include a
summary of the overarching policy objectives of the regulation and a
list of questions seeking input that will help DoW develop a proposed
regulation. Information on whether DoW plans to publish an ANPR or RFI
is included in both the Open DFARS Cases Report and the biannual
Unified Agenda.
Occasionally, while an ANPR, proposed DFARS regulation, or interim
DFARS regulation is out for public comment, DoW may hold a public
meeting to allow the public to provide feedback to the Government in an
open forum. Information about whether DoW plans on holding a public
meeting for an ANPR or a regulation is normally included in the ANPR,
proposed regulation, or interim regulation when it is published for
public comment. Presentations made during the public meeting are made
publicly available.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) occasionally utilizes
listening sessions prior to proposing a rule to obtain public input
that is then used to inform the contents of the proposed rule.
Additionally, Federal Register notices, website postings, press
releases, and social media releases are used to notify the public of
the dates and times for the listening sessions. When a Federal Register
notice is used to provide notification of the listening sessions, the
use of an open docket is employed for the submission of public comments
in addition to the receipt of public comments during the listening
sessions.
Also, the USACE may publish an ANPR to engage the public on the
development of a proposed rule. Federal Register notices, website
postings, press releases, and social media releases are used to notify
the
[[Page 52822]]
public of the publication of the proposed rule and how they can provide
comments and engage in the rulemaking effort.
Finally, the USACE has meetings with industry associations, non-
Government Organizations (NGOs), or similar stakeholders to provide
updates on proposed policies or actions to solicit informal feedback
that is used to help inform the path forward for the development of a
proposed rule.
DoW Priority Deregulatory Actions
The Federal regulatory and deregulatory actions identified in this
Regulatory Plan embody the core of DoW's regulatory priorities for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 and help support the President's regulatory
priorities, the Secretary of War's top priorities. The DoW Deregulatory
prioritization is focused on initiatives that:
Restore the warrior ethos.
Rebuild our military readiness and capability;
Reestablish credible deterrence; and.
Strengthen national security, including safeguarding
Federal information and information technology systems.
Rules That Promote the Country's Economic Resilience
Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses. RIN 0790-AK52
This final rule amends the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)
acquisition regulations in title 48 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 5452 by removing an unnecessary clause. The 5452.249 Allocation
clause became effective on May 4, 1995, and was last revised on May 17,
2001 (66 FR 27474). The rule permits fuel contractors to supply less
than the full amount of fuel contracted for by the government, without
being terminated for default, during periods of exceptional fuel
shortages, provided that the fuel shortage is beyond the control and
without the fault or negligence of the contractor. The DLA has
determined there are existing Federal Acquisition Regulations and DFARS
clauses on excusable delay.
Reissuance and Modification of Nationwide Permits. 0710-AB56
This proposed rule would begin the process of reissuing the 57
existing nationwide permits before they expire on March 14, 2026. Under
the Clean Water Act and the Corps' regulations, nationwide permits can
be issued for a period of no more than five years. If the nationwide
permits are not reissued before they expire, they automatically become
null and void and project proponents who want to conduct activities
regulated under section 404 of the Clean Water Act or section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act would need to obtain individual permits from the
Corps for those activities. The nationwide permits are a type of
general permit issued by the Chief of Engineers and are designed to
regulate with little, if any, delay or paperwork categories of
activities having no more than minimal individual and cumulative
adverse environmental impacts. The nationwide permits provide
environmental protection by incentivizing project proponents to reduce
impacts to waters and wetlands to obtain the required Corps
authorization in less time than it would take to be granted individual
permits for regulated activities.
Updated Definition of ``Waters of the United States''. 0710-AB59
The Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army
are undertaking a rulemaking to revise key topics of the waters of the
United States definition in light of the Supreme Court's decision in
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023),
including continuous surface connection, relatively permanent, and
jurisdictional versus non-jurisdictional ditches. These revisions focus
on clarity, simplicity, and improvements that will stand the test of
time. This action will streamline implementation of Clean Water Act
programs by aligning the definition of waters of the United States with
Sackett, which significantly narrowed the definition under the Clean
Water Act.
Health Care Priorities
TRICARE Removal of Temporary Regulation Change and Freestanding End-
Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Facilities as TRICARE-Authorized
Institutional Providers and Reimbursement Methods for ESRD Facilities.
RIN 0720-AB85
This rule finalizes an interim final rule that amended 32 CFR part
199 by: (1) adding freestanding End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD)
facilities as a category of TRICARE-authorized institutional provider
and modifying the reimbursement for such facilities; and (2)
temporarily adopting Medicare's New COVID-19 Treatments Add-on Payment
(NCTAP). The ESRD provisions are made permanent, and the temporary
NCTAP provisions which expired at the end of the public health
emergency are terminated.
Medical Billing for Healthcare Services Provided by Department of War
Medical Treatment Facilities to Civilian Non-Beneficiaries. RIN 0720-
AB87
This final rule is aimed at preventing severe financial harm to
civilians who are not covered beneficiaries of the Military Health
System, and who receive healthcare services at military medical
treatment facilities. The proposed rule implements the requirement to
apply a sliding fee and/or a catastrophic waiver to medical invoices of
non-beneficiaries; to accept payments from health insurers as full
payment; to not balance bill non-beneficiaries except for copays,
coinsurance, deductibles, nominal fees, and non-covered services; and
grants the Director of Defense Health Agency (DHA) discretionary
authority to waive medical debts of non-beneficiaries when the
healthcare provided enhances the knowledge, skills, and abilities of
healthcare providers, as determined by the Director of DHA.
Rules That Support National Security Efforts
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Program. RIN 0790-
AM01
With this amendment, DoW amends the CMMC Program to comply with
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special
Publication (SP) 800-171 Revision 2, to a requirement to comply with
NIST SP 800-171 Revision 3. As described by NIST, the significant
changes between these two documents include added specificity in the
security requirements and introduction of organization-defined
parameters (ODPs) in select security requirementsIn addition to
revising documents incorporated by reference in this rule, this
amendment adds administrative edits and clarifying content in certain
areas.
National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM); Second
Amendment. RIN 0790-AL52
The DoW is amending the NISPOM based on public comments received on
a final rule published on December 21, 2020. The amendments address
implementation guidance and costs for the Security Executive Agent
Directive (SEAD) 3; clarifications on procedures for the protection and
reproduction of classified information and controlled unclassified
information (CUI); National Interest Determination (NID) requirements
for cleared contractors operating under a Special Security Agreement
for Foreign Ownership, Control or Influence; and eligibility
[[Page 52823]]
determinations for personnel security clearance processes and
requirements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOW--Office of the Secretary (OS) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301
CFR Citation: 48 CFR 5452
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This final rule amends the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)
acquisition regulations in 48 CFR part 5452 by removing an unnecessary
clause. The 5452.249 Allocation clause became effective on May 4, 1995,
and was last revised on May 17, 2001 (66 FR 27474). The rule permits
fuel contractors to supply less than the full amount of fuel contracted
for by the government, without being terminated for default, during
periods of exceptional fuel shortages, provided that the fuel shortage
is beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the
contractor. The DLA has determined there are existing Federal
Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplements (DFARS) clauses on excusable delay.
Statement of Need: This final rule amends the DLA acquisition
regulations in this part by removing an unnecessary clause. The
Allocation clause was effective on May 4, 1995, and permitted fuel
contractors to supply less than the full amount of fuel contracted for
by the government, without being terminated for default, during periods
of exceptional fuel shortages, provided that the fuel shortage is
beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the
contractor. DLA has determined that this clause is not necessary, since
there are means to address the circumstance described under existing
Federal Acquisition Regulation and Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement clauses on excusable delay. Therefore, the clause
may be removed.
Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301
Alternatives: None
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The rule removes a clause that is no
longer in use. Therefore, there is no impact on contractors or
offerors. This rule removal will not create any costs.
Risks: None
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Tracie Swann,
Department of War, Office of the Secretary, 8752 John J Kingman Rd,
Ste 2545, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060.
Phone: 571 767-1124
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0790-AK52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOW--OS Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL (NISPOM);
SECOND AMENDMENT
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 32 CFR 2004; E.O. 10865; E.O. 12333; E.O. 12829;
E.O. 12866; E.O. 12968; E.O. 13526; E.O. 13563; E.O. 13587; E.O. 13691;
Pub. L 108-458; 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. ch. 44; 50 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.
CFR Citation: 32 CFR 117
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Defense is amending the National
Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM) based on public
comments received on a final rule published on December 21, 2020. The
amendments address implementation guidance and costs for the Security
Executive Agent Directive (SEAD) 3, clarifications on procedures for
the protection and reproduction of classified information, controlled
unclassified information (CUI), National Interest Determination (NID)
requirements for cleared contractors operating under a Special Security
Agreement for Foreign Ownership, Control or Influence, and eligibility
determinations for personnel security clearance processes and
requirements.
Statement of Need: With this amendment, DoD amends the National
Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM) to address
implementation guidance and costs for the Security Executive Agent
Directive (SEAD) 2, clarifications on procedures for the protection and
reproduction of classified information.
Summary of Legal Basis: 32 CFR 2004; E.O. 10865; E.O. 12333 ; E.O.
12829 ; E.O. 12866 ; E.O. 12968 ; E.O. 13526 ; E.O. 13563 ; E.O. 13587
; E.O. 13691 ; Pub. L 108-458 ; 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. ; 50 U.S.C. ch.
44 ; 50 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Alternatives: None
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DCSA began the cost analysis for the
baseline costs for fiscal year (FY) 2017 by randomly selecting active
NISP contractor facilities that have existing DoD approval for
classified storage at their own physical locations and having those
facilities submit security costs. The randomly selected contractor
facilities also have an active facility security clearance and a
permanent Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code. In addition to
the randomly selected cleared facilities having approved classified
storage, DCSA categorizes these contractor facilities for the survey
based on the size, scope, and complexity of each contractor's security
program. The general methodology used to estimate security costs
incurred by contractor cleared facilities with approved storage of
classified information is based on the costs incurred by respondent
contractors for the protection of classified information. The
methodology captures the most significant portion of industry's costs,
which is labor. Security labor in the survey is defined as personnel
whose positions exist to support operations and staff in the
implementation of government security requirements for the protection
of classified information. Guards who are required as supplemental
controls are included in security labor. The respondent contractors are
requested to compile their cleared facility's current annual security
labor cost in burdened, current year dollars with the most recent data
being from the 2017 survey. The labor cost, when identified as an
estimated percent of each contractor's total security costs, enables
the respondent contractors to calculate their total security costs.
Information collected is compiled to create an aggregate estimated cost
of NISP classification-related activities.
Risks: None
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/13/23 88 FR 86288
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/12/24 .......................
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Allyson C. Renzella,
Industrial Security Specialist, Department of War, Office of the
Secretary, 1400 Defense Pentagon, Arlington, VA 20130.
Phone: 703 697-9209
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN:
Related to 0790-AK85, Related to 0790-AL41
[[Page 52824]]
RIN: 0790-AL52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOW--OS Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. CYBERSECURITY MATURITY MODEL CERTIFICATION (CMMC) PROGRAM
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; Pub. L. 116-92, sec. 1648; 133 Stat.
1198
CFR Citation: 32 CFR 170
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This amendment defines a deadline and period for
transition from the requirement to comply with NIST SP 800-171 Revision
2, to a requirement to comply with NIST SP 800-171 Revision 3.
Significant changes between these two documents include added
specificity in the security requirements and introduction of
organization-defined parameters (ODP) in select security requirements.
In addition to revising the NIST documents that are incorporated by
reference in 32 CFR part 170, this amendment adds administrative edits
and clarifying content in multiple areas as necessary to effect the
transition.
Statement of Need: With this amendment, DoD amends the
Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Program to define a
period for transition from the requirement to comply with NIST SP 800-
171 Revision 2, to a requirement to comply with NIST SP 800-171
Revision 3. As described by NIST, the significant changes between these
two documents include added specificity in the security requirements
and introduction of organization-defined parameters (ODPs) in select
security requirements. In addition to revising documents incorporated
by reference in this rule, this amendment adds administrative edits and
clarifying content in multiple areas.
Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301; Sec. 1648, Pub. L. 116-92,
133 Stat. 1198.
Alternatives: None
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: In addition to the change from NIST
SP 800-171 revision 2 to revision 3, which impacted CMMC Level 2 and
Level 3 assessment objectives, this rule amendment is based on a more
current estimate of the size of the Defense Industrial Base. Overall,
we estimate approximately 20% fewer total companies will be impacted by
32 CFR part 170.
Risks: None
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions,
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Carrie Cardwell, Acquisition Analyst, Office of the
DoD CIO, Department of War, Office of the Secretary, 4800 Mark Center
Drive, Suite 11G14, Alexandria, VA 22350
Phone: 571 372-4410
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0790-AM01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOW--U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) PROPOSED RULE STAGE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. UPDATED DEFINITION OF ``WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES''
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1344 ; 33 U.S.C. 1251
CFR Citation: 33 CFR 328
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EPA and the Department of the Army are undertaking a
rulemaking to revise key topics of the waters of the United States
definition in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Sackett v.
Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), including
continuous surface connection, relatively permanent, and jurisdictional
versus non-jurisdictional ditches. These revisions focus on clarity,
simplicity, and improvements that will stand the test of time.
Statement of Need: The Environmental Protection Agency and the
Department of the Army are undertaking a rulemaking to revise key
topics of the waters of the United States definition in light of the
Supreme Court's decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency,
598 U.S. 651 (2023), including continuous surface connection,
relatively permanent, and jurisdictional versus non-jurisdictional
ditches. These revisions focus on clarity, simplicity, and improvements
that will stand the test of time. This action will streamline
implementation of Clean Water Act programs by aligning the definition
of waters of the United States with Sackett, which significantly
narrowed the definition under the Clean Water Act.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.)
Alternatives: The EPA and the Army are evaluating alternatives for
this action.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA and Army are evaluating the
anticipated costs and benefits of this action.
Risks: The EPA and the Army are evaluating the risks associated
with this action.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Elliott Carman, Department of War, 108 Army
Pentagon, Room 3E419, Washington, DC 20310-0108,
Phone: 703 300-2899
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0710-AB59
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOW--Office of Assistant Secretary for
Health Affairs (DODOASHA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. TRICARE REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY REGULATION CHANGE AND FREESTANDING
END-STAGE RENAL DISEASE (ESRD) FACILITIES AS TRICARE-AUTHORIZED
INSTITUTIONAL PROVIDERS AND REIMBURSEMENT METHODS FOR ESRD FACILITIES
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 U.S.C. ch. 55
CFR Citation: 32 CFR 199
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule finalizes the provisions of the interim final
rule (88 FR 1992) that added freestanding End-Stage Renal Disease
(ESRD) facilities as TRICARE-authorized institutional providers and
established reimbursement methodologies for such facilities. These ESRD
provisions are adopted as final without substantive change. This rule
also removed expired regulatory text related to Medicare's New COVID-19
Treatments Add-on Payment (NCTAP), which was implemented on a temporary
basis in the interim final rule and expired at the
[[Page 52825]]
conclusion of the COVID 19 public health emergency. This removal is
administrative in nature and ensures the regulations reflects current
policy.
Statement of Need: The modifications to paragraphs 199.6(b)(4)(xxi)
and 199.14(a)(1)(iii)(E)(7) establish freestanding End Stage Renal
Disease (ESRD) facilities as a category of TRICARE-authorized
institutional provider and modify TRICARE reimbursement of freestanding
ESRD facilities. These provisions will improve TRICARE beneficiary
access to medically necessary dialysis and other ESRD services and
supplies. These provisions also support the requirement that TRICARE
reimburse like Medicare, and will help ensure access to dialysis care
in freestanding ESRD facilities rather than hospital outpatient
departments.
Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is issued under 10 U.S.C.
1073(a)(2) giving authority and responsibility to the Secretary of
Defense to administer the TRICARE program.
Alternatives:
(1) No action
(2) The second alternative the Department of Defense considered was
to adopt Medicare's ESRD reimbursement methodology, the ESRD
Prospective Payment System (PPS), in total. While this would have been
completely consistent with the statutory provision to pay institutional
providers using the same reimbursement methodology as Medicare, this
alternative is not preferred because there is still a relatively low
volume of TRICARE beneficiaries who receive dialysis services from
freestanding ESRDs and who are not enrolled to Medicare. The cost of
implementing the full ESRD PPS system is estimated to be at least
$600,000.00 in start-up costs, plus ongoing administrative costs, to
ensure all adjustments were made for each claim, plus additional
special pricing software or algorithms. In contrast, we estimate that
the option provided in this IFR can be implemented relatively quickly
(within six months of publication), and for approximately $300,000.00
in start-up costs with lower ongoing administrative costs. Further, the
flat rate will provide the ESRD facilities with predictability with
regard to TRICARE payments and will reduce uncertainty and specialized
coding or case-mix documentation requirements that may be required by
the ESRD PPS, reducing the administrative burden on the provider.
To summarize, adopting the ESRD PPS was considered, but was deemed
impracticable and overly burdensome to both the Government and
providers due to the relative low volume of claims that will be priced
and paid by TRICARE as primary under this system.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The ESRD provisions are expected to
result in $5M in incremental annual health care costs.
Risks: None. This rule will promote the efficient functioning of
the economy and markets by modifying the regulations to better
reimburse health care providers for particularly as strain on the
health care economy is being felt due to reductions in higher cost
elective procedures.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 01/12/23 88 FR 1992
Interim Final Rule Effective........ 01/12/23 .......................
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 03/13/23 .......................
End.
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Duncan Moskowitz, Health Care Program Specialist
(Reimbursement), Health Plan Design Division, TRICARE Health Plan,
Department of War, Office of Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs,
16401 E Centretech Pkwy, Aurora, CO 80011-9066.
Phone: 303 676-3582
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0720-AB85
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
I. Introduction
The U.S. Department of Education (Department) provides financial
assistance pertaining to education and related services at all levels
to a wide range of stakeholders and individuals, including State
educational and other agencies, local school districts, providers of
early learning programs, elementary and secondary schools, institutions
of higher education, career and technical schools, students, and
families.
The Department also vigorously monitors and enforces the
implementation of Federal civil rights laws in educational programs and
activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the
Department. The Department's regulatory priorities aim to return
education to the states by promoting as much choice, freedom, and
flexibility as possible while ensuring students learn in an environment
that promotes educational excellence, not divisive ideologies.
The Department is focused on removing regulatory barriers that
impede competition, individual initiative, innovation, and economic
growth. This regulatory agenda establishes the Department's regulatory
and deregulatory priorities.
II. Public Participation
We invite the public to submit comments on all proposed regulations
through the internet or by regular mail. We also note that the Higher
Education Act of 1965 requires the Department to use the negotiated
rulemaking process for a majority of its higher education rulemakings,
which is a process that necessitates public participation from a broad
range of stakeholders. Under negotiated rulemaking, the Department
seeks and considers initial input through public hearings and written
comments when it announces intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking
committee and requests nominations from the public for individual
negotiators who represent key stakeholder constituencies for the issues
to be negotiated to serve on the committee before a committee is
established.
To facilitate the public's involvement, we participate in the
Federal Docket Management System (FDMS), an electronic single
Government-wide access point (www.regulations.gov) that enables the
public to submit comments on different types of Federal regulatory
documents as well as read and respond to comments submitted by other
members of the public during the public comment period. This system
provides the public with the opportunity to submit comments
electronically on any notice of proposed rulemaking or interim final
regulations open for comment as well as read and print any supporting
regulatory documents.
III. Regulatory Priorities
This Administration's goals are to return power over education to
families instead of bureaucracies, return education authority to the
states, continue provision of services, programs and benefits on which
Americans rely, and ensure that Federal funds support students and
families instead of extreme ideologies that divide Americans by race
and deny that sex is a binary, immutable human characteristic.
The Department expects to initiate several deregulatory actions and
continue rescinding burdensome guidance documents across all
[[Page 52826]]
programs. The Department will focus on completing regulatory actions
that streamline existing regulations and remove unjustified burdens as
well as reduce government transfers and promote principles of fiscal
responsibility. The Department also considered ideas the public
submitted to OMB through the Notice of request for information:
Deregulation. 90 FR 15481 (April 11, 2025). Many of the deregulatory
actions described below align with the ideas the public submitted and
are already being put into action.
Postsecondary Education
Section 492 of the Higher Education Act (HEA) requires that the
Secretary solicit public involvement in the development of regulations
before publishing proposed rules implementing programs authorized under
Title IV. In the Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE)
proposed rule, the Department intends to propose regulations after
completing negotiated rulemaking and reaching consensus to implement
the changes the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Public Law. 119-21, made to
the student loans programs. Proposed changes include phasing out
graduate PLUS Loans; eliminating income contingent repayment (ICR) and
Pay As You Earn (PAYE) loans, setting loan limits at $20,000 for
graduate students and $50,000 for professional students and creating a
new loan repayment plan known at the ``Repayment Assistance Plan.'' The
Department also engaged in negotiated rulemaking to propose regulations
implementing the One Big Beautiful Bill's changes to Pell Grants and
accountability provisions, including updates to the Workforce Pell
Grant program that offers Pell Grants to students for short-term
training programs. In addition, the proposed rules will address
institutional accountability issues including financial value
transparency and gainful employment. These rules seek to enhance
oversight, strengthen eligibility standards, and streamline
implementation.
The Department intends to propose regulations covering
institutions' reporting of statutorily defined gifts, contracts, and/or
restricted and conditional gifts or contracts from or with defined
foreign sources, pursuant to the requirements of section 117 of the
HigherEA. In compliance with Executive Order 14279, Reforming
Accreditation To Strengthen Higher Education, negotiated rulemaking
will address accreditation issues to clarify institutional flexibility
to pursue changes of accreditors without prior Department approval and
remove other burdensome requirements that erect barriers to entry for
new accreditation agencies. Also, the Department proposes to address
Title IV eligibility issues to remove requirements that unnecessarily
target faith-based or for-profit institutions and interfere with
efficient and beneficial mergers, sales, and transfers of institutions
of higher education. Such issues to be addressed in the context of
institutional eligibility for participation of Federal student
financial aid include rules governing change of ownership, cash
management, administrative capability standards, and financial
responsibility requirements.
In the Reducing Anti-Competitive Regulatory Barriers proposed rule,
the Department seeks to implement President Trump's Executive Order
14267, Reducing Anti-Competitive Regulatory Barriers, and will engage
in negotiated rulemaking to promulgate rules to (1) amend college
textbook packaging rules under 34 CFR 668.163(c)(2) to put downward
pressure on prices by promoting competition among booksellers and (2)
improve the transferability of college credits.
Civil Rights
The Department intends to remove the regulation under Title VI of
the 1964 Civil Rights Act that utilizes a disparate impact theory of
race-based discrimination. We will align Department regulations with
Supreme Court precedent that requires Title VI violations to rest upon
intentional discrimination.
Executive Order 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology
Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,
defends women's rights and protects freedom of conscience by directing
agencies to use clear and accurate language and policies that recognize
women are biologically female, and men are biologically male. The
Department intends to amend regulations implementing Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) to ensure consistency with E.O.
14168 by clarifying that implementation of Title IX is to be based on
sex, which shall refer exclusively to an individual's immutable
biological classification as either male or female.
In the Update of Regulations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 proposed rule, the Department intends to amend regulations
implementing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) to
provide further clarification of how Title VI's provisions protecting
individuals from discrimination on the basis of race, color and
national origin protect individuals on the basis of the individual's
actual or perceived shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, or
affiliation with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.
The Department will continue to implement President Trump's Executive
Order 14188, Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism, and use all
available and appropriate legal tools, to tackle unlawful anti-Semitic
harassment and violence.
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
In the Equity in IDEA proposed rule, the Department intends to
amend regulations implementing the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act's (IDEA) provisions pertaining to significant
disproportionality. Specifically, the Department intends to amend 2016
regulations that established a standard methodology States must use to
determine whether significant disproportionality based on race and
ethnicity is occurring in the State and set specific programmatic
requirements on how states are required to comply with Section
618(d)(2) of the IDEA.
Other Actions
The Department will work on a proposed rulemaking relating to
Department grant programs to ensure that federal public benefits are
only provided to citizens and eligible noncitizens, as required under
the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996.
III. Principles for Regulating
Over the next year, the Department may need to issue other
regulations because of new legislation or programmatic changes. In
deciding when to regulate, we consider the following:
Whether regulations are essential to promote quality and
equality of opportunity in education.
Whether a demonstrated problem cannot be resolved without
regulation.
Whether regulations are necessary to provide a legally
binding interpretation to resolve ambiguity.
Whether regulations are needed to protect the Federal
interest, that is, to ensure that Federal funds are used for their
intended purpose and to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse.
In deciding how to regulate, we are mindful of the following
principles:
Regulate no more than necessary.
Minimize burden to the extent possible and promote
multiple approaches to meeting statutory requirements if possible.
[[Page 52827]]
Encourage coordination of federally funded activities with
State and local reform activities.
Ensure that the benefits justify the costs of regulating.
To the extent possible, establish performance objectives
rather than specify the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated
entity must adopt.
Encourage flexibility, to the extent possible and as
needed to enable institutional forces to achieve desired results.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. ELIMINATION OF DISPARATE IMPACT THEORY UNDER TITLE VI OF THE 1964
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1; 20 U.S.C. 1682; 29 U.S.C. 794
Relevant Executive Orders: 14281
CFR Citation: 34 CFR 100
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department intends to remove the regulation under
Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act that utilizes a disparate impact
theory of race-based discrimination, to align Department regulations
with Supreme Court precedent that requires Title VI violations to rest
upon intentional discrimination, to otherwise ensure compliance with
constitutional and statutory requirements, and to remove outdated
materials.
Statement of Need: The Department is rescinding portions of its
regulations promulgated pursuant to Title VI, 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1, to
more closely align its regulations to apply to the intentionally
discriminatory conduct that Congress prohibited when enacting Title VI
statute, 42 U.S.C. 2000d and to ensure its regulations comply with
Executive Order 14821, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and
Meritocracy, issued on April 23, 2025.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department is rescinding portions of
its regulations pursuant to Title VI, 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1. Executive
Order 14281 requires federal agencies to eliminate the use of
disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree
possible to avoid violating the Constitution, federal civil rights
laws, and basic American ideals.
Alternatives: This will be discussed in the action taken by the
agency that is published in the Federal Register.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This will be discussed in the action
taken by the agency that is published in the Federal Register.
Risks: This will be discussed in the action taken by the agency
that is published in the Federal Register.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Meir Katz, Department of Education, Office for
Civil Rights, 400 Maryland Ave SW, Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 999-9999
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1870-AA20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--OCR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. IMPLEMENTATION OF TITLE IX BASED ON DEFINITION OF ``SEX''
IDENTIFIED IN E.O. 14168
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14168
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department intends to amend regulations implementing
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) to ensure
consistency with Executive Order 14168, Defending Women From Gender
Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal
Government (January 20, 2025), including clarifying that implementation
of Title IX is to be based on sex, which shall refer exclusively to an
individual's immutable biological classification as either male or
female.
Statement of Need: The Department is amending portions of its
regulations promulgated pursuant to Title IX of the Education
Amendments Act, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1681, to more closely align its
regulations with Executive Order 14168, Defending Women from Gender
Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal
Government, issued on January 20, 2025.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department is amending portions of its
regulations pursuant to Title IX of the Education Amendments Act, 20
U.S.C. 1681. Executive Order 14168 directs federal agencies to
recognize the existence of only two sexes, male and female, that are
not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible
reality.
Alternatives: This will be discussed in the action taken by the
agency that is published in the Federal Register.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This will be discussed in the action
taken by the agency that is published in the Federal Register.
Risks: This will be discussed in the action taken by the agency
that is published in the Federal Register.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: David Samberg, Department of Education, Office for
Civil Rights, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 5th, Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 999-9999
Email: [email protected].
RIN: 1870-AA23
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--Office of Postsecondary Education
(OPE) Prerule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. DOCUMENTATION OF FOREIGN SOURCE GIFTS AND CONTRACTS, SECTION 117 OF
THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1011f
CFR Citation: 34 CFR 668; 34 CFR 695
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department intends to propose regulations covering
institutions' reporting of statutorily defined gifts, contracts, and/or
restricted and conditional gifts or contracts from or with defined
foreign sources, pursuant to the requirements of section 117 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA).
Statement of Need: Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965,
as amended, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1011f, requires that institutions of
higher education that receive federal funding must biannually disclose
to the Department of Education foreign gifts, contracts, and ownership,
the value of which (alone or combined) is $250,000 or more annually. In
an official report published by the Department in October 2020
(Institutional Compliance with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act
of 1965), the Department reported findings of widespread noncompliance
with Section 117's relatively simple disclosure requirements amounting
to
[[Page 52828]]
billions of dollars in unreported but qualifying foreign funding
transactions. The Department's review of IHE disclosures indicates
significant improvements in compliance, although noncompliance
continues to occur at unacceptably high levels. Evidence obtained by
the Department through disclosures submitted by IHEs and records
obtained by the Department through its civil investigations have
revealed significant continued noncompliance by IHEs.
Issued on Apr. 22, 2025, Executive Order 14282 (Transparency
Regarding Foreign Influence at American Universities) further clarified
the need for significantly improved enforcement of Section 117's
disclosure requirements. The Department is statutorily obligated to
provide robust enforcement of Section 117's disclosure requirements as
required by Congress to ensure transparency with regard to foreign
funding and involvements in higher education.
Summary of Legal Basis: Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of
1965, as amended, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1011f, requires that
institutions of higher education that receive federal funding must
biannually disclose to the Department of Education foreign gifts,
contracts, and ownership, the value of which (alone or combined) is
$250,000 or more annually. The current version of this disclosure
requirement was adopted in 1998, see Public Law 105-244, Higher
Education Amendments of 1998, Title I, sec. 102(a), adding HEA Title I,
sec. 117 (Oct. 7, 1998); but a substantially similar disclosure
requirement has been in place since 1986. See Public Law 99-498, Higher
Education Amendments of 1986, Title XII, sec. 1206, adding HEA Title
XII, sec. 1207 (Oct. 17, 1986) (then codified at 20 U.S.C. 1145d). In
addition, IHEs are required to accurately and timely report qualifying
Section 117 foreign funding under their Program Participation
Agreements (PPAs) with the Department, pursuant to 20 U.S.C.
1094(a)(17), which provides that [i]n order to be an eligible
institution for the purposes of any program authorized under this
subchapter, an institution must . . . enter into a program
participation agreement with the Secretary. The agreement shall
condition the initial and continuing eligibility of an institution to
participate in a program upon compliance with the following
requirements: . . . (17) The institution will complete surveys
conducted as a part of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System (IPEDS) or any other Federal postsecondary institution data
collection effort, as designated by the Secretary, in a timely manner
and to the satisfaction of the Secretary. Under 20 U.S.C. 1094(a)(17),
where an IHE fails to report Section 117 information timely and
accurately, the IHE has failed to comply with its reporting obligations
under 20 U.S.C. 1011f and failed to comply with the requirements
contained in its PPA.
Alternatives: The Department's ongoing information collection
efforts, vastly improved through the Department's creation of a new
foreign funding reporting portal (www.ForeignFundingHigherEd.gov), is
the least costly alternative for securing improved compliance by IHEs
with Section 117's straightforward requirements. The new reporting
portal also facilitates compliance by IHEs through a significantly more
user-friendly reporting portal.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The Department executed a Firm Fixed
Price (FFP) Contract in support of the creation and maintenance of the
new foreign funding reporting portal (www.ForeignFundingHigherEd.gov).
The original contract obligated $9,828,256.13 for an initial nine-month
base year through June 18, 2026, and included four twelve-month option
years thereafter that would bring the potential award to over $60
million.
Risks: There are significant national security risks associated
with the failure to timely and accurately disclose foreign funding to
IHEs, particularly to federally funded research universities (which
receive approximately $65 billion annually in support of sometimes
highly classified weapons-related technological developments (i.e.,
critical emerging technologies). Universities often have significant
contracts for the operation of important national laboratories (e.g.,
the Los Alamos National Laboratory a Department of Energy national
laboratory with well known historical and current involvements is
managed by Texas A&M University; NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
critically important to U.S. space involvements and related
technologies is managed by the California Institute of Technology). In
addition, foreign influence operations on IHE campuses continue to be
deeply concerning to Congress, the President, and the American people.
Section 117's transparency requirements continue to play an important
statutory role in providing Congress, the President, and the American
people with important ongoing knowledge regarding efforts to safeguard
America's research enterprise.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Intent to Commence 11/00/26 .......................
Negotiated Rulemaking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
URL For Public Comments: www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Paul Moore, Chief Investigative Counsel, Office of
the General Counsel, Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Seventh Floor, Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 999 999-9999
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1840-AD50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--OPE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. REDUCING ANTI-COMPETITIVE REGULATORY BARRIERS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14267
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: To implement President Trump's Executive Order 14267 on
anti-competitive regulations, the Department will engage in negotiated
rulemaking to promulgate rules to (1) amend college textbook packaging
rules under 34 CFR 668.163(c)(2) to put downward pressure on prices by
promoting competition among booksellers; and (2) improve the
transferability of college credits.
Statement of Need: This rule amends and aligns Department
regulations with Executive Order 14267, Reducing Anti-Competitive
Regulatory Barriers, issued on April 9, 2025 to amend college textbook
packaging rules under 34 CFR 668.163(c)(2) to put downward pressure on
prices by promoting competition among booksellers and to improve the
transferability of college credits.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department is amending portions of its
regulations pursuant to title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965,
as amended, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1070. Executive Order 14267 mandates
federal agencies to identify and rescind regulations that create
monopolies, create unnecessary barriers to entry for new market
participants, limit competition, or otherwise impose anti-competitive
restraints or distortions on the operation of the free market.
[[Page 52829]]
Alternatives: Alternatives will be discussed in the notice of
proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated Costs and Benefits will
be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Risks: Risks will be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking
and final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Intent to Commence 09/00/26 .......................
Negotiated Rulemaking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Jeffrey R. Andrade, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Policy, Planning and Innovation, Department of Education, Office of
Postsecondary Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 708-7888
RIN: 1840-AE01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--OPE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. ADDRESSING TITLE IV ELIGIBILITY ISSUES
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14267
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department proposes to address Title IV eligibility
issues to remove requirements that unnecessarily target faith-based or
for-profit institutions and interfere with efficient and beneficial
mergers, sales, and transfers of institutions of higher education. Such
issues to be addressed in the context of institutional eligibility for
participation of Federal student financial aid include rules governing
change of ownership, cash management, administrative capability
standards, program length requirements, and financial responsibility
requirements. This rule would also remove ultra vires provisions in the
Title IV Revenue and Non-Federal Education Assistance Funds regulations
called the 90/10 Rule that give public and nonprofit institutions a
competitive advantage and update Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate
Achievement Program regulations consistent with the December 2, 2025
opinion published by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of
Justice entitled, ``Constitutionality of Race-Based Department of
Education Programs,'' regarding that program.
Statement of Need: The rule will address Title IV eligibility
issues to remove requirements that unnecessarily target faith-based or
for-profit institutions and interfere with efficient and beneficial
mergers, sales, and transfers of institutions of higher education.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department is amending portions of its
regulations pursuant to title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965,
as amended, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1070.
Alternatives: Alternatives will be discussed in the notice of
proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated Costs and Benefits will
be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Risks: Risks will be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking
and final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Intent to Commence 07/00/26 .......................
Negotiated Rulemaking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Tamy Abernathy, Department of Education, Office of
Postsecondary Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 245-4595
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1840-AE04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--OPE Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. ACCREDITATION ISSUES
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1099b
Relevant Executive Orders: 14279
CFR Citation: 34 CFR 600; 34 CFR 602
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department proposes to engage in negotiated
rulemaking to address accreditation issues to clarify institutional
flexibility to pursue changes of accreditors without prior Department
approval and remove other burdensome requirements that erect barriers
to entry for new accreditation agencies.
On December 26, 2024, the Department issued a Notice of Termination
of negotiated rulemaking process for State Authorization, Cash
Management, Accreditation and Related Issues closing the Notice of
Intent to Commence Negotiated Rulemaking, 88 FR 43069 (July 6, 2023).
Statement of Need: This rule aligns Department regulations with
Executive Order 14279, Reforming Accreditation to Strengthen Higher
Education, issued on April 23, 2025, particularly to clarify
institutional flexibility to pursue changes of accreditors without
prior Department approval and remove other burdensome requirements that
erect barriers to entry for new accreditation agencies.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department is conducting this
rulemaking under 20 U.S.C. 1099b.
Executive Order 14279 requires the Department to reform the Higher
Education Accreditation system in the following ways: (1) ensure
programs are free from unlawful discrimination, (2) allow institutions
to adopt practices that advance credential and degree completion, (3)
require institutions to prioritize academic freedom, (4) inhibit
accreditors from using their role to violate State laws, and (5)
prohibit accreditors from engaging in practices that result in
burdensome costs to students.
Alternatives: Alternatives will be discussed in the notice of
proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated Costs and Benefits will
be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Risks: Risks will be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking
and final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Intent to Commence 01/27/26 91 FR 3403
Negotiated Rulemaking.
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
URL For Public Comments: www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Jeffrey R. Andrade, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Policy, Planning and Innovation, Department of Education, Office of
Postsecondary Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202
[[Page 52830]]
Phone: 202 708-7888
RIN: 1840-AD82
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED--Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. EQUITY IN IDEA (INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION
ACT)
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department intends to amend regulations implementing
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act's (IDEA) provisions
pertaining to significant disproportionality. Specifically, the
Department intends to amend 2016 regulations that established a
standard methodology States must use to determine whether significant
disproportionality based on race and ethnicity is occurring in the
State and set specific programmatic requirements on how states are
required to comply with Section 618(d)(2) of the IDEA.
Statement of Need: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA), codified at 20 U.S.C. 1400-82, requires that the Secretary must
ensure that all regulations implementing IDEA are compliance with
federal civil rights laws and uphold both procedural and substantive
protections under IDEA including ensuring that all children with
disabilities are identified, evaluated and receive special education
and related services for which they are eligible.
Summary of Legal Basis: The U.S. Department of Education (ED) has
statutory authority under IDEA, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1400-82 to
propose, issue, amend, or repeal regulations that implement the law.
Alternatives: Alternatives will be discussed in the notice of
proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated Costs and Benefits will
be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking and final rule.
Risks: Risks will be discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking
and final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Erin McHugh, Department of Education, Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, 400 Maryland Ave SW,
Washington, DC 20202
Phone: 202 245-6248
RIN: 1820-AB84
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
Department of Energy
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
The Department of Energy (Department or DOE) makes vital
contributions to the Nation's welfare through its activities focused on
improving national security, energy supply, energy efficiency,
environmental remediation, and energy research. The Department's
mission is to:
Promote dependable and affordable energy production and
distribution;
Advance energy efficiency and conservation;
Provide responsible stewardship of the Nation's nuclear
weapons;
Provide a responsible resolution to the environmental
legacy of nuclear weapons production; and
Strengthen U.S. scientific discovery, economic
competitiveness, and improve quality of life through innovations in
science and technology.
The Department's regulatory activities are essential to achieving
its critical mission and to implementing President Trump's energy
dominance initiatives. Among other things, the Regulatory Plan and the
Unified Agenda contain the rulemakings the Department will be engaged
in during the coming year. The Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda also
reflect the Department's continuing commitment to cut costs, eliminate
red tape, reduce regulatory burden, increase consumer choice, and
promote market competition and innovation as directed through
Departmental priorities and recent executive orders. Additionally, DOE
recognizes that public participation and community engagement are a
crucial aspect of the Department's rulemaking process, as well as an
important vehicle to assist the Department in streamlining its
deregulatory priorities to meet Administration goals as well.
As a general matter, the Department is undertaking a broad review
of its regulatory and deregulatory actions. In the Spring of 2025 and
in response to Executive Orders (E.O.) 14192 and 14219, the Department
initiated an internal review of its existing regulations and guidance
materials with the aim of identifying any redundant or unused
regulatory mechanisms. The Department has used the results of that
internal review to identify several opportunities for deregulatory
activity. Overall, the Department has completed 15 deregulatory
activities, as identified under E.O. 14192. More specifically, the
Department would like to highlight the following ongoing actions.
One rulemaking being undertaken by the Department in FY 2026
addresses proposed revisions to the value for the petroleum-equivalency
factor (PEF). This rulemaking would revise DOE's regulations regarding
procedures for calculating a value for the petroleum-equivalent fuel
economy of electric vehicles (EVs). The PEF is used by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in calculating light-duty vehicle
manufacturers' compliance with the Department of Transportation's (DOT)
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. This rulemaking action
is in response to an Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that
vacated Petroleum-Equivalent Fuel Economy Calculation, 89 FR 22041
(Mar. 29, 2024) (2024 PEF Final Rule).
DOE is also considering potential revisions to the Department's
current rulemaking guidance titled ``Procedures, Interpretations, and
Policies for Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation
Standards and Test Procedures for Consumer Products and Certain
Commercial/Industrial Equipment'' (Process Rule), which was last
modified in 2024. The goal of the Process Rule is to increase
transparency by elaborating on the procedures, interpretations, and
policies that would guide the Department in establishing new or revised
energy conservation standards and test procedures for covered consumer
products and commercial/industrial equipment. DOE is considering a
notice-and-comment rulemaking to amend its Process Improvement Rule to
reflect statutory changes, as well as innovative, collaborative
approaches to reflect more efficient rulemaking. This rulemaking
advances the objectives of E.O. 14154 and E.O. 14219 by ensuring that
the rulemaking process for the Appliance Standards Program meets the
energy and cost savings objectives of EPCA while preserving consumer
choice and minimizing regulatory burdens.
In addition, as part of a nuclear regulatory reform effort directed
by E.O. 14301, DOE is proposing to streamline and modernize its
regulations for worker safety and health to expedite the deployment of
advanced reactors under DOE's jurisdiction. These amendments
[[Page 52831]]
will incorporate lessons learned from decades of operating experience
at DOE nuclear facilities while continuing to ensure worker safety and
health. Benefits of these amendments include: increased flexibility for
DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy contractors to implement current
industry and government standards, streamlined compliance processes,
and a greater focus on risk management.
Lastly, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) amended the Energy
Infrastructure Reinvestment Program authorized by Title XVII of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended. The OBBBA amendments,
specifically its Energy Dominance Financing provisions, necessitate
immediate and material changes to the regulations set forth at 10 CFR
part 609. Through an interim final rule, DOE is amending 10 CFR part
609 to incorporate the Energy Dominance Financing provisions, which
include new and amended categories of eligible projects. The interim
final rule allows DOE to continue processing Title XVII applications
for a broad range of energy infrastructure projects up to a total
principal amount of $250 billion (through September 30, 2028). The
rulemaking will also reduce a Title XVII applicants' reporting burden,
which translates to a cost savings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE--Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EE) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. PROCEDURES, INTERPRETATIONS, AND POLICIES FOR CONSIDERATION IN NEW
OR REVISED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR
CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 5 U.S.C. 553(d)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 13272; 13132; 13211
CFR Citation: 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) is
considering potential revisions to the Department's current rulemaking
guidance titled ``Procedures, Interpretations, and Policies for
Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards and Test
Procedures for Consumer Products and Certain Commercial/Industrial
Equipment'' (Process Rule), which was last modified in 2024. DOE is
considering a notice-and-comment rulemaking to amend its Process
Improvement Rule to reflect statutory changes as well as innovative,
collaborative approaches to reflect more efficient rulemaking. Any
rulemaking action will be consistent with the President's direction in
Executive Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy, to preserve consumer
choice as well as DOE's statutory obligation to preserve appliance
features in the market.
Statement of Need: On January 20, 2025, the President issued
Executive Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy (E.O. 14154). 90 FR
8353 (Jan. 29, 2025). That order stated the policy of the United States
with regard to energy production and management. Among the stated
elements of this policy, section 1(f)-(h) of E.O. 14154 cite the intent
to safeguard the American people's freedom to choose from a variety of
goods and appliances, including but not limited to lightbulbs,
dishwashers, washing machines, gas stoves, water heaters, toilets, and
shower heads, and to promote market competition and innovation within
the manufacturing and appliance industries; to ensure that the global
effects of a rule, regulation, or action shall, whenever evaluated, be
reported separately from its domestic costs and benefits, in order to
promote sound regulatory decision making and prioritize the interests
of the American people; and to guarantee that all Executive departments
and agencies provide opportunity for public comment and rigorous, peer-
reviewed scientific analysis. Section 6 of the Executive order also
specifies policies for prioritizing accuracy in environmental analyses,
specifically instructing that for Federal regulatory processes, all
agencies shall adhere to only the relevant legislated requirements for
environmental considerations and any considerations beyond those
requirements are eliminated. Section 6 of the Executive order also
provides instructions regarding consideration of greenhouse gas
emissions and the social cost of carbon.
On February 19, 2025, the President issued Executive Order 14219,
Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's `Department
of Government Efficiency' Deregulatory Initiative (E.O. 14219). 90 FR
10583 (Feb. 25, 2025). That order stated the policy of the United
States to end Federal regulatory overreach and restore the
constitutional separation of powers. Among the stated elements of this
policy, E.O. 14219 calls for review of certain categories of
regulations. Among these, section 2(a)(v) cites regulations that impose
significant costs upon private parties that are not outweighed by
public benefits, and section 2(a)(vii) cites regulations that impose
undue burdens on small business and impede private enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
To implement E.O. 14154 and E.O. 14219, the Department, among other
actions, is evaluating existing policy regarding its approach to
consideration of new or amended energy conservation standards and test
procedures for consumer products and certain commercial and industrial
equipment. In furtherance of this reassessment, DOE is considering
revisions to the Process Rule, which DOE generally uses to prescribe
energy conservation standards and test procedures for both consumer
products and commercial equipment pursuant to the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6291, et seq.).
Summary of Legal Basis: The Energy Policy and Conservation Act,
Public Law 94-163, as amended (EPCA), authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) Title III,
Part B of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products Other Than Automobiles. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as codified)
Title III, Part C of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV,
section 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed
to improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, as codified) Under
EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists essentially of four
parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the establishment of Federal
energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement
procedures.
In July of 1996, pursuant to EPCA, DOE published a final rule in
the Federal Register that codified DOE's Procedures, Interpretations
and Policies for Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation
Standards for Consumer Products at 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix
A. 61 FR 36974 (July 15, 1996). The goal of the Process Rule was to
increase transparency by elaborating on the procedures,
interpretations, and policies that would guide the Department in
establishing new or revised energy conservation standards for consumer
products. DOE subsequently updated the Process Rule in 2020, 2021, and
2024 to reflect analytical best practices and technological and legal
developments. See 85 FR 8626 (Feb. 14, 2020); 85 FR
[[Page 52832]]
50937 (August 19, 2020); 86 FR 70892 (Dec. 13, 2021), and 89 FR 24340
(April 8, 2024).
This rulemaking advances the objectives of E.O. 14154 and E.O.
14219 by ensuring that the rulemaking process for the Appliance
Standards Program meets the energy and cost savings objectives of EPCA
while preserving consumer choice and minimizing regulatory burdens.
Alternatives: DOE will issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR)
considering amendments to the Process Rule, after a careful review of
public comments on the April 17, 2025 RFI. In determining whether and
how to update the existing Process Rule, DOE may consider alternatives
such as taking no further action or examining approaches different from
those proposed in the NOPR, based upon public comments and additional
information received in response to the NOPR.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This proposed rulemaking has also
been determined to be an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action because it
intends to reduce the burden to society by streamlining the regulatory
framework and improving efficiency for regulated entities and the
interested public. These benefits are difficult to quantify, but they
may involve reduced manufacturer administrative burdens, lower
appliance first costs, and expanded consumer choice.
Risks: N/A
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request for Information (RFI)....... 04/17/25 90 FR 16093
Comment Period End.................. 06/02/25
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Troy Watson, Project Manager, Department of Energy,
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Mail Stop EE-5B, Washington, DC 20585
Phone: 240 449-9387
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 1904-AD38, Related to 1904-AF13
RIN: 1904-AF72
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE--EE Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. PETROLEUM-EQUIVALENT FUEL ECONOMY CALCULATION
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32904(a)(2)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14154; 13563
CFR Citation: 10 CFR part 474
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has reviewed the
petroleum-equivalency factor (PEF) for electric vehicles (EVs) used by
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in calculating light-duty
vehicle manufacturers' compliance with the Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.
DOE has determined that revisions to the PEF are necessary. The interim
final rule was published under RIN 1904-AF47.
Statement of Need: In Iowa v. Wright, several states and the
American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce (AmFree) petitioned the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to review the 2024 PEF Final Rule that
revised DOE's methodology to calculate the PEF used in determining the
equivalent petroleum-based fuel economy values of EVs. On September 5,
2025, the Eighth Circuit issued a decision that vacated and remanded
the 2024 PEF Final Rule to Doe for further consideration.
In addition, on January 20, 2025, the President issued Executive
Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy (E.O. 14154). 90 FR 8353 (Jan.
29, 2025). E.O. 14154 stated the policy of the United States with
regard to energy production and management. Among the stated elements
of this policy, section 1(e) of E.O. 14154 cite the intent to eliminate
the EV mandate and promote true consumer choice by removing regulatory
barriers to motor vehicle access, ensuring a level regulatory playing
field for consumer choice in vehicles, and eliminating unfair subsidies
and other ill-conceived government-imposed market distortions that
favor EVs over other technologies.
In response to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Iowa
v. Wright, and to implement E.O. 14154, the Department, among other
actions, is first publishing a notice of technical amendment to remove
the revisions adopted in the 2024 PEF Final Rule from 10 CFR part 474.
In addition, DOE is proposing revisions to procedures for calculating a
value for the petroleum-equivalent fuel economy of electric vehicles
(EVs).
Summary of Legal Basis: Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, (EPCA), amended the Motor Vehicle
Information and Cost Savings Act (the Motor Vehicle Act) by mandating
fuel economy standards for automobiles produced in, or imported into,
the United States. This legislation, as amended, requires every
manufacturer to meet applicable specified corporate average fuel
economy standards for their fleets of light-duty vehicles under 8,500
pounds that the manufacturer manufactures in any model year. The
Secretary of Transportation is responsible for prescribing the CAFE
standards and enforcing the penalties for failure to meet these
standards. 49 U.S.C. 32902. The Administrator of the EPA is responsible
for calculating each manufacturer's fleet CAFE value. 49 U.S.C. 32902
and 32904.
If an automobile manufacturer manufactures an EV, the Administrator
of EPA shall include in the manufacturer's calculation of average fuel
economy the equivalent petroleum based fuel economy values determined
by the Secretary of Energy for various classes of EVs. 49 U.S.C.
32904(a)(2). The petroleum-equivalency factor is used to convert the
energy efficiency of EVs to an equivalent petroleum-based fuel economy
and is measured in Watt hours per gallon of gasoline.
This rulemaking advances the objectives of E.O. 14154 by ensuring
that the Department`s regulations relating to the calculation of
equivalent petroleum-based fuel economy do not create an unlevel
playing field in favor of EVs while preserving consumer choice and
minimizing regulatory burdens.
Alternatives: DOE will issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR)
considering revisions to the petroleum equivalency factor consistent
with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Iowa v. Wright and
the Administration's policies. In determining how to revise the current
PEF value, DOE may consider alternatives such as taking no further
action.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DOE anticipates that the total costs
are zero or will reduce regulatory burden to society.
Risks: N/A
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Rule; technical amendment..... 01/08/26 91 FR 553
Final Rule; technical amendment 01/08/26
Effective.
Interim Final Rule; request for 02/19/26 91 FR 7810
comments.
Final Rule Effective................ 02/19/26
[[Page 52833]]
Comment Period End.................. 03/23/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Kevin Stork, Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121
Phone: 202 586-8306
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Previously reported as 1904-AF47
RIN: 1904-AG09
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE--Departmental and Others (ENDEP) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
36. WORKER SAFETY AND HEALTH REQUIREMENTS TO SUPPORT REFORM OF
NUCLEAR REACTOR TESTING
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2201(i)(3); 42 U.S.C. 2201(p); 42 U.S.C.
2282c; 42 U.S.C. 5801 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 2401
et seq.; . . .
Relevant Executive Orders: 14301; 14299; 14302
CFR Citation: 10 CFR 851
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to amend its
regulations for worker safety and health to expedite the review,
approval, and deployment of advanced reactors under DOE's jurisdiction
including qualified test reactors in DOE's reactor pilot program,
consistent with Executive Order 14301. The revisions would ensure that
DOE's worker safety and health program continues to protect workers,
while incorporating lessons learned from decades of operating
experience and fostering nuclear innovation and technologies to the
benefit of the United States. Additionally, the proposed rule would
make minor updates to these regulations to improve clarity.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is necessary to expedite the
deployment of advanced reactors under DOE's jurisdiction, as directed
by E.O. 14301, which will contribute towards the Nation's supply of
reliable, diversified, and affordable energy. This rulemaking is also
necessary to streamline and modernize regulations for worker safety and
health consistent with section 234C of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(AEA).
Summary of Legal Basis: Section 234C of the AEA (codified as 42
U.S.C. 2282c) requires DOE to promulgate worker safety and health
regulations. These regulations are to include flexibility to tailor
implementation to reflect activities and hazards associated with a
particular work environment; to take into account special circumstances
for facilities permanently closed or demolished, or for which title is
expected to be transferred; and to achieve national security missions
in an efficient and timely manner (42 U.S.C. 2282c(a)(3)).
Alternatives: One alternative approach that DOE considered but
rejected was to make the proposed changes more broadly applicable to
the Department as a whole rather than only to Office of Nuclear Energy
contractors. However, given that the catalyst for the proposed changes,
E.O. 14301, set forth an expedited timeline and affected only Office of
Nuclear Energy contractors, the Department decided to focus these
proposed changes on Office of Nuclear Energy contractors and defer
changes affecting other DOE contractors for future consideration.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The estimated cost savings, while
difficult to quantify precisely, are expected to be realized through
time savings and increased efficiency. Specifically, the potential cost
savings are estimated to be 1-3% of the contract value per year. For
the Idaho National Laboratory, this would be on the order of $20-60
million per year. Faster decision-making and reduced administrative
tasks can lead to significant savings in both time and resources.
Risks: Optional/no response.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 01/21/26 91 FR 2498
NPRM Comment Period................. 02/20/26
NPRM; Reopening of Public Comment 02/26/26 91 FR 9498
Period.
Reopened comment Period End......... 03/23/26
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Daryn Moorman, Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Ave SW, Washington, DC 20585
Phone: 208 526-1270
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1901-AB74
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE--ENDEP Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
37. ENERGY DOMINANCE FINANCING AMENDMENTS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 16511 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 7254; Pub.L.
119-21
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14262; 14302; 14255
CFR Citation: 10 CFR 609
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act amended the Energy
Infrastructure Reinvestment Program administered by the U.S. Department
of Energy's Loan Programs Office as authorized by Title XVII of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act,
and its Energy Dominance Financing provisions, necessitate immediate
and material changes to DOE's existing regulations set forth in 10 CFR
part 609 to enable the continued processing of loan applications and
issuance of loan guarantees for all categories of Title XVII projects.
The loan authority and appropriations authorized under the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act are available through September 30, 2028, making the
implementation of the authority, and associated amendments, time-
sensitive.
Statement of Need: The Energy Dominance Financing Amendments
interim final rule would amend DOE's regulations implementing the Title
XVII loan guarantee program to incorporate new categories of eligible
projects and other provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The
rule would enable DOE to guarantee loans of up to a total principal
amount of $250 billion through September 30, 2028, for a broad range of
energy infrastructure projects.
Summary of Legal Basis: Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of
2005, as amended (Title XVII) directs the Department of Energy to make
loan guarantees for certain types of energy projects, after final
regulations are issued. 42 U.S.C. 16515(b) & (d).
Alternatives: N/A
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Reduce the reporting burden, which
translates to a cost savings.
Risks: NA
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 10/28/25 90 FR 48705
Interim Final Rule Effective........ 10/28/25
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 12/29/25
End.
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
[[Page 52834]]
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Uchechukwu Nnaemeka Eze, Attorney-Advisor,
Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585
Phone: 202 586-1092
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1901-AB72
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Statement of Regulatory Priorities for Fiscal Year 2026
America faces an unprecedented healthcare crisis. With skyrocketing
costs--nearing $4.5 trillion annually--essential care has become
unaffordable for millions of Americans.
To meet this generational challenge, the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS) will unlock innovation and apply ``Make
America Healthy Again'' (MAHA) principles to improve the health and
well-being of Americans, including with its regulatory agenda. The 2026
HHS regulatory plan prioritizes actions to promote health, manage
chronic diseases; eliminate unnecessary administrative expenses and
rent-seeking practices; combating fraud and abuse; protecting religious
and individual liberties; supporting biological women, children, and
families; and radical transparency. HHS is committed to fixing a system
that rewards ineffective health care practices and delivers poor value.
This agenda highlights certain rulemakings that promote open
government, reduce government transfers, and support small businesses,
to ensure a transparent and efficient regulatory framework that
promotes and protects public health.
I. Promoting Health and Managing Chronic Disease
Addressing chronic disease, the most pressing public health problem
of our time--is the cornerstone of the MAHA agenda. In less than a
year, under Secretary Kennedy's leadership, HHS, CMS, and FDA have
taken unprecedented steps to combat the obesity crisis and make
prescriptions more affordable to everyday Americans with Most-Favored-
Nation pricing. And in the coming year, the Department will continue to
take steps to make medicines affordable to address and manage chronic
disease.
HHS will also explore ways to enhance our nation's response to this
unprecedented challenge by critically examining its regulations. To
better serve the American people through its programs, HHS will advance
innovative care models and other regulatory actions to prevent and
manage chronic diseases, for example:
Modernization of Coverage Pathways. CMS will modernize
coverage pathways for innovative technologies, streamlining
implementation to ensure timely access to treatments. This rulemaking
is expected to yield significant net benefits by improving health
outcomes and reducing long-term costs.
Quality and Safety Measurements. CMS will reduce the
number of quality measures and shift from fee-for-service to value-
based care, streamlining compliance burdens and creating reimbursement
pathways for MAHA-based interventions. This action will promote fiscal
responsibility by optimizing resource allocation.
Substances Generally Recognized as Safe. This FDA rule
proposes mandatory submission of GRAS notices, enhancing oversight of
food substances to combat obesity-related risks. It promotes open
government by ensuring transparent safety evaluations and is expected
to yield large net benefits by reducing obesity-related health care
costs.
Nutrient Content Claims for Added Sugars. FDA will propose
a rule to update definitions, terminology, and provisions related to
nutrient content claims and added sugars to be consistent with terms
related to and updates to requirements for the Nutrition Facts label.
The rule will define a new ``low sugar'' nutrient content claim that
manufacturers could voluntarily use to communicate information about
the level of added sugars in food products.
Nimbler Powered Respirators. This CDC rule will finalize
performance standards allowing for the approval of PAPR100 class
powered air-purifying particulate respirators. Although the current
PAPR approval program has provided proven protection, these current
requirements, as outlined in the interim final rule, will extend the
same proven protection to smaller, lighter systems that may be more
comfortable to wear.
II. Eliminating Unnecessary Administrative Expenses and Rent-Seeking
Practices
Unnecessary administrative expenses and rent-seeking practices
contribute to inefficiency in health care. The Department is committed
to advancing initiatives that reward innovation, value, and
performance.
Across the Department, under Secretary Kennedy and Deputy Secretary
O'Neill's leadership, agencies are exploring, deploying, and
integrating modern technology and AI to streamline internal operations
of the Department and agencies. For example, HHS has launched internal
tools to help employees leverage AI to streamline daily tasks; FDA has
launched an AI tool to assist with scientific reviews; and CMS has
launched an AI-assisted prior-authorization pilot.
The Department's regulatory priorities further reflect its
commitment to eliminating unnecessary administrative burdens. In the
upcoming year, HHS will take deregulatory actions to reduce common and/
or significant regulatory burdens, such as:
Updating the Common Rule. The Department is considering
revising 45 CFR part 46 to modernize and simplify subpart A, known as
the Common Rule, to uphold protections for human subjects while
reducing burden and ambiguity for investigators, institutional review
boards, and research institutions. Examples of changes include
clarifying terminology, expanding exemptions for certain low-risk
research activities, and enabling flexibility for regulatory review of
de minimis protocol changes.
Amending Regulations that Require Multiple Copies to
Single Submission. FDA will replace paper-based, multiple-copy
submissions with single, electronic submissions. This rule reduces
paperwork burdens, saving time and costs for submitters. This action
aligns with public RFI feedback calling for simplified submission
processes.
Electronic Labeling for Medical Devices. FDA will propose
a rule to clarify the ``adequate directions for use'' requirement in
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act can be satisfied when labeling
is provided solely by electronic means for certain types of devices in
certain circumstances.
Ending Accreditation Monopolies. CMS will work toward
reforming accreditation processes to eliminate monopolies, reduce
unjustified costs, and align accreditation with principles that will
make Americans healthy again. This deregulatory action promotes
competition and fiscal responsibility.
Innovative Payment Models for Affordable Drugs. This CMS
initiative will streamline drug pricing models, reducing government
transfers and promoting fiscal responsibility, and is expected to yield
large net benefits by lowering costs for patients.
Reducing Bureaucracy and Burden in the Child Care and
Development Fund. This ACF proposed rule would modify Child Care and
Development
[[Page 52835]]
Fund (CCDF) regulations to improve childcare access and choice for
families, reduce administrative burdens for states, territories, and
Tribes, and provide additional flexibilities by removing outdated
provisions, changing requirements for Tribal CCDF programs,
streamlining complicated and burdensome requirements for states and
territories.
Modernizing the Head Start Program by Reducing
Requirements and Enhancing Alignment with State and Local Systems. This
ACF proposed rule will reduce and streamline Head Start regulatory
requirements to align standards with state and local systems and reduce
burden on Head Start programs. The proposed rule would also make
regulatory changes to ensure children and families have access to
healthy food and comprehensive nutrition services and that programs are
supporting improved early literacy outcomes for children.
III. Combatting Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
Waste, fraud, and abuse are the antithesis of efficient health
care. Improved technology such as AI will not only help the Department
make processes more efficient, but will help root out fraud, waste, and
abuse. For example, CMS's WISeR Model will assess whether new
technologies like AI can expedite the prior authorization processes for
select items and services that have been identified as particularly
vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse, or inappropriate use.
In the coming year, HHS will strengthen oversight and eligibility
standards with its regulatory agenda to combat fraud and reduce
government transfers.
Strengthening the Integrity of Medicaid and CHIP
Eligibility, Managed Care, Financing, and Section 1115 Demonstrations.
By streamlining implementation through clarifying payment and access
requirements, this CMS rule enhances oversight of state enrollment
processes and establishes budget neutrality for Section 1115
demonstrations, reducing fraudulent transfers and ensuring fiscal
responsibility.
Administrative Detention of Tobacco Products. By allowing
FDA to detain adulterated or misbranded tobacco products during
inspections, this rule strengthens oversight, protecting public health
and reducing risks of costly recalls.
Zero-Based Regulation. The goal of this ACF proposed rule
is to take the ZBR approach to ACF's regulations and remove any
regulations identified as outdated or unnecessary in a cross-cutting
package. This proposal seeks to trim the nearly 1,500 sections of
regulations associated with ACF, some of which have not been updated
since the '60s.
Eliminating Bureaucratic Waste in Federal Reporting and
Assessments. This rulemaking seeks to restructure the way in which
Child and Family Services Reviews are conducted by the states to comply
with federal requirements. The current system is both ineffective and
costly. Regulatory changes will allow for streamlined reporting and
better outcomes.
Strengthening Regulatory Oversight of the Organ
Procurement and Transplantation Network to Ensure Patient Safety. HRSA
will make the policies of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation
Network (OPTN), which are currently voluntary, legally enforceable.
IV. Protecting Religious and Individual Liberty and Standing Up for
Biological Women, Children, and Families
Good health care policy begins with protecting life, liberty, and
immutable, biologically rooted truths. HHS will amend regulations
consistent with this policy, such as:
Making Technical Changes and Clarifying How OCR Addresses
Conscience Authorities in Health Care; Delegation of Authority. This
deregulatory rule clarifies federal conscience authorities, reducing
ambiguity for providers and aligning with public feedback emphasizing
religious liberty protections.
Restoring Flexibility to the Child Care and Development
Fund. This ACF deregulatory rule increases parental choice and reduces
administrative burdens in the CCDF program, streamlining implementation
and supporting families. It is of particular interest to small
businesses, such as childcare providers, by simplifying compliance.
Medicare; Hospital Condition of Participation: Prohibiting
Sex Trait Modifications. By prohibiting specified sex trait
modification procedures on children, this CMS rule enhances oversight
and aligns with evidence-based care, yielding large net benefits by
safeguarding child health.
Clarifying Statutory Limitation on Disability as it
Applies to Gender Identity and Dysphoria in Nondiscrimination: This OCR
deregulatory rule clarifies that gender identity disorders do not
qualify as disabilities under Section 504, reducing unjustified burdens
on providers and ensuring fiscal responsibility.
Modification of Certain Terminology in Title 21. FDA will
modify certain terminology in Title 21 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) to comply with Executive Order E.O. 14168,
``Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring
Biological Truth to the Federal Government,'' issued on January 20,
2025. Specifically, this proposed rule will propose removing the term
``gender'' wherever it appears and either replace it with the term
``sex,'' or delete reference to gender as applicable, along with other
editorial changes to improve readability.
HIPAA Privacy Rule to Promote Individuals' Timely Access
to their Protected Health Information. OCR will solicit comment on
proposals to modify the Privacy Rule under the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and the Health
Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009
(HITECH Act). The proposals would address the amount of time that
covered entities have to respond to requests for protected health
information (PHI) made pursuant to the right of access.
V. Radical Transparency
Radical transparency--making information, decisions, processes, and
even failures publicly visible--is a force multiplier for the MAHA
agenda. Radical transparency exposes impropriety, accelerates evidence-
based policies, system self-correction, and ensures merit prevails in a
free market. Most important, radical transparency builds trust and
gives patients and care-providers the tools to make informed choices
that are best for them, as opposed to having to rely on government
bureaucrats. Numerous HHS agencies have already taken steps to promote
radical transparency, such as FDA's release of Complete Response
Letters (CRLs).
In the coming year, the Department will take other novel and
unprecedented actions to promote radical transparency, including
streamlining operational issues with public disclosure statutes. New
regulatory actions relevant to increased transparency include:
Proactive Disclosure of Complete Response Letters. This
rule will clarify and expand the FDA Commissioner's discretion to
release CRLs and not approvable letters and eliminate the longstanding
presumption that the mere existence of a marketing application
constitutes confidential commercial information to enable proactive
disclosure of information maintaining
[[Page 52836]]
appropriate redactions for trade secrets and personal private
information.
Transparency in Direct-to-Consumer Advertising. This rule
will revise 21 CFR 202.1 to eliminate the option for prescription drug
advertisements broadcast through media such as radio or television to
fulfill the statutory ``brief summary'' requirement of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by disclosing risk, contraindications, and
other safety information in another source beyond the advertisement
itself.
Updating Privacy Act Regulations. This rule will update
Department regulations at 45 CFR part 5b and remove duplicative Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) Privacy Act regulations at 21 CFR part
21.
Health Data, Technology, and Interoperability: Application
Programming Interfaces and Information Blocking Advancements. ASTP will
propose a rule to advance interoperability through API certification
and updated information blocking regulations, promoting open government
by enhancing data sharing and improved patient outcomes.
Reforming the HHS Petition Process. HHS will put forward
new streamlined procedures for handling rulemaking petitions, including
a process to review existing regulations.
VI. Conclusion
In the coming year, HHS will take regulatory actions to further the
MAHA agenda and reduce burdens and costs while maximizing benefits and
transparency. To fully realize the potential of these efforts, HHS
seeks to collaborate with stakeholders and the public to ensure
concerns are given due consideration and properly and transparently
addressed. By working with stakeholders and the public, the Department
hopes to Make America Healthy Again, ensure regulations better serve
the needs of the American people, and restore confidence in our public
health agencies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Office of the Secretary (OS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. PRIVACY ACT REGULATIONS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Not subject to, not significant
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14243; 14291; 14295
CFR Citation: 45 CFR part 5b
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking will update the Department's Privacy Act
regulations at 45 CFR part 5b, which detail how the Department
implements requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5
U.S.C. 552a), and will remove duplicative Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) Privacy Act regulations at 21 CFR part 21.
Statement of Need: The Department's existing regulations were
promulgated in 1975, when the Privacy Act was new. Certain details are
now outdated, incomplete, or incorrect due to later amendments to the
Privacy Act, statutorily mandated organizational changes, and judicial
interpretations. The proposed amendment would result in significant
changes and improvements to the Department's regulations (for example,
it would remove antiquated provisions that require an individual's
medical records to be released to the individual indirectly, through a
doctor or other representative designated by the individual), and it
would enable the separate FDA Privacy Act regulations to be removed as
duplicative.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Privacy Act statute at 5 U.S.C. 552a(f)
requires each agency to maintain up-to-date rules implementing the
Privacy Act. Based on the definition of agency in the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) statute at 5 U.S.C. 552(f)(1) (formerly 5 U.S.C.
552(e)), which is incorporated in the Privacy Act statute at 5 U.S.C.
552a(a)(1), such rules must be maintained at the Departmental level but
are not required at the sub-agency level.
Alternatives: Leaving the regulations in their current state is not
recommended, because certain details in the regulations are outdated,
incomplete, or incorrect, and some required provisions are missing. For
example, court cases have identified legal deficiencies in indirect-
access-to-medical records provisions like those in the Department's
regulations, effectively rendering those provisions unenforceable in
their current state.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed rule is not significant
for purposes of E.O. 12866. Privacy Act regulations do not apply to
businesses or other entities and do not impose significant costs and
burdens on individuals
Risks: The only risk that we perceive is associated with
eliminating the indirect-access-to-medical-records provisions, i.e.,
that harm to the individual or another person could result from
allowing subject individuals to receive direct access to their medical
records under the Privacy Act. However, that same risk is present now,
because the indirect access provisions are effectively unenforceable in
their current state, and the risk would be present if the provisions
were retained with curative provisions added, as the curative
provisions would guarantee the full disclosure to the individual of any
medical record the agency released to the individual's designated
representative.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Samuel Shipley, Team Lead & Senior Regulatory
Coordinator, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the
Secretary, 200 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 503-6492
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0991-AC05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--OS Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39. PETITION PROCESS FOR RULEMAKING AND REGULATORY REVIEW
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553(e), 610
Relevant Executive Orders: 14217; 14219; 14270
CFR Citation: 45 CFR part 10
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This final rule establishes new procedures for the
submission, processing, and review of petitions to amend or repeal a
rule under 5 U.S.C. 553(e) and for regulatory review under 5 U.S.C.
610(b).
Statement of Need: This regulatory action will lessen the burden on
both the public and agency to respond to rulemaking petitions and
establish a process for regulatory review of existing regulations.
Existing processes often result in delays and the presentation of non-
standard or incomplete submissions. This regulatory action will also
enhance transparency and public trust in the rulemaking process.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The costs and benefits are difficult
to quantify. It is anticipated that this rulemaking will require
upfront costs to set up technology to receive and efficiently process
rulemaking petitions. Once the rule is set up, it is anticipated
[[Page 52837]]
that recurring costs will be minimal and the benefits of less employee
time spent managing rulemaking petitions will outstrip costs.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Matt Zorn, Deputy General Counsel, Department of
Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, 200 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 555-1234
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0991-AC43
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40. MAKING TECHNICAL CHANGES AND CLARIFYING HOW OCR ADDRESSES
CONSCIENCE AUTHORITIES IN HEALTH CARE; DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
(RULEMAKING RESULTING FROM A SECTION 610 REVIEW)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and other federal authorities
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14202; 14188
CFR Citation: 45 CFR 88
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: In keeping with Executive Orders 14202 and 14188, and
HHS' commitment to reevaluate its regulations and guidance pertaining
to Federal laws on conscience and religious exercise, the proposed
conscience rule would amend the 2024 rule to make technical corrections
and clarify how OCR addresses those federal authorities.
Statement of Need: HHS is the Federal government's lead agency for
protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human
services. OCR supports that mission by ensuring HHS programs and funds
are expended in keeping with applicable civil rights laws, including
laws protecting the conscience rights of the health care workforce.
Current OCR regulations provide clarity on OCR's enforcement process
but do not address the scope and meaning of the federal health care
conscience statutes. Prior rulemakings have received significant
stakeholder engagement requesting clarity on these authorities. This
regulatory action is needed to clarify that scope and meaning to ensure
the health care workforce can avail themselves of their protection,
thereby ensuring their ability to continue providing health care,
including in the service of women, children, and families.
Summary of Legal Basis: This regulation would be promulgated under
federal conscience and religious freedom protections such as the
following authorities: The Federal health care conscience statutes
(e.g., 42 U.S.C. 300a-7 (the Church Amendments); 42 U.S.C. 238n (Coats-
Snowe Amendment); the Weldon Amendment (e.g., Pub. L. 115-245, Div. B,
sec. 507(d)). The authorities include the Department's Housekeeping
Authority (5 U.S.C. 301); 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 42 U.S.C. 263a(f)(1)(E);
Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit
Requirements For HHS Awards (45 CFR parts 75 and 96); Federal
Acquisitions Regulations (48 CFR chapter 1; 48 CFR part 370); HHS
Nonprocurement Debarment And Suspension (2 CFR part 376).
Alternatives: OCR will consider as alternative approaches to the
proposed rulemaking:
A. Not engaging in rulemaking and maintaining the status quo.
B. Engaging in technical rulemaking only to add related authorities
to OCR's delegation to enforce the federal health care conscience
statutes and to clarify portions of the current regulation.
C. Promulgating a rule substantially similar in scope and cost to
the 2019 Final Conscience Rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 2024 Final Conscience Rule had
significant quantifiable savings of -$128,000,000 annualized value for
the 7% discount rate as a result from partly repealing the 2019
conscience rule. This regulatory action would be building on that final
rule to confer non-quantifiable benefits such as notice and greater
clarity for the medical community about existing statutory obligations
and protections. This regulatory action would also confer qualitative
benefits, including sustaining membership in the workforce of
practitioners who would otherwise not join or remain in the workforce
but for protection of their statutory conscience rights. This
regulatory action would address Government and other federally funded
discrimination against health care systems, insurers, providers, and
the like could reduce the private health care workforce, and in turn,
this could result in longer wait times, lower quality of care, and more
people accessing government funded health insurance with greater costs
to the public.
This regulatory action would likely incur some quantifiable costs
associated with ensuring compliance with the federal health care
conscience statutes. Similar to the 2019 and 2024 Final Conscience
Rules, this regulatory action is likely to have familiarization costs
similar to the $106.3 million cost (at a 7% discount) in the 2024 Final
Rule and $103 million cost (at a 7% discount) in the 2019 Final Rule.
The familiarization costs in this rule will be adjusted for inflation
and will occur in the first year after publication. This regulatory
action may prompt covered entities to incur voluntary remedial efforts,
at a similar inflation-adjusted cost to the 2019 Rule, which costs
ranged between $8.0 million and $5.4 million annually (at a 7% discount
rate). Other costs associated with the 2019 Final Rule, including
additional enforcement costs to OCR and the cost of voluntary notices,
were not considered new costs under the 2024 Final Rule. OCR does not
anticipate additional costs associated with voluntary notices, however,
there may be additional modest enforcement costs to OCR at less than $3
million a year.
Risks: This regulation may reduce risks to public health by
reducing instances of conscience-based discrimination. This both
prevents the deleterious impact discrimination can have on the
individuals experiencing the discrimination, and the negative impact on
public health of a reduction in work force membership, including in
rural areas, of practitioners who would otherwise not join or remain in
the workforce but for awareness of and clear protection of their
statutory conscience rights. The magnitude of the risk addressed by the
action is similar to OCR's role in mitigating risks to public health
posed by discrimination on other bases, though allegations of
conscience-based discrimination currently constitute a smaller portion
of the discrimination-based complaints received annually by OCR.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: David Christensen, Supervisory Policy Advisor,
Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, 200
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 795-7830
Email: [email protected]
[[Page 52838]]
Related RIN: Previously reported as 0945-AA18
RIN: 0945-AA24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--OCR Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
41. HIPAA PRIVACY RULE: CHANGES TO SUPPORT COORDINATED CARE AND
INDIVIDUAL ENGAGEMENT AND REDUCE REGULATORY BURDENS
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: This action may affect the private sector under
PL 104-4.
Legal Authority: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act of 1996 (HIPAA), sec. 264 (42 U.S.C. 1320d-2 note); Health
Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act,
sec. 13405 (42 U.S.C. 201 note)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 13610; 13563; 14221
CFR Citation: 45 CFR 160; 45 CFR 164
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule will address proposals to modify the HIPAA
Privacy Rule to strengthen individuals' rights to access their own
protected health information, including electronic information; improve
information sharing for care coordination and case management for
individuals; facilitate greater family and caregiver involvement in the
care of individuals experiencing emergencies or health crises; enhance
flexibilities for disclosures in emergency or threatening
circumstances; support the use of telecommunications relay services by
individuals and workforce members of HIPAA covered entities and
business associates who are deaf, hard of hearing, deaf-blind, or who
have a speech disability; expand the Privacy Rule permission to use and
disclose protected health information of Armed Forces personnel for
national readiness purposes so that it applies to all uniformed
services personnel; and reduce administrative burdens on HIPAA covered
health care providers and health plans, while continuing to protect
individuals' health information privacy interests.
Statement of Need: HHS is the Federal government's lead agency for
protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human
services. OCR supports that mission by enforcing protections for health
information privacy and security pursuant to the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy, Security,
and Breach Notification Rules and the Health Information Technology for
Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH Act). In light of
ongoing concerns that regulatory barriers across the Department impede
effective delivery of coordinated, value-based health care, and impose
unnecessary administrative expenses and limit initiatives that reward
innovation, value, and performance, the Department launched efforts to
promote care coordination and facilitate a nationwide transformation to
value-based health care and reduce regulatory barriers to coordinated
care.
Summary of Legal Basis: This regulation would be promulgated under
HIPAA, the HITECH Act.
Alternatives: OCR considered regulatory and non-regulatory
alternatives to rulemaking, including expanding OCR outreach, guidance,
and educational materials, as well as not engaging in rulemaking and
maintaining the status quo. OCR determined that rulemaking is necessary
to achieve the desired effects of reducing burdens and strengthening
individual rights. OCR may supplement this rulemaking with non-
regulatory actions such as issuing subregulatory guidance.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OCR estimates an annualized cost
savings of approximately $785 million discounted at 7 percent. Costs
are attributable to new training, the development of new policies and
procedures, and administrative expenses. Cost-savings are attributable
to eliminating certain recordkeeping requirements.
Risks: None known.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RFI................................. 11/01/18 83 FR 64302
RFI Comment Period End.............. 02/19/19
NPRM................................ 01/21/21 86 FR 6446
NPRM Comment Period Extended........ 03/10/21 86 FR 13683
NPRM Comment Period End............. 03/22/21
NPRM Comment Period Extended End.... 05/06/21
Final Action........................ 08/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
URL For More Information: www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy
Agency Contact: Conner O'Brien, Senior Advisor, Department of
Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, 200 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 800 537-7697
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 0945-AA20
RIN: 0945-AA00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--OCR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
42. NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN PROGRAMS OR
ACTIVITIES RECEIVING FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 794
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14168; 14187
CFR Citation: 45 CFR 84
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule would revise 45 CFR part 84 under
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to address discrimination
on the basis of disability in programs and activities funded by HHS.
HHS revised 45 CFR part 84 under Section 504 in May of 2024 (see
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs or Activities
Receiving Federal Financial Assistance (RIN 0945-AA15)) and now intends
to clarify existing statutory limitations on the definition of
disability as it applies to gender identity disorders and/or gender
dysphoria.
Statement of Need: In order to further this Administration's
priorities and clear up confusion surrounding non-binding preamble
language, HHS will need to issue rulemaking on disability under Section
504. HHS has issued a Federal Register notice that the preamble
statements lack the force and effect of law and are not enforceable.
See Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs or
Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance; Clarification, 90 FR
15412 (Apr. 11, 2025). However, because preamble discussions are often
persuasive authority, HHS needs to issue a rule clarifying that the
2024 Section 504 Final Rule preamble language on gender dysphoria did
not constitute the best reading of 29 U.S.C. 705(20)(F)(i) which
excludes gender identity disorders from the term disability. The
Department has already faced legal consequences [1] for the language
and will need to clear up confusion among recipients and members of the
public. Regulatory action is needed to address litigation, enforce the
Administration's priorities, and recognize the best reading of the
underlying statute.
[1] See Texas v. Becerra, No. 5:24-cv-00225 (N.D. Tex.); Rapides
Parish Sch. Bd. v. U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs., et al, 1:25-cv-
70 (W.D. La.).
[[Page 52839]]
Summary of Legal Basis: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 794, gives HHS the authority to promulgate
regulations prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability in
programs and activities conducted by the Department. The substantive
authority for the definition and exclusions includes 29 U.S.C. 705
(20)(F) There are currently no requirements due to statute or court
order.
Alternatives: OCR will consider as alternative approaches to the
proposed rulemaking:
A. Not engaging in rulemaking and maintaining the status quo.
B. Attempt an Interim Final Rule (IFR) instead of a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Any costs would be negligible given
that this is a clarification of one limited aspect of the definition of
disability as it relates to bringing claims for civil rights
violations. OCR does not anticipate that recipients will alter their
practices based on this clarification, especially since this
clarification will eliminate any confusion that may have been brought
about by the Preamble to 2024 Section 504 Final Rule. Benefits would be
largely unquantifiable and rest largely on enforcing Administration
priorities.
Risks: The main risk is for further litigation. At present, there
is only a single federal appeals court decision, Williams v. Kincaid,
[1] that addresses, on the merits, whether gender dysphoria may be
considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. That decision comes to the
opposite conclusion of this rulemaking, finding that gender dysphoria
is not sufficiently similar to gender identity disorders, which are
expressly excluded from the definition of disability and individual
with a disability under the ADA and/or Section 504. While many district
courts have come to the opposite conclusion of Williams, and OCR
believes that the best reading of the underlying statute essentially is
that gender identity disorder encompasses gender dysphoria, the Fourth
Circuit opinion cuts against this rulemaking. OCR's approach is
consistent with a recent statement of interest filed by the Department
of Justice in a private lawsuit involving an ADA claim on the same
issue.
[1] 45 F.4th 759 (4th Cir. 2022), cert. denied, 600 U.S. __ (2023).
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/19/25 90 FR 59478
NPRM Reopening of public comment 02/02/26 91 FR 4467
period.
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/20/26
Final Action........................ 09/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: John Thompson, Policy Advisor, Policy Division,
Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, 200
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 800 368-1019
TDD Phone: 800 537-7697
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Previously reported as 0945-AA15
RIN: 0945-AA27
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Office of the National Coordinator
for Health Information Technology (ONC) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
43. HEALTH DATA, TECHNOLOGY, AND INTEROPERABILITY: APPLICATION
PROGRAMMING INTERFACES AND INFORMATION BLOCKING
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300jj-11; 42 U.S.C. 300jj-14; 42 U.S.C.
300jj-52; 5 U.S.C. 552; P.L 114-255
Relevant Executive Orders: 14267; 14221; 14212
CFR Citation: 45 CFR 170; 45 CFR 171
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The proposed rule would seek to advance interoperability
through proposals for standards adoption; the certification of health
IT to support expanded uses of application programming interfaces
(APIs); and enhancements to the conditions of certification.
Additionally, the rule would update the information blocking
regulations to support information sharing and improved patient health
outcomes.
Statement of Need: The Make America Healthy Again initiative, as
established by Executive Orders 14212 Establishing the President's Make
America Healthy Again Commission and 14221 Making America Healthy Again
by Empowering Patients with Clear, Accurate, and Actionable Healthcare
Pricing Information, aims to combat chronic disease and enhance price
transparency. Executive Order 14267, Reducing Anti-Competitive
Regulatory Barriers, further promotes market competition and lowering
health care costs. The HTI-6 Proposed Rule is needed to further enhance
the access, exchange, and use of electronic health information (EHI) by
patients, providers, and third parties--empowering them to address
chronic disease, increase market competition, and lower health care
costs. Specifically, proposals in the rule would advance
interoperability and EHI sharing through: standards adoption; the
certification of health IT to support expanded uses of application
programming interfaces (APIs) and potential successor technologies;
targeted conditions of certification; and revised information blocking
regulations.
Summary of Legal Basis: The provisions would be implemented under
the authority of the Public Health Service Act, as amended by the
HITECH Act and the 21st Century Cures Act.
Alternatives: ONC will consider different options to improve
interoperability and access to electronic health information so that
the benefits to providers, patients, and payers are maximized and the
economic burden to health IT developers, providers, and other
stakeholders is minimized.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The majority of costs for this
proposed rule would be incurred by health IT developers in terms of
meeting new requirements and continual compliance with the condition
and maintenance of certification requirements. We expect that through
implementation and compliance with the regulations, the market
(particularly patients, payers, and providers) will benefit greatly
from increased interoperability and access to electronic heath
information. We have not yet quantified the costs and benefits of this
proposed rule.
Risks: At this time, ASTP/ONC has not been able to identify any
substantial risks that would undermine likely proposals in the proposed
rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Michael Lipinski, Director, Regulatory and Policy
Affairs Division, Office of Policy, Department of
[[Page 52840]]
Health and Human Services, Office of the National Coordinator for
Health Information Technology, Mail Stop: 7033A, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 690-7151
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0955-AA10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
44. CONTROL OF COMMUNICABLE DISEASES; FOREIGN QUARANTINE: DOG
IMPORTATION
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 264, sec. 361
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14165; 14243
CFR Citation: 42 CFR 71
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule addresses the public health risk of
dog-maintained rabies virus variant (DMRVV) associated with the
importation of dogs into the United States. In this rule, HHS/CDC
proposes revisions and clarifications to the requirements for the
importation of dogs.
Statement of Need: Following publication of a related final rule in
May 2024, CDC received considerable feedback regarding the rule's
requirements for dogs entering from low risk and rabies-free countries.
In response, CDC quickly implemented temporary flexibilities prior to
the rule's effective date. Implementing these temporary flexibilities
alleviated the most pressing concerns regarding burden and prevented
travel disruptions.
Targeted modification of these regulatory requirements is needed to
ensure that they are proportionate to the public health risk. By
refining these requirements, we can strike a better balance between
protecting public health and minimizing unnecessary burden importers
from low-risk and rabies-free countries. This approach acknowledges a
minimal increase in the possibility of fraudulent importation, but the
benefits are substantial: improved public compliance, streamlined
processes, and significantly reduced burden for those importing dogs
from the lowest-risk countries. In addition to alleviating the burden
of individuals importing dogs, we are also working closely with
airlines to provide additional flexibilities for air waybill
requirements.
Congressional and interagency partners (including Department of
State), foreign governments, airlines, rescue groups, disability
advocates, and breeders have welcomed the temporary flexibilities and
remain interested in maintaining simpler and less burdensome
importation requirements in the long-term.
Summary of Legal Basis: The primary legal authority supporting this
proposed rule is section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act)
(42 U.S.C. 264). Under section 361, the Secretary of HHS (Secretary)
may make and enforce such regulations as in the Secretary's judgment
are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of
communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and
from one State or possession into any other State or possession. It
also authorizes the Secretary to promulgate and enforce a variety of
public health regulations to prevent the spread of communicable
diseases, including through inspection, fumigation, disinfection,
sanitation, pest extermination, destruction of animals or articles
found to be sources of dangerous infection to human beings, and other
measures. Since at least 1956, federal quarantine regulations
(currently found at 42 CFR 71.51) have controlled the entry of dogs and
cats into the United States.
Alternatives: We have considered maintaining existing dog
importation requirements, which would provide the highest level of
protection against the importation of DRMVV. However, we have
determined that reducing the requirements for low-risk dog importations
would substantially lower burden while retaining appropriate public
health protections. This approach aligns with Section 4(c)(1)(B) of
Executive Order 12866, which calls for regulations to be tailored to
the level of risk and to avoid imposing unnecessary costs. Furthermore,
maintaining current requirements would conflict with the mandate in
Executive Order 14219 to reduce regulatory burdens wherever possible.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: While formal economic estimates are
still in progress, CDC's preliminary analysis indicates that the
proposed revisions to 42 CFR 71.51 will generate substantial cost
savings and increased flexibilities for individual travelers,
government agencies, and commercial airlines. Current estimates suggest
that these changes could result in annualizednet cost-savings of $5--
$43 million.
The primary source of cost savings stems from streamlining
documentation requirements for dogs imported from rabies-free and low-
risk countries. By streamlining these requirements, the rule will
significantly reduce administrative, compliance, and processing costs
for importers. Instead, the only requirement will be a CDC Dog Import
Form receipt.
In addition to the cost-savings, the proposed changes will enhance
travel flexibility for individuals and organizations, making it easier
to import dogs from low-risk countries without unnecessary delays or
disruptions.
Risks: Adopting reduced documentation requirements for dogs
imported from low-risk and rabies-free countries is a targeted approach
that aligns regulatory oversight with the public health risk posed by
these importations. The primary risk associated with this approach is a
small increase in the possibility of fraudulent importation attempts,
such as falsified documentation or misrepresentation of a dog's country
of origin or rabies status. However, this risk is mitigated by several
factors:
5. Low Baseline Risk: Dogs imported from countries classified as
low-risk or rabies-free have a minimal likelihood of carrying DMRVV, as
these countries maintain robust rabies control and surveillance
programs. Historical data and international standards support the low
risk associated with these importations.
Retained Safeguards: While documentation requirements are
being streamlined, essential safeguards remain in place to verify the
origin and health status of imported dogs. These measures continue to
provide a strong layer of protection against the introduction of rabies
and other diseases.The proposed rule would maintain the Director's
authority to deny the entry of dogs who do not appear healthy upon
arrival.
4. Improved Compliance: Simplifying requirements is expected to
increase public compliance, as importers are more likely to follow
clear and reasonable rules. Higher compliance rates further reduce the
risk of inadvertent or intentional violations.
This approach is consistent with Section 4(c)(1)(D) of Executive
Order 12866, which directs agencies to ensure that regulations are
proportionate to the risks addressed. By focusing regulatory efforts
where they are most needed, we maintain effective public health
protections while minimizing unnecessary burdens.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
[[Page 52841]]
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Agency Contact: Ashley C. Altenburger, JD, Regulatory Analyst,
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS: H16-4, Atlanta, GA 30307
Phone: 800 232-4636
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0920-AA87
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
45. ADMINISTRATIVE DETENTION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 334; 21 U.S.C. 371
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 16; 21 CFR 1100
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: FDA is proposing a regulation to establish requirements
for the administrative detention of tobacco products. This rule, if
finalized, would allow FDA to administratively detain tobacco products
believed to be adulterated or misbranded that are encountered during
inspections of manufacturers, vape shops, or other establishments that
manufacture, process, pack, or hold tobacco products. The intent of
administrative detention is to protect public health by preventing the
distribution or use of tobacco products that are believed to be
adulterated or misbranded until FDA has had time to consider the
appropriate action to take and, where appropriate, to initiate legal
action. This rule, if finalized, would be a critical enforcement tool
to stop the distribution and sale of unauthorized tobacco products,
such as illegal shipments of unauthorized e-cigarettes originating from
overseas.
Statement of Need: Currently, Federal law prohibits the
adulteration or misbranding of a tobacco product, as well as the
introduction, delivery for introduction, or receipt in interstate
commerce of such product. Adulterated products include those that are
contaminated, held under unsanitary conditions, or lack required
marketing authorization. (Section 902(1)-(2), (6) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). Misbranded products include those
with false or misleading labeling or those that do not bear labeling
that is required by an applicable tobacco product standard. (Section
903(a)(1) and (a)(9) of the FD&C Act.) Notably, large quantities of
tobacco products such as e-cigarettes continue to be illegally imported
and marketed without required marketing authorization. This proposed
rule, if finalized, would allow FDA to administratively detain non-
compliant tobacco products. The period of administrative detention
provides FDA with valuable time to consider further action, if
appropriate, including time to engage the Department of Justice, who
could go to court on FDA's behalf to pursue legal action such as a
seizure of the products in question. Without the ability to
administratively detain non-compliant products, manufacturers,
distributors, and retailers could unlawfully transport the products to
evade their seizure, and market them from a different location.
This proposed rule mirrors existing regulatory authority for the
administrative detention of devices and drugs. FDA's administrative
detention authority with respect to drugs allows FDA to better protect
the integrity of the drug supply chain. For foods, FDA can exercise
administrative detention authority to prevent potentially harmful food
from reaching U.S. consumers and thereby improve the safety of the U.S.
food supply. Similarly, FDA can administratively detain devices that
are suspected of being in violation of the Act. This proposed rule is
needed with respect to tobacco products so that FDA has an additional
enforcement tool to better protect the public health. The ability for
FDA to issue administration detention orders against new, unauthorized
tobacco products, including ENDS, may encourage manufacturers to submit
premarket applications requesting authorization for their products to
be lawfully marketed, rather than continue to flood the market with
additional unauthorized products. FDA would be able to use our
resources to review these applications under streamlined procedures
under development and authorize those that are appropriate for the
protection of the public health.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this action is sections
304(g) and 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
Section 304(g) of the FD&C Act provides FDA with administrative
detention authority with respect to tobacco products pursuant to duly
promulgated regulations. Section 304(g)(1) states that [i]f during an
inspection conducted under section 704 of a facility or a vehicle, a
device, drug, or tobacco product which the officer or employee making
the inspection has reason to believe is adulterated or misbranded is
found in such facility or vehicle, such officer or employee may order
the device, drug, or tobacco product detained (in accordance with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary) for a reasonable period which
may not exceed twenty days unless the Secretary determines that a
period of detention greater than twenty days is required to institute
an action under subsection (a) or section 302, in which case he may
authorize a detention period of not to exceed thirty days.
Additionally, section 701 of the FD&C Act gives FDA general rulemaking
authority to issue regulations for the efficient enforcement of the
FD&C Act.
Alternatives: FDA has considered a delay in the effective date of
the regulation, i.e., a greater than 30-day period before the rule
becomes effective. While a delay may discount FDA's cost estimates, it
would not have an impact on the cost of regulated entities reading and
understanding the rule. On the other hand, a delay in the effective
date would increase the risk of adulterated or misbranded tobacco
products being released into U.S. commerce and to the public. For these
reasons, FDA did not pursue this regulatory alternative.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The estimated primary costs of the
proposed rule include the one-time costs incurred by industry to read
and understand the regulation, if finalized, annual costs to FDA
associated with marking or labeling the detained product, and costs
associated with potential appeals of detention orders; however, other
costs, such as loss in market value of a detained tobacco product or
additional costs associated with appeals of detention orders to
affected entities, could be incurred if FDA revokes the detention order
on appeal. Given the history of administrative detention use with
medical devices, foods, and human and animal drugs, the most likely
outcomes are the firm would choose to destroy the detained tobacco
product voluntarily or that FDA would initiate a seizure of the
product.
The primary public health benefit from adoption of the proposed
rule would be the value of the illnesses, injuries, or deaths prevented
because the Agency administratively detained a tobacco product it has
reason to believe is adulterated or misbranded. These benefits would
occur only if the tobacco product would not have been prevented
[[Page 52842]]
from entering the market using one of the Agency's other regulatory and
enforcement tools. Additionally, should firms choose to voluntarily
destroy the detained tobacco products, or a federal seizure action is
otherwise avoided, potential cost-savings would be realized. There
would also be benefits from deterrence if administrative detention
increases the likelihood that adulterated or misbranded products would
not enter commerce in the future.
Risks: None.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Dhanya John, Regulatory Counsel, Department of
Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for
Tobacco Products, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Document Control Center,
Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 877 287-1373
Email: [email protected]
Beth Buckler, Senior Regulatory Counsel, Department of Health and
Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Tobacco
Products, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Document Control Center, Bldg.
71, Rm. G335, Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 877 287-1373
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AI05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
46. MODERNIZING REGULATIONS TO PROMOTE ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION AND REDUCE
PAPER SUBMISSION
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551 to 558; 5 U.S.C. 701 to 706; 15
U.S.C. 1453; 15 U.S.C. 1454; 15 U.S.C. 1455; 21 U.S.C. 141 to 149; 21
U.S.C. 321; 21 U.S.C. 331; 21 U.S.C. 336; 21 U.S.C. 341; 21 U.S.C. 342;
21 U.S.C. 343; 21 U.S.C. 348; 21 U.S.C. 351; 21 U.S.C. 352; 21 U.S.C.
353; 21 U.S.C. 355; 21 U.S.C. 360; 21 U.S.C. 360c; 21 U.S.C. 360j; 21
U.S.C. 360l; 21 U.S.C. 360aa; 21 U.S.C. 360aaa-6; 21 U.S.C. 360b-360f;
21 U.S.C. 360bbb-8b; 21 U.S.C. 360h to 360i; 21 U.S.C. 361; 21 U.S.C.
371; 21 U.S.C. 372; 21 U.S.C. 373; 21 U.S.C. 374; 21 U.S.C. 375; 21
U.S.C. 379; 21 U.S.C. 379e; 21 U.S.C. 379k-1; 21 U.S.C. 381; 21 U.S.C.
467f; 21 U.S.C. 679; 21 U.S.C. 821; 21 U.S.C. 1034; 28 U.S.C. 2112; 42
U.S.C. 201; 42 U.S.C. 216; 42 U.S.C. 241; 42 U.S.C. 243; 42 U.S.C. 262;
42 U.S.C. 263b; 42 U.S.C. 264; 42 U.S.C. 271; . . .
Relevant Executive Orders: 14303; 13563; 14212
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 101.69; 21 CFR 130.17; 21 CFR 171.1; 21 CFR
571.1; 21 CFR 71.1; 21 CFR 10.20; 21 CFR 10.40; 21 CFR 10.85; 21 CFR
314.94; 21 CFR 314.50
Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, September 30, 2022.
Abstract: This rule would amend FDA's regulations to promote
electronic submissions and reduce paper submission, including by
removing requirements for submission of multiple copies and replace
them with the requirement for a single submission in electronic format.
This action is being undertaken to revise regulations that required
paper submission.
Statement of Need: The proposed rule, if finalized, would remove
express or implied requirements for submission of multiple copies as
well as the requirement or option to provide paper submissions for a
large number of programs and processes administered by the Agency and
replace them with a requirement for single submissions in electronic
format. Because electronic submission is easily reproducible, the
requirement for multiple copies is no longer necessary. FDA believes it
is beneficial to the public to limit any burden and expense to
submitters caused by requiring additional copies, and that due to the
essentially universal availability of electronic devices that can
transmit documents in electronic format, the Agency no longer needs to
provide the option to submit information on paper. In conjunction with
related efforts focused on existing records, this rule would facilitate
a fully digital system of records submitted to and maintained by the
Agency. FDA considers that such a system would enhance the efficiency
of the Agency's operations and also facilitate transparency in records
requests. To help ensure access to FDA's submission processes for all
participants, the Agency intends to provide the ability to request a
waiver for individual paper submissions.
Summary of Legal Basis: FDA is issuing this rule from the same
authority under which FDA initially issued the applicable regulations.
In addition, section 701(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 371(a)) grants FDA general rulemaking authority
to issue regulations for the efficient enforcement of the FD&C Act.
Alternatives:
Alternative 1: Remove express or implied requirements for paper
submissions but continue to accept them if submitted.
Given the availability of a waiver process, the primary
beneficiaries of this option would be entities with the ability or
option to submit electronically but who do not choose to do so.
Compared to the proposed approach, this option would be less effective
at reducing administrative complexity and system fragmentation going
forward and would reduce the accessibility of Agency records.
Alternative 2: Require electronic submissions only for a subset of
submission processes.
This option would involve selecting certain submission processes
for mandatory electronic submission. As with Alternative 1, we
anticipate this option would be less effective at reducing
administrative complexity and system fragmentation going forward and
would reduce the accessibility of Agency records. In addition, this
approach could potentially result in concerns of unbalanced treatment
of different stakeholders or industry sectors based on the selected
processes.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The rule would amend regulations to
reduce or eliminate submitting multiple copies to the Agency for a
large number of programs and processes. The rule would also amend
regulations containing a reference to the specific form of a submission
to require that the submission be in electronic format. The rule would
produce cost-savings for firms and FDA without imposing any additional
regulatory burdens or affecting the Agency's ability to review
submissions. Firms would incur minimal administrative costs to read and
understand the rule. Some firms and individuals that currently send
their submissions by mail may incur the costs of submit electronically.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Shena Arellano, Policy Analyst, Department of
Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Office of the
Commissione 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 301 796-8353
Email: [email protected]
[[Page 52843]]
RIN: 0910-AI50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. SUBSTANCES GENERALLY RECOGNIZED AS SAFE
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321; 21 U.S.C. 342; 21 U.S.C. 348; 21
U.S.C. 371
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 13272; 13100
CFR Citation: 21 CFR part 170; 21 CFR part 570
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule, if finalized, would amend FDA's regulations at
21 CFR parts 170 and 570 to require the submission of a generally
recognized as safe (GRAS) notice for the use of a human or animal food
substance that is purported to be GRAS under the conditions of its
intended use under section 201(s) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). The rule would clarify that FDA maintain and
update the public-facing GRAS notice inventory for all substances that
are the subject of mandatory GRAS notice for the conditions of their
intended use. The rule would also clarify the process under which FDA
would determine that the use of a substance is not GRAS. This change
would provide greater transparency about substances that are added to
food, so that FDA can more efficiently determine if the use of a
substance constitutes a food additive use that is subject to the
premarket review and approval requirements under the FD&C Act.
Statement of Need: This proposed rule would revise the procedures
by which a person introducing a human or animal food substance into
interstate commerce notifies FDA of a conclusion that the use of such
substance is generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Specifically, the
proposed rule would require the submission of GRAS notices to FDA for
certain uses of food substances. A substance that is GRAS under the
conditions of its intended use is not subject to FDA premarket review
and approval as a food additive for that particular use (see sections
201(s) and 409 of the FD&C Act). Under our current regulations, a
person who concludes that the use of a substance is GRAS under the
conditions of its intended use may, but is not required to, notify FDA
of this conclusion. The submission of a GRAS notice is therefore
currently voluntary. If the proposed rule is finalized, GRAS notices
will be required for certain uses of substances in human and animal
food. Uses of food substances that are subject to the mandatory
notification requirement will be presumed by FDA not to be GRAS unless
the notification requirement has been met regarding the use of the
substance.
Summary of Legal Basis: We are issuing this proposed rule
consistent with our authority in sections 201, 402, 409, and 701 of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348, 371).
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The primary benefits of the proposed
rule, if finalized, would come from increased information being made
available to FDA and the public regarding substances used in human and
animal foods. This information would enable us to more effectively
determine if the use of a substance constitutes a food additive use
that is subject to premarket review and approval under the FD&C Act.
This information is also expected to help FDA identify and prevent the
use of unsafe food additives in food, thereby enabling FDA to regulate
the safety of food substances more effectively. One-time costs of the
proposed rule to persons who introduce a substance into interstate
commerce under the GRAS provision of section 201(s) of the FD&C Act
include reading the rule and revising standard operating procedures
(SOPs) regarding GRAS notices. Other one-time per manufacturer costs of
the proposed rule are preparing and submitting streamlined submissions
related to uses of substances introduced into interstate commerce under
the GRAS provision of section 201(s) of the FD&C Act before the
effective date of a final rule, for firms that choose to submit this
information during the window of availability for this time-limited
option for such submissions. Costs associated with these activities may
include translation costs for manufacturers in non-English speaking
countries. Recurring costs to affected manufacturers would include
preparing and submitting GRAS notices for the uses of substances
introduced into interstate commerce under the GRAS provision of section
201(s) of the FD&C Act after the effective date of a final rule that
would otherwise have been the subject of an independent conclusion of
GRAS status (i.e., a GRAS conclusion has been reached without
submitting a GRAS notice).
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Paulette Gaynor, Senior Policy Advisor, Department
of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Human Foods
Program, 4300 River Road, Room 2053 (HFS-255), College Park, MD 20740-
3835
Phone: 240 402-1192
Fax: 301 436-2965
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
48. TRANSPARENCY IN DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER ADVERTISING
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, section
502(n) (21 U.S.C. 352)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14303; 14212; 13563
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 202
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule will revise 21 CFR 202.1 to eliminate the
option for prescription drug advertisements broadcast through media
such as radio or television to fulfill the statutory brief summary
requirement in section 502(n) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FD&C Act) by disclosing risk, contraindication, and other safety
information in another source beyond the advertisement itself.
Statement of Need: Until relatively recently, Direct-to-Consumer
(DTC) broadcast advertisements for prescription drugs were rare, in
part because drug companies had not been advised by FDA how they could
meet the adequate provision requirement for dissemination of the FDA-
approved labeling in connection with broadcast ads. In 1999, FDA issued
a final guidance document, that described an approach to fulfill the
adequate provision requirement for broadcast advertisements. The
approach created a loophole that resulted in certain important
information being hidden behind 1-800 numbers, print inserts, and
websites, rather than being included in the broadcast advertisement.
The proliferation of DTC advertising across television and digital
platforms has created potential patient confusion and harm from
inappropriate demand for medications, distorting the doctor-patient
relationship leading to misalignment of therapeutic choices
[[Page 52844]]
with actual patient needs, and the misallocation of healthcare
resources and government overspending. FDA proposes revising the
prescription drug advertising regulation to require DTC ads broadcast
through media such as radio and television to disclose all relevant
risk and safety information to consumers within the confines of the ad
itself rather than referring consumers to an external source where they
can request the full FDA-approved labeling. This action does not
constitute a ban or unreasonable imposition on DTC drug advertising,
but would instead require complete and accurate safety,
contraindication, and other risk information in DTC prescription drug
advertisements, so that patients and consumers can make fully informed
decisions.
Summary of Legal Basis: FDA has authority to promulgate rules
governing the promotion of prescription drugs under Section 502(n) of
the FD&C Act [21 U.S.C. 352(n)], which states that promotional material
shall include ``such other information in brief summary relating to
side effects, contraindications, and effectiveness as shall be required
in regulations[.]'' FDA has set forth regulations under 502(n) at 21
CFR 202.1, including the ``adequate provision'' language at issue here.
Id. at 202.1(e)(1)(i)(B).
Alternatives: Removing the ``adequate provision'' loophole
permitting the disclosure of ``all necessary information related to
side effects and contraindications'' in a location other than the
promotional material is the only option to effectuate the goals and
direction of the September 9, 2025, Presidential Memorandum instructing
HHS and FDA to ``take appropriate action to ensure transparency and
accuracy in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising, including
by increasing the amount of information regarding any risks associated
with the use of any such prescription drug required to be provided in
prescription drug advertisements, to the extent permitted by applicable
law.''
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FDA anticipates that this rule, if
finalized, will result in regulatory costs. Industry will face costs of
either: (1) purchasing additional advertising time to include required
product safety information, (2) dedicating additional advertising time
within current advertising time slots toward the newly required
information, or (3) the opportunity cost of choosing not to advertise
if the cost of inclusion of all newly required safety information
induces a decrease or cessation of product advertising. To provide
context for the magnitude of such potential costs, we note that, in
2023, the top ten pharmaceutical companies spent a combined $13.8
billion on the promotion of drugs directed at U.S. consumers and
physicians (source: CSRxP Analysis: Direct-To-Consumer Advertising
Report. (2025). In CSRxP.org. The Campaign for Sustainable Rx Pricing.
https://www.csrxp.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/CSRxP-Analysis-Direct-to-Consumer-Advertising-Report.pdf). Given the potential impact on
advertising spending, we expect this rule to be economically
significant, with annual costs exceeding $100 million for at least one
year. The benefits of this rule are in providing patients more complete
safety information during all advertisements covered by the rule, thus
improving consumer understanding when they participate in healthcare
decision making.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Agency Contact: Lowell Zeta, Deputy Commissioner of Strategic
Initiatives, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, WO Building 1, Room 2314,
Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 301 332-8931
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
49. PROACTIVE DISCLOSURE OF COMPLETE RESPONSE LETTERS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, section
505(1) (21 U.S.C. 355(1)); The Freedom of Information Act at 5 U.S.C.
552(a)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 13563; 14303
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 20; 21 CFR 312.130; 21 CFR 314.430; 21 CFR
601.51; 21 CFR 814.9
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule will revise 21 CFR 312.130, 314.430, 601.51,
and 814.9 to clarify and expand the discretion of the Commissioner of
the Food and Drug Administration regarding the public release of
Complete Response Letters (CRLs) and not approvable letters. This rule
will eliminate the longstanding presumption that the mere existence of
a marketing application constitutes confidential commercial
information, thereby enabling proactive disclosure of CRLs for
unapproved products while maintaining appropriate redactions for trade
secrets and personal private information.
Statement of Need: CRLs and not approvable letters are summary
documents FDA issues to sponsors when it completes its review cycle and
determines that it cannot grant approval of an application in its
current form. FDA describes in the letters the specific deficiencies
identified during the review of safety and effectiveness data in the
application which prevent it from granting approval of an application.
CRLs and not approvable letters often contain confidential commercial
information (CCI), trade secret information (TSI), (and personal
private information (PPI)) that will be redacted prior to any public
disclosure under the Trade Secrets Act and section 301(j) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
There are compelling public interests favoring the disclosure of
CRL information and a good cause finding for this rule. Sponsors can
leverage this valuable information to avoid common missteps and to
provide enhanced predictability leading to more meaningful cures and
treatments. Such efficiencies support the public interest in the
availability, safety, and effectiveness of medical products and their
efficient entry onto the market. Information related to the safety and
effectiveness (and timeliness) of treatments is an issue of the utmost
importance to patients and their families, and healthcare professionals
evaluating and recommending care for patients. In addition, greater
transparency will help to ensure sponsors provide complete and
contextualized information in public announcements and to investors and
shareholders. FDA recognizes the tremendous public interest in the
transparency and credibility of FDA decision-making. Restoring common
sense and gold standard science to America's public health system is an
issue of paramount importance.
Summary of Legal Basis: FDA's authority to release CRL information
is
[[Page 52845]]
derived from the Federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) at 5 U.S.C.
552(a), section 505(l) of the FD&C Act) at 21 U.S.C. 355(l), and FDA
information disclosure regulations at 21 CFR part 20 and 21 CFR parts
312.130, 314.430, and 601.51. Federal law and FDA regulations provide
FDA significant discretion to disclose CRL information including
certain safety and effectiveness deficiencies associated with a pending
application, regardless of whether the application has been made
public. See 21 U.S.C. 355(l)(1). As set forth in 21 CFR 314.430(a)-(c),
FDA's statements and deliberations reflected in CRLs are not property
of the sponsor and can be disclosed by FDA.
Alternatives: There is no alternative method of changing the
current regulatory structure to permit the disclosure of CRLs
associated with applications whose existence has not been made public.
Amending 21 CFR parts 312.130, 314.430, 601.51, and 814.9 enables FDA
to clarify and revise its longstanding presumption that the mere
existence of an application is CCI and thus cannot be disclosed to the
public, permitting the disclosure of CRLs related to otherwise non-
public applications.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The benefits of the proposed rule
would be increased transparency into FDA decision-making on CRLs, which
may help future sponsors avoid submitting applications with the
deficiencies explained in the CRLs. The costs of the proposed rule
include costs to read and understand both the rule and the CRLs to
interested parties, as well as costs to redact and publish CRLs on
FDA's website.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 10/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Agency Contact: Lowell Zeta, Deputy Commissioner of Strategic
Initiatives, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, WO Building 1, Room 2314,
Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 301 332-8931
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
50. ELECTRONIC LABELING FOR MEDICAL DEVICES
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 352(f)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14303; 14212; 13951; 14273
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule would clarify that the adequate directions for
use requirement in section 502(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act could be satisfied when labeling is provided solely by
electronic means for certain types of devices in certain circumstances.
FDA anticipates that this clarification would facilitate the
communication of comprehensive and up-to-date information to users to
provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of such
medical devices.
Statement of Need: The proposed rule, if finalized, would clarify
that the ``adequate directions for use'' requirement under section
502(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act could be satisfied
when labeling is provided solely by electronic means for certain types
of prescription and non-prescription devices used outside of health
care settings, and would establish the associated requirements for use
of such electronic labeling. Considering the current widespread use of
and access to the internet, particularly through mobile devices, this
rulemaking would help modernize the way required labeling is provided
to consumers of medical devices. This clarification would help
manufacturers facilitate the communication of robust and up-to-date
labeling necessary to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of medical devices. Electronic labeling for medical
devices would also reduce various administrative and resource burdens
associated with printing, and subsequent revision and redistribution,
of print labeling, and would better help manufacturers quickly and
efficiently update any labeling. Electronic forms of required labeling
can also increase access to labeling in various ways, such as by
enabling users to access labeling online at any time and place, and by
increasing accessibility for users with visual impairments. The
proposed rule, if finalized, would require that access to electronic
labeling be readily available and unrestricted, while also requiring
that manufacturers afford users the opportunity to request and then
promptly provide labeling in paper form.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this action is 502(f)
of the FD&C Act. 502(f) of the FD&C Act, a device shall be deemed
misbranded unless its labeling bears adequate directions for use and
such adequate warnings (to the extent applicable) in such manner and
form as are necessary for the protection of users. The term labeling
contemplates both physical and non-physical forms, as it is defined as
``all labels and other written, printed, or graphic matter (1) upon any
article or any of its containers or wrappers, or (2) accompanying such
article.'' 21 U.S.C. 321(m). The term accompanying has been interpreted
liberally to extend beyond physical association with the product, and
includes materials provided electronically. The statutory language does
not require labeling to be provided solely in paper form for all
devices and in fact contemplates different manner[s] and form[s] of
permissible labeling to protect the public health. A clarification via
rulemaking that certain information can be provided electronically
would not alter the existing requirements for adequate directions for
use, but instead would clarify that such required labeling may be
provided in either physical or electronic form for certain devices in
certain circumstances.
Alternatives: FDA has considered taking action via guidance.
However, the focus of this effort is to clarify the availability of
electronic labeling for certain types of prescription and non-
prescription devices used outside of health care settings and establish
the requirements for such use of electronic labeling. In order to make
these requirements binding they would need to be captured in
regulations, as guidance would not allow FDA to accomplish this level
of specificity in a binding manner.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FDA anticipates that this rule is
deregulatory. The rule, if finalized, would produce cost-savings for
firms, as it would reduce the various administrative and resource
burdens of printing and distributing paper labeling for specific
medical devices. Additionally, electronic labels can be updated as
needed without costly updates to a physical label. We note that firms
can still choose to use physical labeling if they find it more cost
effective. The cost of this rule comes in the form of time cost for
consumers who are unable to
[[Page 52846]]
access electronic labeling and must request labeling in paper form or
those who prefer to request labeling in paper form rather than access
labeling electronically. Benefits of this rule include increased
accessible labeling as consumers can adjust font size, use text to
voice, and access other accessibility features in electronic labeling.
Additionally, the availability of electronic labeling will facilitate
the communication of comprehensive and up to date information to
consumers. We anticipate that this regulation will be net cost savings
and therefore deregulatory.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Rachel Park, Regulatory Counsel, Department of
Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., WO Bldg. 66, Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 301 796-7944
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
51. NUTRIENT CONTENT CLAIMS FOR ADDED SUGARS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14303
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The rule would update definitions, terminology, and
provisions related to nutrient content claims and added sugars to be
consistent with terms related to and updates to requirements for the
Nutrition Facts label. The rule would, among other things, define a new
``low added sugar'' nutrient content claim that manufactures could
voluntarily use to communicate information about the level of added
sugars in food products.
Statement of Need: In 2016, FDA updated the requirements for the
Nutrition Facts label and serving size information for packaged foods
to reflect new scientific information, including the link between diet
and chronic diseases such as obesity and heart disease. Among the
updates to the Nutrition Facts label was the requirement that added
sugars be included in the Nutrition Facts label and the establishment
of a daily value (DV) for added sugars. The declaration for added
sugars was established, in part, because excess consumption of added
sugars makes it difficult to meet nutrient needs within the calorie
limits generally needed to maintain a healthy weight and can lead to an
increase in overall caloric intake. Further, healthy dietary patterns
that are characterized by lower amounts of sugar-sweetened foods and
beverages, as compared to less healthy dietary patterns, are associated
with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease. This proposed rule, if
finalized, would update definitions, terminology, and provisions
related to nutrient content claims and added sugars to be consistent
with the terms related to and the previous updates to the requirements
for the Nutrition Facts label.
Summary of Legal Basis: We are issuing this proposed rule
consistent with our authority in sections 201, 301, 403, and 701 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 343, and
371).
Alternatives: None.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed rule will include
several provisions. For one, it will propose to update the definition
of added sugars in the existing no added sugar, without added sugar, or
no sugar added claims to be consistent with the declaration on the
updated Nutrition Facts label. This proposal, if finalized, would cause
manufacturers who are voluntarily using the older no added sugar claims
and whose products are not consistent with definition of added sugars
to either reformulate products or to remove claims from the label, both
of which involve costs to the manufacturer. In addition, the proposed
rule will propose to define a claim of ``low added sugars'' and allow
factual quantitative amount statements for added sugars on the labels
of certain products. These proposals, if finalized, would provide
claims that have not previously been available for use by
manufacturers. If manufacturers voluntarily choose to use these new
claims on their labels, there would be relabeling costs involved.
Finally, the proposed rule will propose to update the terminology in
existing nutrient content claims for added sugars and total sugars that
are not consistent with the terms used in the updated Nutrition Fact
label regarding the Added Sugars and Total Sugars declarations. This
proposal, if finalized, would require manufacturers who are using the
older added sugar or total sugar claims to relabel and incur relabeling
costs to correct terminology (i.e., change the term ``sugar'' to
``sugars'') or to remove the claim.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Vincent De Jesus, Nutritionist, Department of
Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Human Foods
Program, Office of Nutrition and Food Labeling, 5001 Campus Dr.,
College Park, MD 20740
Phone: 240 402-2371
Fax: 301 436-1191
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
52. MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN TERMINOLOGY IN TITLE 21
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321 to 397; 42 U.S.C. 201; 42 U.S.C.
216; 42 U.S.C. 241 to 242(a); 42 U.S.C. 262; 42 U.S.C. 263a and b; 42
U.S.C. 264; 15 U.S.C. 1451 to 1461; 28 U.S.C. 2112; 5 U.S.C. 551 to
558; 5 U.S.C. 701 to 706; 21 U.S.C. 141 to 149; 21 U.S.C. 467f; 21
U.S.C. 679; 21 U.S.C. 821; 21 U.S.C. 1034; Pub. L. 117-103, 136 Stat.
49
Relevant Executive Orders: 14168; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 10.65; 21 CFR 56.107; 21 CFR 106.121; 21 CFR
201.57; 21 CFR 600.80; 21 CFR 803.42
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Food and Drug Administration is issuing a rule to
modify certain terminology in Title 21 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to comply with Executive Order 14168, Defending Women From
Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal
Government, issued on January 20, 2025. Specifically, this rule, if
finalized, will remove the term gender wherever it appears and either
replace it with the term sex, or delete reference to gender as
applicable, along with other editorial changes to improve readability.
Statement of Need: The terms gender and sex appear in various
contexts in
[[Page 52847]]
FDA regulations, including in requirements related to Institutional
Review Board (IRB) membership (see 21 CFR 56.107), records and
reporting requirements for product applications and approvals (see,
e.g., 21 CFR 312.42, 314.50, 314.80, 600.80, 803.32), and device
classification regulations (see, e.g., 21 CFR 862.1840, 866.3215,
866.5950). Section 2(a) of E.O. 14168 defines sex as referring to ``an
individual's immutable biological classification as either male or
female. `Sex' is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of
`gender identity.' Section 3(c) of E.O. 14168 requires, among other
things, that [w]hen administering or enforcing sex-based distinctions,
every agency and all Federal employees acting in an official capacity
on behalf of their agency shall use the term sex and not gender in all
applicable Federal policies and documents. Accordingly, FDA is
modifying regulations to remove the term gender wherever it appears, to
either replace it with the term sex, or delete reference to gender as
applicable.
Summary of Legal Basis: FDA proposes to issue this rule under the
following authorities: The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C
Act) (at 21 U.S.C. 321 et seq.) and specifically, sections 321-397; the
Public Health Service (PHS) Act at 42 U.S.C. 201, 216, 241, 242(a),
262, 263a, 263b, 264; and 15 U.S.C. 1451-1461; 5 U.S.C. 551-558, 701-
706; 21 U.S.C. 141-149, 467f, 679, 821, 1034; 28 U.S.C. 2112; and
section 111 of Pub. L. 117-103 (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022),
136 Stat. 49 at 789. FDA also has general authority to issue
regulations for the efficient enforcement of the FD&C Act and the PHS
Act under section 701 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 371) and section
351(j) of the PHS Act.
Alternatives: Alternative option: leave current regulations
unchanged and update terminology when each regulation is amended for
programmatic or other reasons. The drawback of this approach is that
the sex/gender terminology in Title 21 would remain inconsistent until
every provision is revised individually. In addition, taking this
approach would not be in compliance with the directives of E.O. 14168.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This proposed rule reflects
editorial changes that affect FDA and does not impact industry
practices. Consequently, we do not anticipate any measurable change in
industry resulting from this proposed rule. We also expect the economic
impact on the FDA to be minimal. This proposed rule will produce no
quantifiable savings, costs, or transfers. We do not expect any loss of
public health benefits as a result of this rule.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Swati Kabaria, Senior Policy Advisor, Department of
Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., WO Bldg. 32, Rm. 4262, Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 301 796-8569
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
53. AMENDMENTS TO 21 CFR PARTS 56 AND 312; EXPEDITED
INVESTIGATIONAL NEW DRUG APPLICATION FOR PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL REFORM
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321; 21 U.S.C. 331; 21 U.S.C. 351; 21
U.S.C. 352; 21 U.S.C. 353; 21 U.S.C. 355; 21 U.S.C. 360bbb; 21 U.S.C.
371; 42 U.S.C. 262
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14273; 14293
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 56; 21 CFR 312 Subparts A, B, C, D
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Food and Drug Administration is proposing to amend 21
CFR 312 Subparts A, B, C, D and 21 CFR 56, for expedited
Investigational New Drug (IND) reform. The proposed rule would make
changes to general provisions related to the IND requirements,
including process and IND content and format and sponsor
responsibilities.
Statement of Need: FDA is proposing this action to modernize and
streamline the Investigational New Drug (IND) application process for
Phase 1 clinical trials by reducing unnecessary regulatory burden
through targeted, risk-based flexibilities. The action is needed to
accelerate patient access to promising investigational therapies while
maintaining appropriate human subject protections. By facilitating
earlier clinical development of innovative drugs, this rule is expected
to reduce delays that can adversely affect patient health outcomes and
to address regulatory risks that are disproportionate to the low-risk
nature of many early-phase studies. This type of reform is also a do
out of the MAHA Commission as part of the White House's Make Our
Children Healthy Again: Strategy Report (September 2025) and aligned
with the Administration's deregulatory efforts.
Summary of Legal Basis: FDA's authority lies under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Public Health Service Act,
including 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351 to 355, 360bbb, and 371, and 42
U.S.C. 262, to revise IND and IRB requirements for Phase 1 clinical
trials. The proposed rule is intended to support risk-based regulatory
modernization consistent with recent Executive Orders on deregulatory
reform and innovation in healthcare.
Alternatives: FDA considered maintaining the current IND framework
without modification, as well as implementing narrower administrative
guidance instead of formal rulemaking. The Agency also considered more
limited exemptions applicable only to specific therapeutic categories
but determined broader risk-based flexibilities would better reduce
unnecessary burden while preserving appropriate human subject
protections, especially given Administration interest in these reforms.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FDA is proposing to amend 21 CFR 312
Subparts A, B, C, D and 21 CFR 56, for expedited Investigational New
Drug (IND) reform. The proposed rule would make changes to general
provisions related to the IND requirements, including process, content,
format and sponsor responsibilities. FDA anticipates benefits from this
rule emanating from loosening requirements. This streamlining for the
use of certain investigational drugs for Phase I clinical trials
through targeted and risk-based exemptions to speed the access of
investigational drugs to patients would decrease regulatory burden,
which may help accelerate access to transformative treatments for
patients, which may lead to improved health outcomes. We anticipate
costs of this rule would include reading and understanding what new
flexibilities would be afforded to sponsors and any potential safety
risks of loosening current requirements.
Risks: Potential risks include inconsistent sponsor interpretation
of new flexibilities, and the possibility that streamlined requirements
could increase safety concerns or data quality issues in low-risk
studies while firms adjust. FDA expects these risks to be mitigated
through existing Institutional
[[Page 52848]]
Review Board review, sponsor responsibilities, and continued FDA
monitoring authority, as well as sponsor education and early
engagement.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lowell Zeta, Deputy Commissioner of Strategic
Initiatives, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, WO Building 1, Room 2314,
Silver Spring, MD 20993
Phone: 301 332-8931
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0910-AJ30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
54. STRENGTHENING REGULATORY OVERSIGHT OF THE ORGAN
PROCUREMENT AND TRANSPLANTATION NETWORK TO ENSURE PATIENT SAFETY
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 216, 274; 42 U.S.C. 1320b-8; 42 CFR
121.4(2)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14292; 14212; 14303
CFR Citation: 42 CFR part 121
Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, December 19, 2025.
Abstract: The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
seeks to use the authority described in 42 CFR 121.4(b)(2) to make
policies of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)
enforceable by formally approving them through the federal rulemaking
process. Currently, compliance with OPTN policies is voluntary unless
the Secretary has formally approved the policies. HRSA is also
proposing rulemaking action to: (1) update regulatory language to align
it with provisions of the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Act, Public Law 118-14 (Sept. 22, 2023) and (2) remove
a paragraph of part 121 that references a prior effective date of the
regulations.
Statement of Need: HRSA is pursuing rulemaking to address
widespread non-compliance with OPTN policies, resulting in harm to
patients and families. HRSA-led investigations, external investigative
reporting, and Congressional hearings have revealed problems with the
organ procurement and transplant system stemming from the failure of
Organ Procurement Centers and transplant centers to adhere to OPTN
policy. HRSA is also pursuing rulemaking to align existing regulations
with the 2023 Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation
Act.
Summary of Legal Basis: The implementing regulations of the
National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) (the OPTN final rule, 42 CFR part
121), describe a process by which certain policies of the OPTN may be
made enforceable by HHS by promulgating those policies through federal
rulemaking (42 CFR 121.4(b)(2)). Additionally, Section 1138 of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320b-8) (section 1138) requires
Medicare and Medicaid participating hospitals that perform transplants
to be members of the OPTN and to abide by its rules and requirements.
1 Since violations of section 1138 could result in the
withholding of a transplant hospital's reimbursement under Medicare or
Medicaid, or termination from these programs, HHS has stated that for
an OPTN policy to be considered a rule or requirement of the OPTN, and
therefore mandatory or binding on OPOs and hospitals participating in
Medicare or Medicaid, the Secretary must have given formal approval to
the rule or requirement. Therefore, the term rules and requirements of
the OPTN means those rules and requirements formally approved by the
Secretary through the rulemaking process.2 Once certain OPTN
policies are enforceable by the Secretary, CMS and HRSA, as per the
authority delegated by the Secretary, may take enforcement actions
based on violations of these OPTN policies.
HRSA also seeks to make technical edits to 42 CFR 121.3(c)(1), to
align the OPTN final rule with provisions of the Securing the U.S.
Organ Procurement and Transplantation Act (Securing Act), Public Law
118-14 (Sept. 22, 2023) and to delete 42 CFR 121.3(d), which refers to
a date in the past (June 30, 2000) by which requirements of 42 CFR
121.3 needed to be met.
[1] See 54 FR 51802 (December 18, 1989) (Federal Register notice
setting forth Secretary's interpretation of section 1138 provisions.)
[2] See 63 FR 16297 (April 2, 1998).
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We anticipate benefits related to
reduced health and safety risks for patients, and improvements in the
equitable allocation of organs, patient safety, and transparency. We
anticipate costs associated with greater adherence to documentation
requirements, provider responsibilities, screening criteria, and
increased reporting on patient safety events.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 09/00/26
NPRM Comment Period End............. 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Raymond Lynch, Chief, Organ Transplantation Branch,
Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857
Phone: 301 443-3300
RIN: 0906-AB34
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Office of Assistant Secretary for
Health (OASH) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
55. HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTIONS: EXEMPTIONS AND CLARIFYING
PROVISIONS RELATED TO INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD OVERSIGHT
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 42 U.S.C. 289(a); 42 U.S.C. 300v-
1(b)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14179; 13563; 14303
CFR Citation: 45 CFR part 46
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department is proposing revisions to 45 CFR part 46
to modernize and simplify subpart A, known as the Common Rule. Changes
are intended to uphold protections for human subjects while reducing
burden and ambiguity for investigators, institutional review boards,
and research institutions. Examples of changes include clarifying
terminology, expanding exemptions for certain low-risk research
activities, and enabling flexibilities for regulatory review of de
minimis protocol changes. The Department will collaborate with the
other Common Rule Departments and Agencies during this process.
Statement of Need: The foundational framework for human subjects
protection in the United States was established by the National
Research Act of 1974 in response to widespread public concern over
unethical biomedical and behavioral research practices. Following its
passage, the
[[Page 52849]]
then-Department of Health, Education, and Welfare issued the first
version of 45 CFR part 46. These regulations established institutional
review boards (IRBs) as the key mechanism for oversight and ethical
review of human subjects research. While these protections remain
vital, the current regulatory framework no longer reflects the
realities of modern research.
In 1991 the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects,
known as the Common Rule, was formally adopted by HHS and 15 other
federal departments and agencies. Although the last major revision in
2017 introduced several changes to modernize human subject protections
while reducing unnecessary regulatory burden, investigators and
institutions have continued to report that the Common Rule imposes
unnecessary burdens and unclear requirements, particularly for minimal-
risk studies. For example, the Department has received feedback that
applying the Common Rule remains cumbersome for research within
Learning Healthcare Systems and for other research methods that are
integrated into clinical care settings and are intended to improve the
quality and safety of medical care.
Without additional changes intended to clarify ambiguities, expand
flexibilities, and redirect protective measures toward high-risk
activities, the rights and safety of research participants as well as
scientific breakthroughs can be impeded. Examples of how this
rulemaking will address these issues include expanding exemptions for
certain additional types of low-risk research, incorporating
flexibilities for de minimis protocol changes, and clarifying key terms
such as the definition of undue influence. These reforms will reduce
ambiguity and undue administrative burden for institutions engaged in
HHS-supported and conducted human research and will enable IRBs and
human research protection programs to focus on those activities posing
the greatest risk to human participants while reducing barriers to
research that could benefit society.
Summary of Legal Basis: U.S. Code Title 42, Section 289 requires
the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish
regulatory requirements for human research protections, a program for
guidance, and a process for responding to violations. The President's
Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical
and Behavioral Research was described in 42 U.S.C. 300v, and the
reports and recommendations that were created by this commission were
integral to the development and promulgation of the Common Rule.
Alternatives: The Department considered maintaining the current
Common Rule framework without modification, as well as relying solely
on subregulatory guidance or interpretive materials to clarify existing
requirements. HHS determined that broader regulatory updates are
necessary to improve consistency, reduce administrative burden, and
ensure that oversight remains appropriately calibrated to the level of
risk posed to research participants.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The Department expects that the
overall economic and social impact of this proposed rule will be
deregulatory in nature and designed to improve efficiency, consistency,
and proportionality of the rule's application. New costs attributable
to this proposed rule would be associated with regulated entities'
obligations to comply with updated requirements.
The Department anticipates that this proposed rule would generate
significant quantifiable and unquantifiable deregulatory benefits by
improving efficiency and enabling a more risk-based application of
human subjects protections requirements. By expanding flexibilities for
low-risk research activities and clarifying existing requirements, the
proposed rule is expected to reduce administrative burden on
investigators, institutions, and institutional review boards while
helping accelerate scientific discovery, improve healthcare delivery
practices, and support more timely development of treatments and
interventions that benefit public health.
Risks: Potential risks include concerns from some stakeholders that
expanded exemptions and additional regulatory flexibilities could
reduce oversight for certain categories of research or create
inconsistent implementation across institutions. The Department expects
these risks to be mitigated through continued IRB oversight for higher-
risk activities, existing human subject protections requirements,
interagency coordination among Common Rule departments and agencies,
and public engagement through the notice-and-comment process to ensure
that participant protections remain strong while unnecessary burden is
reduced.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Natalie Klein, Acting Director, Department of
Health and Human Services, Office of Assistant Secretary for Health,
Office for Human Research Protections, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite 200,
Rockville, MD 20852
Phone: 240 453-6900
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0937-AA16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
56. INTEROPERABILITY STANDARDS AND PRIOR AUTHORIZATION FOR DRUGS (CMS-
0062)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1395hh; 42 U.S.C. 1302; Pub. L. 104-191;
Pub. L. 111-148, sec. 1104
CFR Citation: 42 CFR 422; 42 CFR 431; 42 CFR 438; 42 CFR 457; 45
CFR 156; . . .
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule would propose new requirements for Medicare
Advantage (MA) organizations, state Medicaid fee-for service (FFS)
programs, state Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) FFS
programs, Medicaid managed care plans, CHIP managed care entities, and
Qualified Health Plans (QHPs) offered on the Federally-facilitated
Exchanges (FFEs) to streamline processes for the prior authorization
for certain drugs. We are developing this rule, in part, based on the
significant number of public commenters who responded to the CMS
Interoperability and Prior Authorization proposed rule (87 FR 76238)
urging CMS to expand the proposed prior authorization policies to
include drugs. This rule would also propose a modified standard for
prior authorization-related transactions under the Administrative
Simplification provisions of HIPAA. In addition, as part of this rule,
ASTP/ONC would propose to adopt updated versions of certain standards
referenced in the proposed updated technical requirements for payer
APIs, including standards supporting electronic prior authorization
transactions. Finally, we are proposing to update the definition of
``failure to report'' under the Open Payments program.
Statement of Need: This proposed rule furthers CMS efforts to
reduce
[[Page 52850]]
administrative burden on providers and allow them to spend more time on
patient care. The proposals increase appropriate electronic access to
health care data, while keeping that information safe and secure by
utilizing the latest standards adopted by the Assistant Secretary for
Technology Policy/Office of the National Coordinator for Health
Information Technology. The proposals build on the CMS Interoperability
and Prior Authorization final rule by expanding the types of prior
authorizations that could be conducted electronically to include those
for drugs. Based on public comments received on the CMS
Interoperability and Prior Authorization proposed rule (87 FR 76238),
we expect patients and providers will overwhelmingly support the
addition of drugs to our prior authorization policies and the increased
alignment across Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP and Marketplace coverage.
Summary of Legal Basis: The policies in this proposed rule are
intended, where possible, to address disparities in standards and
processes for prior authorization for drugs across Medicare Advantage,
Medicaid, CHIP and QHPs offered on the FFEs. The statutory authority
for these proposals is contained in the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1302 and 1395hh).
Alternatives: In this proposed rule, we continue to build on the
efforts from the CMS Interoperability and Patient Access final rule (85
FR 25510) and the CMS Interoperability and Prior Authorization final
rule (89 FR 8758) to advance interoperability, improve care
coordination, empower patients with access to their data, and improve
prior authorization processes. When we excluded prior authorizations
for drugs from the CMS Interoperability and Prior Authorization
proposed rule, we received significant public feedback that we should
reconsider that decision with future rulemaking. Those comments and
engagements with industry experts over the past two years support our
conclusions that the alternative of continuing to exclude drugs would
leave significant burden on patients and providers.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We expect this rule will not be
significant under section 3(f)(1). This rule proposes updates to the
Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) already required by previous
rules, proposes to require standards that were previously recommended,
and proposes standards for the electronic prior authorization of drugs
that are already required or being implemented across the country. We
acknowledge that business processes would need to be updated for these
payers, but we do not believe these costs would exceed the section
3(f)(1) threshold.
Risks: These policies are natural continuations of the policies
finalized in the CMS Interoperability and Prior Authorization final
rule. Adding certain drugs to the prior authorization requirements and
data availability would close a gap in our current requirements.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
Agency Contact: David Koppel, Interoperability Policy Advisor,
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, Office of Healthcare Experience and
Interoperability, 7500 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21244
Phone: 303 844-2883
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0938-AV44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--CMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
57. STRENGTHENING THE INTEGRITY OF MEDICAID AND CHIP MANAGED CARE,
FINANCING, AND ACCESS TO CARE (CMS-2450)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302; 42 U.S.C. 1396u; 42 U.S.C. 1396r-
8; Pub. L. 111-148; Pub. L. 119-21
CFR Citation: 42 CFR 431; 42 CFR 433; 42 CFR 438; 42 CFR 441; . . .
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule would update regulations to strengthen
the integrity of state enrollment processes, state directed payments
and other payment and access requirements.
Statement of Need: Following an extensive review of rulemaking
finalized in 2024, which includes the Medicaid and Children's Health
Insurance Program Managed Care Access, Finance and Quality Final Rule
(89 FR 41002; CMS-2439-F) and the Ensuring Access to Medicaid Services
Final Rule (89 FR 40542; CMS-2442-F), CMS is developing a proposed rule
to address priority fiscal and program integrity issues in Medicaid and
the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), including rescinding or
revising provisions finalized in the 2024 final rules.
Additionally, CMS intends to propose a number of provisions to
enhance oversight of states managed care plans, and provider
enrollment, such as (1) revising various overpayment, disallowance, and
other administrative action authorities, (2) adding new grounds for
state Medicaid agencies (SMA) to use to terminate/deny the enrollment
of bad actor providers, and (3) giving SMAs greater authority to
conduct on-site visits of providers to verify compliance with state
Medicaid requirements.
CMS would issue proposals affecting managed care and access that
are intended to reduce administrative costs and regulatory and
administrative burden for both state Medicaid and CHIP agencies and the
federal government. CMS would also issue proposals that affect program
integrity that are intended to decrease fraud and improper payments.
These proposals, if finalized, would be expected to lessen burden on
states and enable more efficient and cost-effective implementation of
the revised provisions.
Summary of Legal Basis: To provide states with the direction they
need on whether or how to implement the rulemaking finalized in 2024,
and to give states notice as early as possible of CMS's plans for
implementing sections 71103 and 71104 certain provisions of the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) (Public Law 119-21).
Alternatives: In developing the proposals for this rule,
alternatives will be considered, including maintaining existing
requirements. These alternatives will be described in the rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: As we move toward publication,
estimates of costs and benefits will be included in the rule.
Risks: Risks associated with the impact of this rule are under
development and will be included in the published rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Kathryn Schultz, Health Insurance Specialist,
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services,
[[Page 52851]]
7500 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21244
Phone: 443 539-6172
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0938-AV70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--CMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
58. CY 2027 REVISIONS TO PAYMENT POLICIES UNDER THE PHYSICIAN
FEE SCHEDULE AND OTHER REVISIONS TO MEDICARE PART B (CMS-1848) (SECTION
610 REVIEW)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302; 42 U.S.C. 1395hh
CFR Citation: 42 CFR 409; 42 CFR 410; 42 CFR 414
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, January 1, 2027, By statute, rule
must be effective by January 1 annually.
Abstract: This annual proposed rule would revise payment polices
under the Medicare physician fee schedule, and make other policy
changes to payment under Medicare Part B, including for telehealth and
primary care, to promote rural health and support deregulation. These
changes would apply to services furnished beginning January 1, 2027.
Additionally, this rule proposes updates to the Quality Payment
Program.
Statement of Need: The statute requires that we establish each
year, by regulation, payment amounts for all physicians' services
furnished in all fee schedule areas. This rule would implement changes
affecting Medicare Part B payment to physicians and other Part B
suppliers and updates to the Quality Payment Program. The final rule
has a statutory publication date of November 1, 2026, and an
implementation date of January 1, 2027.
Summary of Legal Basis: Section 1848 of the Social Security Act
(the Act) establishes the payment for physician services provided under
Medicare. Section 1848 of the Act imposes an annual deadline of no
later than November 1 for publication of the final rule or final
physician fee schedule.
Alternatives: None. This rule implements a statutory requirement.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Total expenditures will be adjusted
for CY 2027.
Risks: If this regulation is not published timely, physician
services will not be paid appropriately, beginning January 1, 2027.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lindsey Baldwin, Director, Division of Practitioner
Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services, Center for Medicare, 7500 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, MD 21244
Phone: 410 786-1694
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0938-AV82
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--CMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
59. COMPREHENSIVE REGULATIONS TO UNCOVER SUSPICIOUS HEALTHCARE
(CRUSH) (CMS-6098)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1395hh
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule would include provisions related to
provider enrollment, medical review, investigations, and other program
integrity oversight provisions that would greatly strengthen CMS's
ability to crush fraud, enhance program integrity efforts across
Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP),
and maximize legislative authorities to address inappropriate payments.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request for Information............. 02/27/26 91 FR 9803
RFI Comment Period End.............. 03/30/26 .......................
NPRM................................ 10/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Kathleen O'Malley, Health Insurance Specialist,
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, Center for Program Integrity, 7500 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244
Phone: 410 786-8987
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0938-AV97
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--CMS Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
60. STRENGTHENING OVERSIGHT OF ACCREDITING ORGANIZATIONS (AO), BURDEN
REDUCTION, AND RELATED PROVISIONS (CMS-3367)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302; 42 U.S.C. 1395hh
CFR Citation: 42 CFR 488; 42 CFR 489
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, February 15, 2027, MMA sec. 902
requires Medicare final rules publish within 3 years of a proposed or
interim final rule.
Per the CMS notice published December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78442),
except for certain Medicare payment regulations and certain other
statutorily-mandated regulations, we schedule all Medicare final
regulations for publication within the 3-year standardized time limit
in the current Unified Agenda. We do not intend to delay publishing a
Medicare final regulation for 3 years if we are able to publish it
sooner.
Abstract: This final rule sets forth a number of provisions to
strengthen the oversight of accrediting organizations (AO) by
addressing conflicts of interest, establishing consistent standards,
processes and definitions, and updating the validation and performance
standards systems.
Statement of Need: We seek to strengthen public trust in CMS-
approved Accrediting Organization (AO) findings and to promote the
health and safety of patients who receive services from Medicare and
Medicaid-participating providers accredited by CMS-approved AOs. When
AOs request and receive CMS approval to determine compliance for
facilities they accredit and are deemed by CMS to meet federal
requirements, they take on a public trust responsibility in their
oversight of providers and suppliers across the country. CMS needs to
hold these organizations accountable for that responsibility and to
eliminate any corporate conflicts of interest. Patients need to be able
to rely on the strength of that accreditation to be assured that their
health care services will be safe and of high quality. Where there are
gaps in that accreditation process, or where quality issues are not
fully identified or investigated by the AO, it means that current and
future patients may experience unnecessary harm or quality issues.
Summary of Legal Basis: This rule implements changes under 42
U.S.C.
[[Page 52852]]
1302 and 1395hh (the Social Security Act).
Alternatives: In developing the policies contained in this rule, we
considered several alternatives affecting AO fee-based consulting and
the validation program. These alternatives will be described in the
rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: In developing this regulation, we
carefully considered its potential effects including both costs and
benefits. The overall benefit of this rule would be to improve CMS'
oversight of the AOs and to improve the overall quality and safety of
healthcare. More specifically, the benefits of this rule include the
improvement of the validation process and anticipated reductions in the
validation disparity rate, the additional performance measure and the
implementation of plans of correction that would help AOs that have low
performance measure scores to prepare a plan for how to improve their
performance, and the prevention and removal of potential and actual
conflicts of interest. We note that the generation of benefits is
contingent upon behavior change, which entails costs, as having
negligible costs would therefore be anticipated to have minimal
benefits. As we move toward publication, estimates of costs and
benefits will be included in the rule.
Risks: The changes to be finalized in this rule are intended to
mitigate risks and improve patient care.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/15/24 89 FR 11996
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/15/24 .......................
Final Action........................ 02/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Michelle Geppi, Special Assistant, Department of
Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services,
Center for Clinical Standards and Quality, 7500 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, MD 21244
Phone: 410 786-4844
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0938-AU88
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--CMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
61. ESTABLISHING STATE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS UNDER SECTION 1902(XX) OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
(CMS-2454)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Pub L 119-21, section 71119 ; Section 1902(xx) of
the Social Security Act
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, June 1, 2026.
Section 71119 of Public Law 119-21 requires the agency to
promulgate an interim final rule no later than June 1, 2026, to
implement the requirements established by such section beginning
January 1, 2027 (or earlier date at state option).
Abstract: Section 71119 (Requirement for States to Establish
Medicaid Community Engagement Requirements for Certain Individuals) of
Public Law 119-21 amended section 1902 of the Social Security Act (the
Act) to add subsection (xx). Section 1902(xx) of the Act requires
states and the District of Columbia to ensure that applicable
individuals demonstrate, as a condition of their Medicaid eligibility,
a minimum number of community engagement hours (generally, that they
work, are enrolled in an educational program, complete community
service, participate in a work program, or any combination thereof) for
a minimum period of time preceding their application and during their
enrollment. The requirements of section 1902(xx) of the Act are
effective beginning January 1, 2027, unless a state opts to implement
the requirements sooner. Section 71119 also requires the agency to
promulgate an interim final rule to implement 1902(xx) of the Act no
later than June 1, 2026.
Statement of Need: As required by statute, beginning January 1,
2027, states must condition eligibility for applicable individuals on
their demonstration of community engagement (generally, that they work,
are enrolled in an educational program, complete community service,
participate in a work program, or any combination thereof, or meet an
exception), unless a state opts to implement community engagement
sooner.
Summary of Legal Basis: Section 71119 of the Working Families Tax
Cut Act (Pub L. 119-21) requires that we promulgate an interim final
rule to implement 1902(xx) of the Act no later than June 1, 2026.
Alternatives: None. This rule implements a statutory requirement.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: As we move toward publication,
estimates of costs and benefits will be included in the rule.
Risks: Risks associated with the impact of this rule are under
development and will be included in the published rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
Federalism: This action may have federalism implications as defined
in E.O. 13132.
Agency Contact: Jessica Stephens, Acting Deputy Director, Children
and Adults Health Programs Group, Department of Health and Human
Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Center for Medicaid
and CHIP Services, 7500 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21244
Phone: 410 786-3341
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0938-AV98
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--Administration for Children and
Families (ACF) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
62. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN IN THE CHILD CARE AND
DEVELOPMENT FUND (CCDF)
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9857 et seq; 42 U.S.C. 618
Relevant Executive Orders: 14303; 14191; 14219
CFR Citation: CFR part 98 and 99
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM proposes to modify Child Care and Development
Fund (CCDF) regulations to improve child care access and choice for
families, reduce administrative burdens for states, territories, and
Tribes, and provide additional flexibilities. The proposed changes
would remove outdated provisions, significantly change requirements for
Tribal CCDF programs, and streamline overly complicated and burdensome
requirements for states and territories.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to significantly reduce CCDF
regulations (45 Part 98 and 99) to serve
[[Page 52853]]
more children and reduce costs and burden for states, territories, and
Tribes administering the CCDF program. It builds upon the first
deregulatory CCDF NPRM (RIN: 0970-AD20) by further promoting the
Administration's interests and priorities around expanding parental
choice, reducing bureaucratic red tape and regulatory burden, and
prioritizing flexibility for states, territories, and Tribes. More
specifically, this NPRM is in line with Executive Order (E.O.) 14192,
Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.
Summary of Legal Basis: This NPRM will be issued under the
authority granted to the Secretary of Health and Human Services by the
Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act of 1990, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 9857, et seq.), and section 418 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 618).
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: ACF anticipates that this regulatory
action would result in great cost savings for states, territories, and
Tribes due to reduced administrative burden. ACF expects these savings
would allow states, territories, and Tribes to serve additional
children and families.
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Megan Campbell, Supervisory Child Care Program
Specialist, Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for
Children and Families, Office of Child Care, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 690-6499
Fax: 202 690-5600
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD29
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--CMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
63. MODERNIZE THE HEAD START PROGRAM BY REDUCING REQUIREMENTS
AND ENHANCING ALIGNMENT WITH STATE AND LOCAL SYSTEMS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Public Law 110-134, Sec. 641A, 645, and 645A
Relevant Executive Orders: 14303; 14242; 14219
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM proposes to reduce and streamline Head Start
regulatory requirements, to align Head Start standards with state and
local systems and reduce burden on Head Start programs. Regulatory
changes will support the integration of Head Start programs and funding
into state systems of early care and education.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to modify the Head Start
Program Performance Standards to significantly reduce regulatory
requirements and better align Head Start standards with state and local
systems. This NPRM will lower burden on Head Start programs and improve
coordination with state early childhood systems. The NPRM also proposes
to prioritize and strengthen the importance of nutrition and physical
exercise in Head Start programs.
This builds upon the first deregulatory OHS NPRM by further
promoting the Administration's interests and priorities around
expanding parental choice, reducing bureaucratic red tape and
regulatory burden, and prioritizing flexibility for states,
territories, and Tribes. More specifically, this NPRM is in line with
Executive Order (E.O.) 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation.
Summary of Legal Basis: This NPRM will be issued under the
authority granted to the Secretary of Health and Human Services by the
Head Start Act.
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on agencies administering the Head Start
program and to promote choice for parents in the program. Sub-
regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome mandates and
requirements included in existing regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: ACF anticipates that this regulatory
action will result in cost savings for Head Start programs by reducing
burden on grant recipients.
Risks: ACF expects this NPRM will be well-received by Head Start
programs, since they will welcome reduced burden and increased
flexibility. ACF expects that some providers, some state or regional
associations, and child and family stakeholders may have some express
hesitation with the removal or revision of certain requirements;
however, the NPRM would generally allow flexibility to Head Start
programs to implement policies that best address the needs of their
communities with direct engagement with state and local entities.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Shawna Pinckney, Acting Deputy Director, Office of
Head Start, Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for
Children and Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20416
Phone: 866 763-6481
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
64. REFORMING FEDERAL REPORTING AND ASSESSMENTS IN CHILD
WELFARE
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Not subject to, not significant
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14270; 14219; 14303
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM would permit ACF to streamline the assessment
and reporting scheme in the Children's Bureau.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to simplify and restructure
the overly bureaucratic array of reporting and monitoring systems that
evaluate a state's compliance with federal child welfare requirements.
This includes both the five-year Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP),
the Annual Progress and Services Report (APSR), and the Child and
Family Services Review (CFSR). The CFSR is a periodic review of a
state's child welfare system, which no state has achieved substantial
conformity under after three complete rounds of review of every state.
As such, every state is on a Program Improvement Plan (PIP) to take
corrective action to improve the CFSR's findings.
Unfortunately, the PIPs have also been ineffective, with states
producing
[[Page 52854]]
worse results in each subsequent round of the CFSR. It is clear that
the web of reviews and reporting associated with state child welfare
monitoring is overly restrictive and prescriptive. This rulemaking
seeks to address this issue and reform the compliance reviews from a
check-the-box process to an outcomes-based approach directed towards a
tailored goal of ensuring a safe, loving home for every American child.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states who are responsible for
complying with the current bureaucratic patchwork of reporting and
assessments. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
the needlessly prescriptive mandates and requirements included in
existing regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: ACF has calculated that the cost of
administering the CFSR is roughly $600,000 per state, per round. A
rewritten reporting and review process seeks to not only save
administrative expenses, but will also allow states and ACF to spend
time seeking to improve child welfare as opposed to following a failed
bureaucratic process. This proposed rulemaking is set to save
considerable administrative costs for both the states and ACF.
Risks: Risks are minimal. ACF expects this NPRM will be well-
received by the community as few individuals see much of a benefit in
the CFSR process, which since the turn of the century has identified
zero states in substantial compliance. While with any changes in
reporting requirements, there could be some initial hesitation, it is
expected that stakeholders would be excited for compliance reporting to
strengthen a component of child welfare, rather than waste hundreds of
thousands of dollars per review which will lead to a pre-determined
failure.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD32
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
65. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH AND
FAMILIES
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM would eliminate the Administration for Children
and Families' obsolete and unnecessary regulations related to the
Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to modify Administration
Children, Youth and Families regulations to identify outdated and
obsolete regulations, while also shining a brighter spotlight onto the
regulations that remain in order to improve clarity and to support
families, reduce administrative burdens for states, territories, and
Tribes, and provide additional flexibilities. The proposed changes
would remove outdated provisions and streamline requirements.
This action is necessary as ACF has amassed nearly 1,500 sections
of regulations, some of which have not been amended or updated since
the final year of the Johnson Administration. Without this intentional
removal of dead-weight regulations, regulatory provisions can confuse
and burden members of the public who are forced to abide by them.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states, territories, and tribes who
are currently saddled with dead weight text that presently remains on
the books. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
outdated and obsolete mandates and requirements included in existing
regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The regulations that are to be
repealed as a result of this rulemaking are obsolete, and thus
currently impose limited cost. As a result, the financial cost
associated with their removal will not necessarily result in saved
dollars, but will rather provide clarity and ease confusion to grantees
and the public who interact with ACF's regulations.
Risks: ACF expects this NPRM will be well-received by the community
as this serves to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
66. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN FOR FAMILY ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM would eliminate the Administration for Children
and Families' obsolete and unnecessary regulations related to the
Office of Family Assistance.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to modify Office of Family
Assistance regulations to identify outdated and obsolete regulations,
while also shining a brighter spotlight onto the regulations that
remain in order to support families, reduce administrative burdens for
states, territories, and Tribes, and provide additional flexibilities.
The proposed changes would remove outdated provisions and streamline
requirements.
This action is necessary as ACF has amassed nearly 1,500 sections
of regulations, some of which have not been amended or updated since
the final year of the Johnson Administration. Without this intentional
removal of dead-weight regulations, regulatory provisions can confuse
and burden members of the public who are forced to abide by them.
[[Page 52855]]
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states, territories, and tribes who
are currently saddled with dead weight text that presently remains on
the books. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
outdated and obsolete mandates and requirements included in existing
regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The regulations that are to be
repealed as a result of this rulemaking are obsolete, and thus
currently impose limited cost. As a result, the financial cost
associated with their removal will not necessarily result in saved
dollars, but will rather provide clarity and ease confusion to grantees
and the public who interact with ACF's regulations.
Risks: ACF expects this NPRM will be well-received by the community
as this serves to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD38
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
67. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN FOR CHILD SUPPORT
ENFORCEMENT
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM would eliminate the Administration for Children
and Families' obsolete and unnecessary regulations related to the
Office of Child Support Enforcement.
Statement of Need:
This NPRM proposes to modify Office of Child Support Enforcement
regulations to identify outdated and obsolete regulations, while also
shining a brighter spotlight onto the regulations that remain in order
to improve clarity, reduce administrative burdens for states,
territories, and Tribes, and provide additional flexibilities. The
proposed changes would remove outdated provisions and streamline
requirements.
This action is necessary as ACF has amassed nearly 1,500 sections
of regulations, some of which have not been amended or updated since
the final year of the Johnson Administration. Without this intentional
removal of dead-weight regulations, regulatory provisions can confuse
and burden members of the public who are forced to abide by them.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states, territories, and tribes who
are currently saddled with dead weight text that presently remains on
the books. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
outdated and obsolete mandates and requirements included in existing
regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The regulations that are to be
repealed as a result of this rulemaking are obsolete, and thus
currently impose limited cost. As a result, the financial cost
associated with their removal will not necessarily result in saved
dollars, but will rather provide clarity and ease confusion to grantees
and the public who interact with ACF's regulations.
Risks: ACF expects this NPRM will be well-received by the community
as this serves to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
68. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN IN COMMUNITY SERVICES
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM would eliminate the Administration for Children
and Families' obsolete and unnecessary regulations related to the
Office of Community Services.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to modify Office of Community
Services regulations to identify outdated and obsolete regulations,
while also shining a brighter spotlight onto the regulations that
remain in order to improve support families, reduce administrative
burdens for states, territories, and Tribes, and provide additional
flexibilities. The proposed changes would remove outdated provisions
and streamline requirements.
This action is necessary as ACF has amassed nearly 1,500 sections
of regulations, some of which have not been amended or updated since
the final year of the Johnson Administration. Without this intentional
removal of dead-weight regulations, regulatory provisions can confuse
and burden members of the public who are forced to abide by them.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states, territories, and tribes who
are currently saddled with dead weight text that presently remains on
the books. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
outdated and obsolete mandates and requirements included in existing
regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The regulations that are to be
repealed as a result of this rulemaking are obsolete, and thus
currently impose limited cost. As a result, the financial cost
associated with their removal will not necessarily result in saved
dollars, but will rather provide clarity and ease confusion to grantees
and the public who interact with ACF's regulations.
Risks: ACF expects this NPRM will be well-received by the community
as this
[[Page 52856]]
serves to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
69. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN IN FAMILY VIOLENCE AND
PREVENTION SERVICES
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This NPRM would eliminate the Administration for Children
and Families' obsolete and unnecessary regulations related to the
Office of Family Violence and Prevention Services.
Statement of Need: This NPRM proposes to modify Office of Family
Violence and Prevention Services regulations to identify outdated and
obsolete regulations, while also shining a brighter spotlight onto the
regulations that remain in order to improve clarity and to support
families, reduce administrative burdens for states, territories, and
Tribes, and provide additional flexibilities. The proposed changes
would remove outdated provisions and streamline requirements.
This action is necessary as ACF has amassed nearly 1,500 sections
of regulations, some of which have not been amended or updated since
the final year of the Johnson Administration. Without this intentional
removal of dead-weight regulations, regulatory provisions can confuse
and burden members of the public who are forced to abide by them.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states, territories, and tribes who
are currently saddled with dead weight text that presently remains on
the books. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
outdated and obsolete mandates and requirements included in existing
regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The regulations that are to be
repealed as a result of this rulemaking are obsolete, and thus
currently impose limited cost. As a result, the financial cost
associated with their removal will not necessarily result in saved
dollars, but will rather provide clarity and ease confusion to grantees
and the public who interact with ACF's regulations.
Risks: ACF expects this NPRM will be well-received by the community
as this serves to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--ACF Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
70. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY AND BURDEN FOR REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT
PROGRAMS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303; 13563
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This DFR would eliminate the Administration for Children
and Families' obsolete and unnecessary regulations related to the
Office of Refugee Resettlement.
Statement of Need: This DFR proposes to modify Office of Refugee
Resettlement regulations to identify outdated and obsolete regulations,
while also shining a brighter spotlight onto the regulations that
remain in order to support for families, reduce administrative burdens
for states, territories, and Tribes, and provide additional
flexibilities. The proposed changes would remove outdated provisions
and streamline requirements.
This action is necessary as ACF has amassed nearly 1,500 sections
of regulations, some of which have not been amended or updated since
the final year of the Johnson Administration. Without this intentional
removal of dead-weight regulations, regulatory provisions can confuse
and burden members of the public who are forced to abide by them.
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: ACF has considered alternatives, including issuance
of sub-regulatory guidance, but has determined that regulatory action
is necessary to reduce burden on states, territories, and tribes who
are currently saddled with dead weight text that presently remains on
the books. Sub-regulatory action alone is insufficient to overcome
outdated and obsolete mandates and requirements included in existing
regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The regulations that are to be
repealed as a result of this rulemaking are obsolete, and thus
currently impose limited cost. As a result, the financial cost
associated with their removal will not necessarily result in saved
dollars, but will rather provide clarity and ease confusion to grantees
and the public who interact with ACF's regulations.
Risks: ACF expects this DFR will be well-received by the community
as this serves to eliminate unnecessary and obsolete regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Final Rule................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Agency Contact: Adam Jones, Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20201
Phone: 202 417-0115
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0970-AD28
BILLING CODE 4150-03-P
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
2026 Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department) was
established in 2003 pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
Public
[[Page 52857]]
Law 107-296. The DHS mission statement provides the following: ``With
honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our
homeland, and our values.''
Fulfilling that mission requires the dedication of more than
271,000 employees in jobs that range from aviation and border security
to emergency response, from cybersecurity analyst to chemical facility
inspector. Our duties are wide-ranging, but our goal is clear: keep
America safe.
There are six overarching homeland security missions that make up
DHS's strategic plan: (1) Counter terrorism and homeland security
threats; (2) secure U.S. borders; (3) administer the nation's legal
immigration system; (4) secure cyberspace and critical infrastructure;
(5) strengthen preparedness and respond to incidents; and (6) combat
crimes of exploitation and protect victims. See also 6 U.S.C. 111(b)(1)
(identifying the primary mission of the Department).
In achieving those goals, we are committed to upholding and
strengthening the nation's economic security and prosperity. We are
continually strengthening our partnerships with communities, first
responders, law enforcement, and Government agencies--at the Federal,
State, local, tribal, and international levels. We are accelerating the
deployment of science, technology, and innovation in order to make
America more secure, and we are becoming leaner, smarter and more
efficient, ensuring that every security resource is used as effectively
as possible. For a further discussion of our mission, see the DHS
website at https://www.dhs.gov/mission.
The regulations in the Department's 2026 regulatory plan and agenda
support the Department's mission, and also address legislative
initiatives such as those found in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the
REAL ID Act, and the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act of 2007.
In addition, the regulations advance the President's priorities as
outlined in executive orders and presidential memoranda, including
Executive Order 14165, Securing Our Borders; Executive Order 14159,
Protecting the American People Against Invasion; and Executive Order
14267, Reducing Anti-Competitive Regulatory Barriers. Consistent with
the priorities in these and related executive actions, the Department
is strengthening the integrity of its immigration programs and ensuring
that immigration benefits are only issued to aliens that establish
eligibility after thorough screening and vetting. In this effort, DHS
is enhancing vetting of aliens who seek to enter the United States and
who apply for benefits such as work authorization or admission as
students or exchange visitors. DHS is also working to reduce asylum
fraud and backlogs, address vulnerabilities in the transportation
system, guard against cyber-attacks and threats to critical
infrastructure, reduce barriers to American innovation, and streamline
operations across its components. DHS is committed to supporting fair
competition in the marketplace and is pursuing actions to facilitate
private-sector engagement in disaster response efforts and innovation
in the technology sector. In addition, DHS is working to restore
American dominance in the maritime industry by eliminating needless
barriers to entry for mariners and outdated requirements for vessel
owners and operators.
DHS is committed to reviewing existing regulations, consistent with
Executive Orders 14192 and 14219, and to rescinding any regulations
that may be contrary to the public interest or administration policy,
or unduly burdensome on private enterprise. These actions will improve
the Department's ability to accomplish its mission and support broader
Administration priorities. In fiscal year 2026, based on current
estimates, DHS has already or plans to finalize the following actions:
0 Executive Order 14192 regulatory action;
24 Executive Order 14192 deregulatory actions;
19 Executive Order 14192-exempt regulations; and
2 additional regulations that do not yet have an Executive
Order 14192 designation.
DHS strives for organizational excellence and uses a centralized
and unified approach to manage its regulatory resources. The Office of
the General Counsel manages the Department's regulatory program,
including the agenda and regulatory plan. In addition, DHS senior
leadership reviews each significant regulatory project in order to
ensure that the project fosters and supports the Department's mission.
The DHS 2026 regulatory plan includes regulations from multiple DHS
components, including U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Coast
Guard (Coast Guard), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP),
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). Below, we describe the regulations that comprise the DHS
2026 regulatory plan.
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
USCIS oversees lawful immigration to the United States. USCIS is
restoring integrity to the legal immigration system by prioritizing
enhanced screening and vetting to deter, detect, and disrupt
immigration fraud and threats to our national security and public
safety. In the coming year, USCIS will pursue regulatory actions to
further these priorities and to fortify our ability to process and
issue accurate and timely eligibility determinations in strict
adherence to U.S. immigration law, regulations, and policy.
Improving the Process of Certification of Form N-648, Medical
Certification for Disability Exceptions. DHS will propose to amend its
regulations governing the process of certifying Form N-648, Medical
Certification for Disability Exceptions, by certain medical
professionals. Through this certification process, aliens qualify for
exemptions from the English proficiency and civics requirements for
naturalization. The proposed amendments seek to strengthen the
safeguards designed to protect the integrity of the naturalization
process and reduce the ability of medical professionals to exploit
vulnerabilities in the process. These changes would ensure proper
administration of the disability exception process by implementing
streamlined certification procedures for Form N-648 requests.
Naturalization Application Fee Adjustments. DHS will propose to
adjust the fees that USCIS charges for Form N-400, Application for
Naturalization, and Form N-336, Request for a Hearing on a Decision in
Naturalization Proceedings, eliminate the reduced fee option for Form
N-400, and eliminate the availability of fee waivers for both forms.
Adjusting these fees would allow USCIS to recover operating costs more
fully and support the issuance of accurate and timely eligibility
determinations. Armed forces service members filing under INA 328 or
INA 329 would remain exempt from paying the fees when filing for
naturalization under statutes for members of the armed forces.
Protecting the Integrity of Naturalization through Enhanced
Educational Standards. DHS will propose to amend regulations governing
the educational requirements for naturalization. Naturalization is the
most significant immigration benefit offered by the U.S. and it is a
privilege
[[Page 52858]]
that allows aliens to become fully vested members of American society,
with important rights and responsibilities that all citizens should
exercise and respect. DHS will propose to establish a framework and a
standard for applicants to meet showing they have satisfied the
educational requirements to ensure only those aliens who meet all
eligibility requirements--including the ability to read, write, and
speak English and an understanding of U.S. government and civics--are
able to naturalize. DHS will also propose additional flexibilities to
allow USCIS to modify the way it administers the naturalization test,
including allowing third parties to administer the test.
Sponsor Reimbursement and Deeming. To uphold the rule of law,
preserve hard-earned taxpayer resources, and protect benefits for
American citizens in need,DHS will propose to amend its regulations
relating to the mechanisms by which the Federal government, as well as
the States and state agencies, hold the sponsors of aliens to their
commitments to financially support those aliens. These amendments will
include changes relating to requests for reimbursement and actions to
compel reimbursement. DHS will also propose to amend its regulations to
clarify the responsibilities of States and state agencies administering
Federal means-tested public benefits to attribute a sponsor's income
and resources to an alien when determining the eligibility and the
amount of benefits of an alien for Federal means-tested public benefits
programs. The goal is to hold individuals who have agreed to
financially support aliens responsible for repaying American taxpayers
for any means-tested public benefits received by those sponsored
aliens.
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
ICE is the principal criminal investigative arm of DHS and one of
the three DHS components charged with the criminal and civil
enforcement of the Nation's immigration laws. ICE's primary mission is
to enforce immigration laws in order to preserve national security and
public safety, while also mitigating transnational threats and
safeguarding our nation, communities, lawful immigration, trade,
travel, and financial systems. During the coming year, ICE will focus
on rulemakings that relate to foreign students, fees, and streamlining
immigration processes in line with executive orders and Administration
priorities. ICE highlights the rule below, which promotes fiscal
responsibility and enhancing oversight of foreign student programs.
Establishing a Fixed Time Period of Admission and an Extension of
Stay Procedure for Nonimmigrant Academic Students, Exchange Visitors,
and Representatives of Foreign Information Media. On August 28, 2025,
ICE proposed to amend the regulations governing the admission period of
aliens in the F, J, and I classifications into the United States.
Currently, aliens under those classifications are admitted into the
United States for a period known as duration of status, which is an
unspecified period of time, to engage in activities authorized under
the alien's respective nonimmigrant classification. This rule will
replace the duration of status framework with a fixed period of
admission. This rule will ensure that DHS has an effective mechanism to
periodically and directly assess whether these aliens are complying
with the conditions of their classifications and U.S. immigration laws,
while also addressing fraud and national security concerns.
United States Coast Guard
The Coast Guard is a military, multi-mission, maritime service of
the United States and the only military organization within DHS. It is
the principal Federal agency responsible for maritime safety, security,
and stewardship in U.S. ports and waterways. The Coast Guard delivers
daily value to the nation through its unique resources, authorities,
and capabilities.
The United States is a maritime nation, and our security,
resilience, and economic prosperity are intrinsically linked to the
oceans. Safety, efficient waterways, and freedom of transit on the high
seas are essential to our well-being. The Coast Guard is leaning
forward, poised to meet the demands of the modern maritime environment.
The Coast Guard creates value for the public through solid prevention
and response efforts. Activities involving oversight and regulation,
enforcement, maritime presence, and public and private partnership
foster increased maritime safety, security, and stewardship. The Coast
Guard supports the Department's overarching goals of mobilizing and
organizing our Nation to secure the homeland from terrorist attacks,
natural disasters, and other emergencies.
To empower its deregulatory endeavors, the Coast Guard has
established over a dozen Process Improvement Teams (Deregulatory PIT
Crews) that identified dozens of deregulatory ideas. The Coast Guard is
deregulating through guidance documents, legislative change proposals,
legacy stakeholder ideas, leveraging AI, program evaluation and
evidence building, information collection requests, and several
maritime sectors specific to Coast Guard jurisdiction. In fiscal year
2026, the Coast Guard plans to finalize the following 3 deregulatory
actions.
Clarification of Certain Mariner Training Requirements. The Coast
Guard will propose to remove certain Coast Guard merchant mariner
requirements related to International Convention on Standards of
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as
amended (STCW) and the Seafarer's Training Certification and
Watchkeeping Code endorsements from its regulations. The Coast Guard
has determined these training requirements exceed current international
certification and training standards of the STCW and cause a
misalignment between the training of U.S. mariners and of mariners of
other countries. The Coast Guard is taking this action to reduce the
regulatory burden on U.S. mariners and to promote equivalent compliance
standards with international requirements.
Electronic Chart and Navigation Equipment Carriage Requirements.
This deregulatory action will revise regulations associated with the
approval and carriage of navigation equipment, navigational charts, and
publications. It will allow the use of electronic navigational charts
and publications and certain classes of electronic charting systems to
meet navigational equipment carriage requirements. This action will
align Coast Guard regulations with current industry behavior. By
establishing clear and updated standards for both paper and electronic
navigational charts and systems, the Coast Guard regulations will
reflect technological advancements and operational practices adopted by
the maritime industry, and it will make navigational charting easier
for the mariner.
Shipping Safety Fairways Along the Atlantic Coast. The Coast Guard
published a notice of proposed rulemaking on January 19, 2024 to
establish shipping safety fairways and other routing measures along the
Atlantic Coast. The Coast Guard will reopen the comment period to
request comments on a supplemental regulatory analysis and draft
programmatic environmental impact statement. Fairways are marked routes
for vessel traffic in which any obstructions are prohibited. The
proposed fairways will be based on studies about vessel traffic along
the Atlantic Coast. This action
[[Page 52859]]
would ensure that obstruction-free routes are preserved to and from US
ports and along the Atlantic coast; reduce the risk of collisions,
allisions and grounding; and alleviate the chance of increased time and
expenses in transit. These routing measures would facilitate the direct
and unobstructed transit of ships, and the Coast Guard believes that
the assurances such routing measures provide would allow for improved
medium- and long-term planning strategies, further serving shipping
companies and their vessels.
United States Customs and Border Protection
CBP is the DHS agency principally responsible for the security of
our Nation's borders, both at and between the ports of entry into the
United States. CBP must accomplish its border security and enforcement
mission without stifling the flow of legitimate trade and travel. The
primary mission of CBP is its homeland security mission, that is, to
prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the United
States. An important aspect of this mission involves improving security
at our borders and ports of entry, but it also means extending our zone
of security beyond our physical borders.
CBP also administers laws concerning the importation of goods into
the United States and enforces the laws concerning the entry of persons
into the United States. This includes regulating and facilitating
international trade; collecting import duties; enforcing U.S. trade,
immigration, and other laws of the United States at our borders;
inspecting imports; overseeing the activities of persons and businesses
engaged in importing; enforcing the laws concerning smuggling and
trafficking in contraband; apprehending aliens attempting to enter the
United States illegally; protecting our agriculture and economic
interests from harmful pests and diseases; servicing all people,
vehicles, and cargo entering the United States; maintaining export
controls; and protecting U.S. businesses from theft of their
intellectual property.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 provides that, although many
functions of the former U.S. Customs Service were transferred to DHS,
the Secretary of Treasury retains legal authority over customs revenue
functions. By Treasury Department Order No. 100-20, the Secretary of
the Treasury delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security authority
to prescribe regulations pertaining to the customs revenue functions.
CBP plans to prioritize customs revenue-related regulations that
streamline CBP procedures, protect the public, or are required by
either statute or executive order.
CBP intends to issue several regulations to improve security at our
borders and ports of entry as well as facilitate lawful trade. During
the upcoming year, CBP will also work on projects to streamline CBP
processing, reduce duplicative processes, reduce burdens on the public,
and automate paper forms.
Homeland Security Functions
Advance Passenger Information System (APIS): Electronic Validation
of Travel Documents. CBP intends to amend current APIS regulations to
incorporate additional carrier requirements. This change would further
enable CBP to determine whether each passenger is traveling with valid,
authentic travel documents prior to the passenger boarding the
aircraft. This rule is deregulatory and will result in time savings to
passengers and cost savings to CBP. The rule will also enhance national
security, because it will require air carriers to transmit to CBP
additional data elements regarding contact information for all
commercial aircraft passengers arriving in the United States. CBP also
expects that the collection of these elements would support border
operations and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's mission
in monitoring and tracing the contacts for persons involved in health
incidents.
Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) Electronic Export Manifest
for Rail Cargo. This rule will enhance national security by requiring
exporters transporting cargo by rail to submit export manifest data
electronically to CBP in the ACE. CBP officers are able to review
electronic manifests faster than paper manifests, and so the rule would
reduce the time burden for CBP, carriers, and transmitters.
Customs Revenue Functions
Elimination of Paper-Based Bond Applications and the Automated
Processing of Bond Applications. CBP will propose to replace the paper-
based bond application and approval process with an electronic process.
The proposed rule would implement the successful National Customs
Automation Program test of the electronic bond process.
Transportation Security Administration
TSA protects the Nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom
of movement for people and commerce. TSA applies an intelligence-
driven, risk-based approach to all aspects of its mission. This
approach results in layers of security to mitigate risks effectively
and efficiently.
TSA has prioritized regulatory actions that are required to meet
statutory mandates, necessary for national and homeland security, and
consistent with the goals of Executive Order 14192, Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation and other Administration priorities. In
fiscal year 2026, TSA plans to issue the following three deregulatory
and security-related actions.
Update to Procedures for State Certification for Remote Application
and Issuance. This deregulatory rule would reduce burdens for
individuals to apply for REAL ID-compliant driver's licenses and
identification cards by establishing a procedure for TSA to approve
States' remote application and issuance processes. Enabling remote
processes will eliminate the need for individuals to travel to
Departments of Motor Vehicle (DMV) offices and may reduce the burden on
States to provide resources at DMV offices for in-person processing.
This rulemaking is necessary to implement authority under the REAL ID
Modernization Act, which authorized electronic submission of
information and remote issuance of REAL ID cards under regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Homeland Security. States currently
certified as meeting REAL ID standards would need to update their REAL
ID certification documentation to confirm that their remote processes
meet, or are comparable to, the existing standards. By enabling REAL ID
application and issuance processes to conform to the modern modalities
of electronic transactions with which the public is already familiar,
this rule would accelerate and expand adoption of REAL ID-compliant
cards.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line of Sight Operations
Security. This final rule is intended to provide a predictable and
clear pathway for private industry to engage in safe, routine, and
scalable unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operations that include
package delivery, agriculture, aerial surveying, operations training,
demonstration, recreation, and flight testing. On June 6, 2025, the
President issued Executive Order 14305, Restoring American Airspace
Sovereignty, which noted the public safety benefits and security risks
associated with UAS and also required Federal agencies to address the
serious threats to our homeland that could be conducted if a UAS is
weaponized. Concurrently, the President issued Executive Order 14307,
Unleashing American Drone Dominance, which requires the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) to issue
[[Page 52860]]
a final rule to enable beyond visual line of sight UAS operations for
commercial and public safety purposes. In August 2025, TSA and FAA
issued a joint proposed rule. TSA is working on a final rule, which it
will issue in conjunction with FAA's final rule. The rule is an
enabling rule as it will enable operations that are generally
prohibited currently. While there may be costs associated in complying
with mitigating security requirements necessary to permit these
operations, the overall impact is expected to be deregulatory.
Vetting of Certain Surface Transportation Employees. This final
rule will establish the requirements and procedures to conduct the
vetting of certain higher-risk railroad, public transportation, and
over-the-road bus employees, and to recover the costs of the vetting
services. This rulemaking is required by the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act, and it will enhance the
security of surface transportation by ensuring that workers who are
central to operations do not pose a threat to transportation or
national security, or of terrorism. The final rule will address the
public comments that TSA received in response to the May 2023 proposed
rule.
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
CISA leads the national effort to understand, manage, and reduce
risk to the cyber and physical infrastructure that Americans rely on
every hour of every day. CISA's mission expands across three primary
areas: cybersecurity, infrastructure security, and emergency
communications.CISA is the operational lead for federal cybersecurity
and the national coordinator for critical infrastructure security and
resilience.
Cybersecurity Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act
(CIRCIA) Reporting Requirements. In March 2022, CIRCIA was signed into
law. CIRCIA directs CISA to develop and implement regulations requiring
covered entities to submit reports to CISA regarding covered cyber
incidents and ransom payments. CISA published a proposed rule on April
4, 2024. CISA received significant public comments, many of which
emphasized the need to reduce the scope and burden of the reporting
requirements, improve harmonization with other federal cyber incident
reporting requirements, and ensure clarity. CISA is working to address
Congressional intent and streamline CIRCIA's requirements, consistent
with feedback to the NRPM.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FEMA is responsible for helping the American people before, during,
and after disasters. FEMA supports the people and communities of our
Nation by providing experience, perspective, and resources in emergency
management. FEMA is particularly focused on national resilience in the
face of the risks of flooding, drought, extreme heat, and wildfire.
FEMA has made a series of efforts to make assistance available promptly
to those who need it, and to reduce administrative barriers and
burdens. FEMA continues to prioritize those efforts and to improve
them.
FEMA is working on deregulatory actions and has included certain
ones in the 2026 Agenda. FEMA also plans to revise or repeal guidance
documents and information collections to streamline program
implementation and reduce burdens on the public. Additionally, FEMA is
awaiting the recommendations of the FEMA Review Council, which was
established by Executive Order 14180 (January 24, 2025).
Removal of Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of
Wetlands Regulations. FEMA plans to rescind the July 11, 2024 final
rule, Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands
Regulations to Implement the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard
(FFRMS). This action is consistent with Executive Order 14148, Initial
Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions (January 20, 2025),
which rescinded the executive order that had established the FFRMS. On
March 25, 2025, FEMA stopped implementation of the FFRMS. FEMA is
undertaking rulemaking to remove the FFRMS from its regulations.
Removing the standard will streamline FEMA's regulations, streamline
program implementation, reduce Federal spending, minimize transfers,
and reduce burdens on the public.
BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services (USCIS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. IMPROVING THE PROCESS OF CERTIFICATION OF FORM N-648,
MEDICAL CERTIFICATION FOR DISABILITY EXCEPTIONS [1615-AD07]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1423; 8 U.S.C. 1443
Relevant Executive Orders: 14161
CFR Citation: 8 CFR part 312; 8 CFR 106.2; 8 CFR part 336
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS proposes to amend its regulations governing the
process of certifying Form N-648, Medical Certification for Disability
Exceptions by certain medical professionals. Through this certification
process, aliens qualify for exemptions from the English proficiency and
civics requirements for naturalization. The proposed amendments seek to
strengthen the integrity of the naturalization process by implementing
streamlined certification procedures for medical professionals and
ensuring that only qualified aliens are granted exemptions. These
changes are intended to enhance safeguards designed to prevent
fraudulent submissions and ensure proper administration of disability
exception process for naturalization.
Statement of Need: Across the country and over the decades, there
have been numerous instances where the medical certification process
has been exploited. Some medical professionals have been arrested,
indicted and convicted for submitting fraudulent Forms N-648 in
violation of various federal statutes. This rule is intended to
mitigate some of the concerns with the exploitation of the Form N-648
process, thereby further enhancing the integrity of naturalization
process.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD07
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52861]]
2. NATURALIZATION APPLICATION FEE ADJUSTMENTS [1615-AD08]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), (n)
CFR Citation: 8 CFR 106.2; 8 CFR 106.3
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS is proposing to adjust the fees that USCIS charges
for Form N-400 and Form N-336 to ensure recovery of the cost of
adjudication. This includes eliminating fee waivers (except for armed
forces service members when filing for naturalization under statutes
for members of the armed forces) and reduced fees for these forms.
Statement of Need: These proposed changes provide additional
resources to further support USCIS's financial sustainability and
provide additional resources for continued review of the integrity of
the naturalization process.
Alternatives: DHS is currently considering the specific impacts of
the proposed provisions.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 03/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD08
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF NATURALIZATION THROUGH ENHANCED
EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS [1615-AD13]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1423; 8 U.S.C. 1443
Relevant Executive Orders: 14161
CFR Citation: 8 CFR part 312, 8 CRF part 316, 8 CFR part 3
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS proposes to amend its regulations governing the
educational requirements for naturalization. DHS proposes to establish
a framework and a standard for applicants to meet the educational
requirements for naturalization. With this proposed rule, USCIS is
seeking to further enhance the integrity of the naturalization test.
DHS also proposes additional flexibilities to allow USCIS to modify the
way it administers the naturalization tests, including by allowing for
third party administration of the test.
Statement of Need: Aliens applying for naturalization must
demonstrate an understanding of the English language, including an
ability to read, write, and speak words in ordinary usage (English
language requirements). Aliens must also demonstrate a knowledge and
understanding of the fundamentals of the history, and of the principles
and form of government, of the United States (civics requirements).
Current regulations do not provide specifics on how aliens should meet
the educational requirements. These changes would ensure the proper
assimilation of lawful immigrants into the United States and promote a
unified American identity and attachment to the Constitution, laws, and
founding principles of the United States. With this proposed rule,
USCIS is seeking to further enhance the integrity of the naturalization
test and provide additional flexibilities in administering the
naturalization test. Current regulations limit the administration of
the naturalization test by requiring the test as part of the
naturalization application and interview with an officer.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. SPONSOR REIMBURSEMENT AND DEEMING 8 CFR 213A [1615-AD15]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: INA 213A (8 U.S.C. 1183a); 8 U.S.C. 1631; 8 U.S.C.
1632
CFR Citation: 8 CFR 213a
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS proposes to amend its regulations relating to the
mechanisms by which the Federal government, as well as the States and
state agencies, hold the sponsors of aliens to their commitments to
financially support those aliens. The project will include amendments
relating to requests for reimbursement and actions to compel
reimbursement. DHS will also amend its regulations to clarify the
responsibilities of States and state agencies to attribute a sponsor's
income and resources to an alien when determining the eligibility and
the amount of benefits of an alien for means-tested public benefits
programs.
Statement of Need: Existing regulations relating to sponsor
reimbursement and deeming fail to adequately convey the steps that
States and state agencies must take to comply with their statutory
obligations. These regulations would better aid States and state
agencies in fulfilling those obligations, and expand the Federal role
in forcing sponsors to financially support the sponsored aliens and
reimburse the expenses associated with public benefit use by those
aliens.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 03/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy
[[Page 52862]]
and Strategy, 5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD
20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. SHIPPING SAFETY FAIRWAYS ALONG THE ATLANTIC COAST [1625-AC57]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70001; 46 U.S.C. 70003; 46 U.S.C. 70034
Relevant Executive Orders: 14269
CFR Citation: 33 CFR 166; 33 CFR 167
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Coast Guard is proposing the establishment of
shipping safety fairways along the Atlantic Coast of the United States.
Fairways are marked routes for vessel traffic in which any fixed
obstructions are prohibited. The proposed fairways are based on studies
about vessel traffic along the Atlantic Coast and do not conflict with
other ocean users. Coast Guard establishes shipping safety fairways to
maintain safe and secure access to major ports of the U.S. Marine
Transportation System.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking would establish shipping safety
fairways along the Atlantic Coast of the United States to facilitate
the direct and unobstructed transits of ships and facilitate
development on the outer continental shelf. The rulemaking would also
establish traffic separation schemes, precautionary areas, and a
fairway anchorage. The establishment of these routing measures would
ensure that obstruction-free routes are preserved to and from US ports
and along the Atlantic Coast.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Establishing fairways would
streamline interagency coordination between the Coast Guard, the Bureau
of Ocean Energy Management, and other stakeholders during the wind
energy leasing process. By clearly identifying historic vessel travel
lanes and areas with high vessel traffic early on, this rule would
enable efficient communication and decision-making. Additionally, it
would provide clarity on less-trafficked, open-water areas suitable for
future energy exploration projects, facilitating quicker and more
effective planning. Coast Guard is determining the costs of the rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANPRM............................... 06/19/20 85 FR 37034
ANPRM Comment Period End............ 08/18/20 .......................
NPRM................................ 01/19/24 89 FR 3587
Notification of Public Meeting; 03/25/24 89 FR 20582
Extension of Comment Period.
NPRM Comment Period Extended End.... 05/17/24 .......................
NPRM Comment Period Reopened........ 03/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Maureen Kallgren, Program Manager, Department of
Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Navigation Systems (CG-
NAV), 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, STOP 7509, Washington, DC
20593-7509
Phone: 571 608-5384
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1625-AC57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(USCBP) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. ADVANCE PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEM: ELECTRONIC VALIDATION OF
TRAVEL DOCUMENTS [1651-AB43]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 44909; 8 U.S.C. 1221; 19 U.S.C. 1431
CFR Citation: 19 CFR 122
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations
require commercial air carriers to electronically transmit passenger
information to CBP's Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) prior
to an aircraft's arrival in or departure from the United States. CBP
proposed to incorporate additional carrier requirements that would
enable CBP to validate each passenger's travel documents prior to the
passenger boarding the aircraft. The proposed changes, if implemented,
would also require air carriers to transmit additional data elements
through APIS for all commercial aircraft passengers arriving in the
United States in order to support border operations and national
security. This rule is deregulatory and will result in time savings to
passengers and cost savings to CBP.
Statement of Need: This Rule is needed to increase the safety of
the traveling public, the air carrier industry, and the United States.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions. Based on the analysis for
the NPRM, DHS estimates this rule will result in an annualized net
benefit of approximately $1 million due to time savings for CBP and
travelers who will now be able to correct errors immediately.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/02/23 88 FR 7016
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/03/23 .......................
Final Action........................ 04/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Robert Neumann, Program Manager, Office of Field
Operations, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20229
Phone: 202 412-2788
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1651-AB43
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCBP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT (ACE) ELECTRONIC EXPORT MANIFEST
FOR RAIL CARGO [1651-AB52]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1415
CFR Citation: 123.93
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking proposes to create a new regulation
requiring the submission of export manifest data electronically to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in the Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE) for cargo transported by rail pursuant to section
343(a), of the Trade Act of 2002, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1415), for any
train departing the United States. The proposed regulation would
mandate the electronic transmission of rail export manifest
information, identify the parties eligible to transmit information,
describe the time frames prior to departure of the train in which
[[Page 52863]]
the information is due, and identify an initial filing that must occur
24 hours prior to departure from the port of export while requiring
that remaining data be transmitted at least two hours prior to such
departure. This rule is deregulatory and will result in both time
savings and cost savings for carriers, transmitters, and CBP.
Statement of Need: This Rule is needed to address important cargo
security concerns while providing efficiencies to the trade.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Based on the analysis for the NPRM,
CBP expects that this rule would result in a present value total
combined net cost savings of $49.8 million using a two percent discount
rate, or approximately $3.8 million annualized (2023 U.S. dollars) to
CBP, outbound rail carriers and other related parties during the period
of analysis (2016 to 2030). CBP anticipates that this proposed rule
would also provide added benefits from enhanced cargo security measures
by improving compliance and the enforcement of U.S. export laws and
regulations on U.S. rail exports, while also improving the facilitation
of the export process.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 01/13/25 90 FR 2874
NPRM Comment Period End............. 03/14/25 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 04/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Thomas Pagano, Chief, Outbound Enforcement Branch,
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
Office of Field Operations, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC
20229
Phone: 202 344-3277
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1651-AB52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. VETTING OF CERTAIN SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EMPLOYEES [1652-AA69]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 108-90, sec. 520; Pub. L.
110-53, secs. 1411, 1414, 1512, 1520, 1522, and 1531
Relevant Executive Orders: 14157; 14159; 14161; 14165
CFR Citation: 49 CFR 1500 ; 49 CFR 1530; 49 CFR 1570; 49 CFR 1572;
49 CFR 1580; 49 CFR 1582; 49 CFR 1584; . . .
Legal Deadline: Other, Statutory, August 3, 2008, background and
immigration status check for all public transportation and railroad
frontline employees is due no later than 12 months after date of
enactment.
Sections 1411 and 1520 of Pub. L. 110-53, Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act), (121
Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007), require background checks of frontline public
transportation and railroad employees not later than one year from the
date of enactment. Requirement will be met through regulatory action.
Abstract: TSA will finalize regulations to establish the
requirements and procedures to conduct the vetting of certain railroad,
public transportation, and over-the-road bus employees, and to recover
the costs of the vetting services. On May 23, 2023, TSA issued a notice
of proposed rulemaking proposing these standards. TSA is evaluating all
comments received and will publish the final rule. This regulation is
related to 1652-AA55, Security Training for Surface Transportation
Employees.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is required by the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act, Pub. L. 110-53, (121 Stat.
266, Aug. 3, 2007), and will enhance the security of surface
transportation by ensuring that workers who are central to operations
do not pose a threat to transportation or national security, or of
terrorism.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The vetting of railroad, public
transportation, and over-the-road bus employees covered under the rule
will result in costs to TSA and to industry. TSA is required to recover
vetting costs by collecting user fees from the individuals who are
subject to the requirements rather than the public at large. TSA also
anticipates ancillary costs (e.g. updating contact information,
compliance inspections) associated with compliance with the rule.
Anticipated benefits include reducing security risks by identifying
and/or mitigating potential insider threats through vetting.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 05/23/23 88 FR 33472
NPRM Comment Period End............. 08/21/23 .......................
NPRM Extension of Comment Period.... 08/22/23 88 FR 57044
NPRM Extension Comment Period End... 10/01/23 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions,
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Local
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Ashlee Marks, Section Chief, Policy Development
Section, Surface Policy Division, Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and Engagement,
6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-3740
Email: [email protected]
James Ruger, Chief Economist, Economic Analysis Branch-Coordination
& Analysis Division, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation
Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and Engagement, 6595
Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-5519
Email: [email protected]
Christine Beyer, Senior Counsel, Regulations and Security
Standards, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security
Administration, Chief Counsel's Office, 6595 Springfield Center Drive,
Springfield, VA 20598-6002
Phone: 571 227-3653
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 1652-AA55, Related to 1652-AA56
RIN: 1652-AA69
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--TSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52864]]
9. MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR DRIVER'S LICENSES AND IDENTIFICATION CARDS
ACCEPTABLE BY FEDERAL AGENCIES FOR OFFICIAL PURPOSES; PROCEDURES FOR
REMOTE APPLICATION AND ISSUANCE [1652-AA78]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30301 note; 6 U.S.C. 111, 112; 49 U.S.C.
114
Relevant Executive Orders: 14159; 14161; 14165
CFR Citation: 6 CFR 37
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: TSA is amending regulations implementing the REAL ID Act
by issuing a procedural final rule that enables individuals to apply
for, and for States to issue, REAL ID-compliant driver's licenses and
identification cards remotely. The final rule requires States that
elect to implement remote systems to update their existing REAL ID
certification documentation to demonstrate how their remote systems
meet, or are comparable to, existing standards of this part. Remote
processes would eliminate the need for individuals to travel to
Departments of Motor Vehicle offices and enable States to reduce
support personnel at those offices. By reducing application and
issuance burdens on individuals and States, this rule accelerates and
expands adoption of REAL ID-compliant cards.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is necessary to implement
authority under the REAL ID Modernization Act, Section 1001 of Title X,
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260 (Dec. 27, 2020),
which authorized electronic submission of information and remote
issuance of REAL ID cards under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Allowance of a REAL ID remote
issuance process will result in costs to States and TSA and cost
savings for individuals. Individuals will realize cost savings from
avoiding travel to the State Department of Motor Vehicles. States and
TSA will incur administrative costs associated with submitting and
reviewing remote issues applications. States may also incur costs to
develop and implement remote issuance processes as well as potential
cost savings associated with offering a fully remote option.
Anticipated benefits include increased efficiencies as well as the
acceleration and potential expansion of REAL ID adoption.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Anurag Maheshwary, Attorney Advisor, Department of
Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, Regulations
and Security Standards, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA
20598
Phone: 571 227-4812
Email: [email protected]
James Ruger, Chief Economist, Economic Analysis Branch-Coordination
& Analysis Division, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation
Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and Engagement, 6595
Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-5519
Email: [email protected]
George Petersen, Senior Program Manager, REAL ID Program,
Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security
Administration, Enrollment Services & Vetting Programs, 6595
Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6010
Phone: 571 227-2215
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1652-AA78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--TSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. NORMALIZING UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS BEYOND VISUAL LINE
OF SIGHT OPERATIONS [1652-AA80]
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114, 44901, 44903
Relevant Executive Orders: 14157; 14159; 14161; 14305; 14307; 14165
CFR Citation: 49 CFR 1540; 49 CFR 1544; 49 CFR 1550
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, December 7, 2025, Deadline for
FAA BVLOS Final Rule under section 930 of Pub. L. 118-63 (May 16,
2024).
Abstract: This final rule is intended to provide a predictable and
clear pathway for safe, routine, and scalable UAS operations that
include package delivery, agriculture, aerial surveying, civic
interest, operations training, demonstration, recreation, and flight
testing. This final rule will be issued in conjunction with the FAA's
final rule. FAA's final rule provides performance-based regulations
enabling the design and operation of unmanned aircraft systems at low
altitudes beyond visual line of sight and for third-party services, to
include UAS Traffic Management, that support these operations. The FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 directs the development of this rulemaking.
TSA's rule is necessary to support the secure integration of BVLOS UAS
operations into the national air space system.
TSA's final rule makes complementary changes to its regulations to
require necessary security measures on these operations consistent with
its current regulatory structure for civil aviation.
Statement of Need: TSA has proposed revisions to its regulations to
ensure that the FAA's regulation of BVLOS UAS operations under part 108
does not inadvertently create a security gap under TSA regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TSA is continuing to assess the
anticipated costs and benefits of the final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/07/25 90 FR 38212
NPRM Comment Period End............. 10/06/25 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 05/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Local
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: James Ruger, Chief Economist, Economic Analysis
Branch-Coordination & Analysis Division, Department of Homeland
Security, Transportation Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and
Engagement, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-5519
Email: [email protected]
Hans Kessler, Attorney Advisor, Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, Regulations and Security
Standards, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfied, VA 20598
Phone: 571 227-1086
Email: [email protected]
Craig Mosford, Aviation Sector Manager, Policy, Plans, and
[[Page 52865]]
Engagement, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security
Administration, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598
Phone: 571 227-5245
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2120-AL82
RIN: 1652-AA80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (USICE) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. ESTABLISHING A FIXED TIME PERIOD OF ADMISSION AND AN EXTENSION OF
STAY PROCEDURE FOR NONIMMIGRANT ACADEMIC STUDENTS, EXCHANGE VISITORS,
AND REPRESENTATIVES OF FOREIGN INFORMATION MEDIA [1653-AA95]
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1182; 8
U.S.C. 1184
CFR Citation: 8 CFR 214; 8 CFR 274a; 8 CFR 248
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule proposes to eliminate the Duration of Status
admission for F, J, and I nonimmigrant categories and replace it with a
date-limited authorized period of stay when entering the United States.
The fixed date would eliminate confusion over how long foreign
students, exchange visitors, and representatives of foreign information
media may stay in the United States. It would also improve the
Department's efforts to reduce overstay rates and address fraud and
national security concerns.
Statement of Need: The failure to provide certain categories of
nonimmigrants with specific dates for their authorized periods of stay
has contributed to fraud, exploitation, and abuse in the system. These
changes will allow DHS to effectively assess whether these
nonimmigrants are complying with the conditions of their
classifications and U.S. immigration law while also mitigating national
security risks.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Through this NPRM, the DHS proposed
changes would have an annualized cost ranging from $390.3 million to
$392.4 million (using 3 and 7 percent discount rates, respectively).
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/28/25 90 FR 42070
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/29/25 .......................
Final Action........................ 03/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Sharon Hageman, Deputy Assistant Director,
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, 500 12th Street SW, Mail Stop 5006, Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 732-6960
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1653-AA95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. REMOVAL OF UPDATES TO FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION OF
WETLANDS REGULATIONS [1660-AB18]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; E.O. 11988 of May 24, 1977, 42 FR 26951, 3 CFR,
1977 Comp., p. 117; E.O. 11990 of May 24, 1977, 42 FR 26961, 3 CFR,
1977 Comp., p. 121
Relevant Executive Orders: 14148; 14219; 14267
CFR Citation: 44 CFR part 9
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule would rescind certain provisions in the July
11, 2024, final rule titled Updates to Floodplain Management and
Protection of Wetlands Regulations to Implement the Federal Flood Risk
Management Standard. FEMA had issued this rule due to Executive Order
14030, which reinstated the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard
(FFRMS). On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order
14148, Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions.
This Executive Order rescinded Executive Order 14030, thereby
eliminating the standard. FEMA stopped implementation of the FFRMS on
March 25, 2025, consistent with Executive Order 14148. FEMA is now
undertaking rulemaking to remove the specific requirements of Executive
Order 14030 from its regulations. Removing the standard from Part 9
will streamline FEMA's regulations, streamline program implementation,
and reduce burdens on the public.
Statement of Need: In 2024, following Executive Order 14030, FEMA
incorporated the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS) into 44
CFR part 9. However, in January 2025, Executive Order 14148 rescinded
Executive Order 14030, thereby eliminating the FFRMS. FEMA stopped
implementing the FFRMS in March 2025 and plans to update 44 CFR part 9
to remove the FFRMS from FEMA's regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of this action.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Portia Ross, Office of Environmental and Historic
Preservation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472
Phone: 202 709-0677
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1660-AB18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency (CISA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. CYBER INCIDENT REPORTING FOR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ACT (CIRCIA)
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS [1670-AA04]
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 681 et seq.
CFR Citation: 6 CFR 226
Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, March 15, 2024, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. Final, Statutory, October 4, 2025, Final Rule.
Abstract: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
(CISA) will finalize regulations to implement certain aspects of the
Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022
(CIRCIA). Specifically, CIRCIA directs CISA to develop and implement
regulations requiring covered entities to submit reports to CISA
regarding covered cyber incidents and ransom payments. CISA published
the NPRM on April 4, 2024. CISA received significant public comments on
the proposed rule, many of which emphasized the need to reduce the
scope and burden of the proposed reporting requirements, improve
harmonization of CIRCIA with other federal cyber incident reporting
[[Page 52866]]
requirements, and clarify terms. CISA is considering the public
comments and examining options for the rulemaking. Additional
information about this rulemaking is available at www.cisa.gov/circia.
Statement of Need: Congress directed CISA to promulgate regulations
requiring covered entities to report covered cyber incidents and ransom
payments to CISA.
Summary of Legal Basis: This regulation is statutorily mandated by
6 U.S.C. 681 et seq.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: CISA is continuing to assess the
anticipated costs and benefits of the final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 04/04/24 89 FR 23644
NPRM Comment Period Extended........ 05/06/24 89 FR 37141
NPRM Correction..................... 06/03/24 89 FR 47471
NPRM Comment Period End............. 06/03/24 .......................
NPRM Comment Period Extended End.... 07/03/24 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 05/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions,
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Local, State, Tribal
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments:
https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Todd Klessman, CIRCIA Rulemaking Team Lead,
Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency, CISA--WB2 Stop 0612, 4200 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA
20598-0612
Phone: 202 964-6869
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1670-AA04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Customs Revenue Functions (CUSTREV) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. ELECTRONIC BOND TRANSMISSION [1685-AA24]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66; 19 U.S.C. 1411(a)(2)(D); 19 U.S.C.
1623; 19 U.S.C. 1624
CFR Citation: 19 CFR part 113
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes to amend the
CBP regulations to require that most bonds be transmitted to CBP
electronically via a specialized system by the surety securing the
bond, or by the principal on a bond secured by cash in lieu of surety.
The proposed amendments eliminate the more onerous and inefficient
paper-based bond application and approval processes. Moving forward,
the proposed amendments would implement the successful National Customs
Automation Program test for electronic bonds (``eBonds'').
Statement of Need: The proposed rule is needed to modernize
existing regulations and reduce burdens on the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/13/26 91 FR 6986
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/14/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... To Be Determined
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Kara Welty, Chief, Revenue Protection Branch,
Revenue Division, Department of Homeland Security, Customs Revenue
Functions, 8899 E 56th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46249
Phone: 202 875-3284
Email: [email protected]
Sharolyn McCann, Director, Commercial Operations, Revenue & Entry
Division, Department of Homeland Security, Customs Revenue Functions,
1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004
Phone: 202 384-8935
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Previously reported as 1515-AE49
RIN: 1685-AA24
BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services (USCIS) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
71. IMPROVING THE PROCESS OF CERTIFICATION OF FORM N-648,
MEDICAL CERTIFICATION FOR DISABILITY EXCEPTIONS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1423; 8 U.S.C. 1443
Relevant Executive Orders: 14161
CFR Citation: 8 CFR part 312; 8 CFR 106.2; 8 CFR part 336
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS proposes to amend its regulations governing the
process of certifying Form N-648, Medical Certification for Disability
Exceptions by certain medical professionals. Through this certification
process, aliens qualify for exemptions from the English proficiency and
civics requirements for naturalization. The proposed amendments seek to
strengthen the integrity of the naturalization process by implementing
streamlined certification procedures for medical professionals and
ensuring that only qualified aliens are granted exemptions. These
changes are intended to enhance safeguards designed to prevent
fraudulent submissions and ensure proper administration of disability
exception process for naturalization.
Statement of Need: Across the country and over the decades, there
have been numerous instances where the medical certification process
has been exploited. Some medical professionals have been arrested,
indicted and convicted for submitting fraudulent Forms N-648 in
violation of various federal statutes. This rule is intended to
mitigate some of the concerns with the exploitation of the Form N-648
process, thereby further enhancing the integrity of naturalization
process.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 04/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD07
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52867]]
72. NATURALIZATION APPLICATION FEE ADJUSTMENTS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), (n)
CFR Citation: 8 CFR 106.2; 8 CFR 106.3
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS is proposing to adjust the fees that USCIS charges
for Form N-400 and Form N-336 to ensure recovery of the cost of
adjudication. This includes eliminating fee waivers (except for armed
forces service members when filing for naturalization under statutes
for members of the armed forces) and reduced fees for these forms.
Statement of Need: These proposed changes provide additional
resources to further support USCIS's financial sustainability and
provide additional resources for continued review of the integrity of
the naturalization process.
Alternatives: DHS is currently considering the specific impacts of
the proposed provisions.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 06/23/26 91 FR 37500
NPRM Comment Period End............. 08/24/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD08
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
73. PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF NATURALIZATION THROUGH
ENHANCED EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1423; 8 U.S.C. 1443
Relevant Executive Orders: 14161
CFR Citation: 8 CFR part 312, 8 CRF part 316, 8 CFR part 3
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS proposes to amend its regulations governing the
educational requirements for naturalization. DHS proposes to establish
a framework and a standard for applicants to meet the educational
requirements for naturalization. With this proposed rule, USCIS is
seeking to further enhance the integrity of the naturalization test.
DHS also proposes additional flexibilities to allow USCIS to modify the
way it administers the naturalization tests, including by allowing for
third party administration of the test.
Statement of Need: Aliens applying for naturalization must
demonstrate an understanding of the English language, including an
ability to read, write, and speak words in ordinary usage (English
language requirements). Aliens must also demonstrate a knowledge and
understanding of the fundamentals of the history, and of the principles
and form of government, of the United States (civics requirements).
Current regulations do not provide specifics on how aliens should meet
the educational requirements. These changes would ensure the proper
assimilation of lawful immigrants into the United States and promote a
unified American identity and attachment to the Constitution, laws, and
founding principles of the United States. With this proposed rule,
USCIS is seeking to further enhance the integrity of the naturalization
test and provide additional flexibilities in administering the
naturalization test. Current regulations limit the administration of
the naturalization test by requiring the test as part of the
naturalization application and interview with an officer.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
74. SPONSOR REIMBURSEMENT AND DEEMING 8 CFR 213A
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: INA 213A (8 U.S.C. 1183a); 8 U.S.C. 1631; 8 U.S.C.
1632
CFR Citation: 8 CFR 213a
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: DHS proposes to amend its regulations relating to the
mechanisms by which the Federal government, as well as the States and
state agencies, hold the sponsors of aliens to their commitments to
financially support those aliens. The project will include amendments
relating to requests for reimbursement and actions to compel
reimbursement. DHS will also amend its regulations to clarify the
responsibilities of States and state agencies to attribute a sponsor's
income and resources to an alien when determining the eligibility and
the amount of benefits of an alien for means-tested public benefits
programs.
Statement of Need: Existing regulations relating to sponsor
reimbursement and deeming fail to adequately convey the steps that
States and state agencies must take to comply with their statutory
obligations. These regulations would better aid States and state
agencies in fulfilling those obligations, and expand the Federal role
in forcing sponsors to financially support the sponsored aliens and
reimburse the expenses associated with public benefit use by those
aliens.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 06/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, Residence and Naturalization
Division Chief, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
[[Page 52868]]
Immigration Services, Office of Policy and Strategy, 5900 Capital
Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588-0009
Phone: 240 721-3000
RIN: 1615-AD15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
75. CLARIFICATION OF CERTAIN MARINER TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 46 U.S.C. 7101(c)
CFR Citation: 46 CFR 11.317; 46 CFR 11.321(a); 46 CFR 11.321(b); 46
CFR 12.611(a)(4)
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Coast Guard proposes to remove four merchant mariner
credentialing training requirements related to Standards of Training,
Certification, and Watchkeeping (STCW) officer and rating endorsements
from its regulations in 46 CFR parts 11 and 12. The Coast Guard has
determined that these training requirements exceed the minimum training
and certification standards required by the STCW. These training
requirements are not necessary for the safety of life and property at
sea. The rule would propose to remove: leadership and managerial skills
training to qualify as master of vessels of less than 500 gross tons
(GT) limited to near-coastal waters; demonstration of meeting the
standard of competence in leadership and teamworking skills to renew an
endorsement of an STCW as an officer in charge of a navigational watch
(OICNW) of vessels of less than 500 GT limited to near-coastal waters
to be valid on or after January 1, 2017; bridge resource management
training to qualify as OICNW on vessels of less than 500 GT limited to
near-coastal waters; and computer systems and maintenance training to
qualify as electro-technical rating (ETR) on vessels powered by main
propulsion machinery of 750 kilowatts (kW)/1,000 horsepower (HP) or
more.
Statement of Need: The Coast Guard has determined that five
requirements exceed current international certification and training
standards of the STCW, causing a misalignment between the training of
U.S. mariners and the mariners of other countries. These requirements
are not necessary for the safety of life and property at sea.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Megan Johns Henry, Marine Transportation
Specialist, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Office
of Merchant Mariner Credentialing (CG-MMC-1), 2703 Martin Luther King
Jr. Avenue SE, STOP 7509, Washington, DC 20593-7509
Phone: 571 610-3303
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1625-AC48
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
76. SHIPPING SAFETY FAIRWAYS ALONG THE ATLANTIC COAST
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70001; 46 U.S.C. 70003; 46 U.S.C. 70034
Relevant Executive Orders: 14269
CFR Citation: 33 CFR 166; 33 CFR 167
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Coast Guard is proposing the establishment of
shipping safety fairways along the Atlantic Coast of the United States.
Fairways are marked routes for vessel traffic in which any fixed
obstructions are prohibited. The proposed fairways are based on studies
about vessel traffic along the Atlantic Coast and do not conflict with
other ocean users. Coast Guard establishes shipping safety fairways to
maintain safe and secure access to major ports of the U.S. Marine
Transportation System.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking would establish shipping safety
fairways along the Atlantic Coast of the United States to facilitate
the direct and unobstructed transits of ships and facilitate
development on the outer continental shelf. The rulemaking would also
establish traffic separation schemes, precautionary areas, and a
fairway anchorage. The establishment of these routing measures would
ensure that obstruction-free routes are preserved to and from US ports
and along the Atlantic Coast.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Establishing fairways would
streamline interagency coordination between the Coast Guard, the Bureau
of Ocean Energy Management, and other stakeholders during the wind
energy leasing process. By clearly identifying historic vessel travel
lanes and areas with high vessel traffic early on, this rule would
enable efficient communication and decision-making. Additionally, it
would provide clarity on less-trafficked, open-water areas suitable for
future energy exploration projects, facilitating quicker and more
effective planning. Coast Guard is determining the costs of the rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANPRM............................... 06/19/20 85 FR 37034
ANPRM Comment Period End............ 08/18/20
NPRM................................ 01/19/24 89 FR 3587
Notification of Public Meeting; 03/25/24 89 FR 20582
Extension of Comment Period.
NPRM Comment Period Extended End.... 05/17/24
NPRM Comment Period Reopened........ 05/05/26
NPRM Reopened Comment Period End.... 06/22/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Maureen Kallgren, Program Manager, Department of
Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Navigation Systems (CG-
NAV), 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, STOP 7509, Washington, DC
20593-7509
Phone: 571 608-5384
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1625-AC57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCG Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
77. ELECTRONIC CHART AND NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT CARRIAGE REQUIREMENTS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 46 U.S.C. 3105
Relevant Executive Orders: 14269
CFR Citation: 33 CFR 164; 46 CFR 26; 46 CFR 28; 46 CFR 35; 46 CFR
78; 46 CFR 97; 46 CFR 109; 46 CFR 121; 46 CFR 130; 46 CFR 140; 46 CFR
167; 46 CFR 169; 46 CFR 184; 46 CFR 196
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking would modify the chart, publications, and
navigational equipment requirements in titles 33 and 46 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) for all commercial
[[Page 52869]]
U.S.-flagged vessels and foreign-flagged vessels operating in the
waters of the United States.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is needed to reduce the burden
on vessel owners and operators, eliminating unnecessary compliance
requirements and streamlining Coast Guard regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANPRM............................... 03/28/22 87 FR 17241
ANPRM Comment Period End............ 06/27/22
Final Rule with Comment............. 12/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: Docket number USCG-2021-0291
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Brian Mottel, Marine Transportation Specialist,
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Navigation
Systems (CG-NAV), 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, STOP 7509,
Washington, DC 20593-1526
Phone: 206 815-4657
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1625-AC74
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(USCBP) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
78. ADVANCE PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEM: ELECTRONIC VALIDATION OF
TRAVEL DOCUMENTS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 44909; 8 U.S.C. 1221; 19 U.S.C. 1431
CFR Citation: 19 CFR 122
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations
require commercial air carriers to electronically transmit passenger
information to CBP's Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) prior
to an aircraft's arrival in or departure from the United States. CBP
proposed to incorporate additional carrier requirements that would
enable CBP to validate each passenger's travel documents prior to the
passenger boarding the aircraft. The proposed changes, if implemented,
would also require air carriers to transmit additional data elements
through APIS for all commercial aircraft passengers arriving in the
United States in order to support border operations and national
security. This rule is deregulatory and will result in time savings to
passengers and cost savings to CBP.
Statement of Need: This Rule is needed to increase the safety of
the traveling public, the air carrier industry, and the United States.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the proposed provisions. Based on the analysis for
the NPRM, DHS estimates this rule will result in an annualized net
benefit of approximately $1 million due to time savings for CBP and
travelers who will now be able to correct errors immediately.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/02/23 88 FR 7016
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/03/23
Final Action........................ 09/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Robert Neumann, Program Manager, Office of Field
Operations, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20229
Phone: 202 412-2788
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1651-AB43
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--USCBP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
79. AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT (ACE) ELECTRONIC EXPORT MANIFEST
FOR RAIL CARGO
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1415
CFR Citation: 123.93
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking proposes to create a new regulation
requiring the submission of export manifest data electronically to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in the Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE) for cargo transported by rail pursuant to section
343(a), of the Trade Act of 2002, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1415), for any
train departing the United States. The proposed regulation would
mandate the electronic transmission of rail export manifest
information, identify the parties eligible to transmit information,
describe the time frames prior to departure of the train in which the
information is due, and identify an initial filing that must occur 24
hours prior to departure from the port of export while requiring that
remaining data be transmitted at least two hours prior to such
departure. This rule is deregulatory and will result in both time
savings and cost savings for carriers, transmitters, and CBP.
Statement of Need: This Rule is needed to address important cargo
security concerns while providing efficiencies to the trade.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Based on the analysis for the NPRM,
CBP expects that this rule would result in a present value total
combined net cost savings of $49.8 million using a two percent discount
rate, or approximately $3.8 million annualized (2023 U.S. dollars) to
CBP, outbound rail carriers and other related parties during the period
of analysis (2016 to 2030). CBP anticipates that this proposed rule
would also provide added benefits from enhanced cargo security measures
by improving compliance and the enforcement of U.S. export laws and
regulations on U.S. rail exports, while also improving the facilitation
of the export process.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 01/13/25 90 FR 2874
NPRM Comment Period End............. 03/14/25
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Thomas Pagano, Chief, Outbound Enforcement Branch,
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
Office of Field Operations, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20229
Phone: 202 344-3277
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1651-AB52
[[Page 52870]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
80. VETTING OF CERTAIN SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EMPLOYEES
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 108-90, sec. 520; Pub. L.
110-53, secs. 1411, 1414, 1512, 1520, 1522, and 1531
Relevant Executive Orders: 14157; 14159; 14161; 14165
CFR Citation: 49 CFR 1500 ; 49 CFR 1530; 49 CFR 1570; 49 CFR 1572;
49 CFR 1580; 49 CFR 1582; 49 CFR 1584; . . .
Legal Deadline: Other, Statutory, August 3, 2008, background and
immigration status check for all public transportation and railroad
frontline employees is due no later than 12 months after date of
enactment.
Sections 1411 and 1520 of Pub. L. 110-53, Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act), (121
Stat. 266, Aug. 3, 2007), require background checks of frontline public
transportation and railroad employees not later than one year from the
date of enactment. Requirement will be met through regulatory action.
Abstract: TSA will finalize regulations to establish the
requirements and procedures to conduct the vetting of certain railroad,
public transportation, and over-the-road bus employees, and to recover
the costs of the vetting services. On May 23, 2023, TSA issued a notice
of proposed rulemaking proposing these standards. TSA is evaluating all
comments received and will publish the final rule. This regulation is
related to 1652-AA55, Security Training for Surface Transportation
Employees.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is required by the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act, Pub. L. 110-53, (121 Stat.
266, Aug. 3, 2007), and will enhance the security of surface
transportation by ensuring that workers who are central to operations
do not pose a threat to transportation or national security, or of
terrorism.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The vetting of railroad, public
transportation, and over-the-road bus employees covered under the rule
will result in costs to TSA and to industry. TSA is required to recover
vetting costs by collecting user fees from the individuals who are
subject to the requirements rather than the public at large. TSA also
anticipates ancillary costs (e.g. updating contact information,
compliance inspections) associated with compliance with the rule.
Anticipated benefits include reducing security risks by identifying
and/or mitigating potential insider threats through vetting.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 05/23/23 88 FR 33472
NPRM Comment Period End............. 08/21/23
NPRM Extension of Comment Period.... 08/22/23 88 FR 57044
NPRM Extension Comment Period End... 10/01/23
Final Rule.......................... 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions,
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Local
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Ashlee Marks, Section Chief, Policy Development
Section, Surface Policy Division, Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and Engagement,
6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-3740
Email: [email protected]
James Ruger, Chief Economist, Economic Analysis Branch--
Coordination & Analysis Division, Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and Engagement,
6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-5519
Email: [email protected]
Christine Beyer, Senior Counsel, Regulations and Security
Standards, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security
Administration, Chief Counsel's Office, 6595 Springfield Center Drive,
Springfield, VA 20598-6002
Phone: 571 227-3653
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 1652-AA55, Related to 1652-AA56
RIN: 1652-AA69
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--TSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
81. MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR DRIVER'S LICENSES AND IDENTIFICATION CARDS
ACCEPTABLE BY FEDERAL AGENCIES FOR OFFICIAL PURPOSES; PROCEDURES FOR
REMOTE APPLICATION AND ISSUANCE
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30301 note; 6 U.S.C. 111, 112; 49 U.S.C.
114
Relevant Executive Orders: 14159; 14161; 14165
CFR Citation: 6 CFR 37
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: TSA is amending regulations implementing the REAL ID Act
by issuing a procedural final rule that enables individuals to apply
for, and for States to issue, REAL ID-compliant driver's licenses and
identification cards remotely. The final rule requires States that
elect to implement remote systems to update their existing REAL ID
certification documentation to demonstrate how their remote systems
meet, or are comparable to, existing standards of this part. Remote
processes would eliminate the need for individuals to travel to
Departments of Motor Vehicle offices and enable States to reduce
support personnel at those offices. By reducing application and
issuance burdens on individuals and States, this rule accelerates and
expands adoption of REAL ID-compliant cards.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is necessary to implement
authority under the REAL ID Modernization Act, Section 1001 of Title X,
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L .116-260 (Dec. 27, 2020),
which authorized electronic submission of information and remote
issuance of REAL ID cards under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Allowance of a REAL ID remote
issuance process will result in costs to States and TSA and cost
savings for individuals. Individuals will realize cost savings from
avoiding travel to the State Department of Motor Vehicles. States and
TSA will incur administrative costs associated with submitting and
reviewing remote issues applications. States may also incur costs to
develop and implement remote issuance processes as well as potential
cost savings associated with offering a fully remote option.
Anticipated benefits include increased efficiencies as well as the
acceleration and potential expansion of REAL ID adoption.
Timetable:
[[Page 52871]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Anurag Maheshwary, Attorney Advisor, Department of
Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, Regulations
and Security Standards, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA
20598
Phone: 571 227-4812
Email: [email protected]
James Ruger, Chief Economist, Economic Analysis Branch--
Coordination & Analysis Division, Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and Engagement,
6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-5519
Email: [email protected]
George Petersen, Senior Program Manager, REAL ID Program,
Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security
Administration, Enrollment Services & Vetting Programs, 6595
Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6010
Phone: 571 227-2215
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1652-AA78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--TSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
82. NORMALIZING UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS BEYOND VISUAL LINE
OF SIGHT OPERATIONS
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114, 44901, 44903
Relevant Executive Orders: 14157; 14159; 14161; 14305; 14307; 14165
CFR Citation: 49 CFR 1540; 49 CFR 1544; 49 CFR 1550
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, December 7, 2025, Deadline for
FAA BVLOS Final Rule under section 930 of Pub. L. 118-63 (May 16,
2024).
Abstract: This final rule is intended to provide a predictable and
clear pathway for safe, routine, and scalable UAS operations that
include package delivery, agriculture, aerial surveying, civic
interest, operations training, demonstration, recreation, and flight
testing. This final rule will be issued in conjunction with the FAA's
final rule. FAA's final rule provides performance-based regulations
enabling the design and operation of unmanned aircraft systems at low
altitudes beyond visual line of sight and for third-party services, to
include UAS Traffic Management, that support these operations. The FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 directs the development of this rulemaking.
TSA's rule is necessary to support the secure integration of BVLOS UAS
operations into the national air space system.
TSA's final rule makes complementary changes to its regulations to
require necessary security measures on these operations consistent with
its current regulatory structure for civil aviation.
Statement of Need: TSA has proposed revisions to its regulations to
ensure that the FAA's regulation of BVLOS UAS operations under part 108
does not inadvertently create a security gap under TSA regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TSA is continuing to assess the
anticipated costs and benefits of the final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/07/25 90 FR 38212
NPRM Comment Period End............. 10/06/25
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Local
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: James Ruger, Chief Economist, Economic Analysis
Branch--Coordination & Analysis Division, Department of Homeland
Security, Transportation Security Administration, Policy, Plans, and
Engagement, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598-6028
Phone: 571 227-5519
Email: [email protected]
Hans Kessler, Attorney Advisor, Department of Homeland Security,
Transportation Security Administration, Regulations and Security
Standards, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfied, VA 20598
Phone: 571 227-1086
Email: [email protected]
Craig Mosford, Aviation Sector Manager, Policy, Plans, and
Engagement, Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security
Administration, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598
Phone: 571 227-5245
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2120-AL82
RIN: 1652-AA80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (USICE) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
83. ESTABLISHING A FIXED TIME PERIOD OF ADMISSION AND AN EXTENSION OF
STAY PROCEDURE FOR NONIMMIGRANT ACADEMIC STUDENTS, EXCHANGE VISITORS,
AND REPRESENTATIVES OF FOREIGN INFORMATION MEDIA
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1182; 8
U.S.C. 1184
CFR Citation: 8 CFR 214; 8 CFR 274a; 8 CFR 248
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule proposes to eliminate the Duration of Status
admission for F, J, and I nonimmigrant categories and replace it with a
date-limited authorized period of stay when entering the United States.
The fixed date would eliminate confusion over how long foreign
students, exchange visitors, and representatives of foreign information
media may stay in the United States. It would also improve the
Department's efforts to reduce overstay rates and address fraud and
national security concerns.
Statement of Need: The failure to provide certain categories of
nonimmigrants with specific dates for their authorized periods of stay
has contributed to fraud, exploitation, and abuse in the system. These
changes will allow DHS to effectively assess whether these
nonimmigrants are complying with the conditions of their
classifications and U.S. immigration law while also mitigating national
security risks.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Through this NPRM, the DHS proposed
changes would have an annualized cost ranging from $390.3 million to
$392.4 million (using 3 and 7 percent discount rates, respectively).
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/28/25 90 FR 42070
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/29/25
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52872]]
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Sharon Hageman, Deputy Assistant Director,
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, 500 12th Street SW, Mail Stop 5006, Washington, DC 20536
Phone: 202 732-6960
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1653-AA95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
84. REMOVAL OF UPDATES TO FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION OF
WETLANDS REGULATIONS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; E.O. 11988 of May 24, 1977, 42 FR 26951, 3 CFR,
1977 Comp., p. 117; E.O. 11990 of May 24, 1977, 42 FR 26961, 3 CFR,
1977 Comp., p. 121
Relevant Executive Orders: 14148; 14219; 14267
CFR Citation: 44 CFR part 9
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule would rescind certain provisions in the July
11, 2024, final rule titled Updates to Floodplain Management and
Protection of Wetlands Regulations to Implement the Federal Flood Risk
Management Standard. FEMA had issued this rule due to Executive Order
14030, which reinstated the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard
(FFRMS). On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order
14148, Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions.
This Executive Order rescinded Executive Order 14030, thereby
eliminating the standard. FEMA stopped implementation of the FFRMS on
March 25, 2025, consistent with Executive Order 14148. FEMA is now
undertaking rulemaking to remove the specific requirements of Executive
Order 14030 from its regulations. Removing the standard from Part 9
will streamline FEMA's regulations, streamline program implementation,
and reduce burdens on the public.
Statement of Need: In 2024, following Executive Order 14030, FEMA
incorporated the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS) into 44
CFR part 9. However, in January 2025, Executive Order 14148 rescinded
Executive Order 14030, thereby eliminating the FFRMS. FEMA stopped
implementing the FFRMS in March 2025 and plans to update 44 CFR part 9
to remove the FFRMS from FEMA's regulations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of this action.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Portia Ross, Office of Environmental and Historic
Preservation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472
Phone: 202 709-0677
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1660-AB18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency (CISA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
85. CYBER INCIDENT REPORTING FOR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ACT (CIRCIA)
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 681 et seq.
CFR Citation: 6 CFR 226
Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, March 15, 2024, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.
Final, Statutory, October 4, 2025, Final Rule.
Abstract: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
(CISA) will finalize regulations to implement certain aspects of the
Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022
(CIRCIA). Specifically, CIRCIA directs CISA to develop and implement
regulations requiring covered entities to submit reports to CISA
regarding covered cyber incidents and ransom payments. CISA published
the NPRM on April 4, 2024. CISA received significant public comments on
the proposed rule, many of which emphasized the need to reduce the
scope and burden of the proposed reporting requirements, improve
harmonization of CIRCIA with other federal cyber incident reporting
requirements, and clarify terms. CISA is considering the public
comments and examining options for the rulemaking. Additional
information about this rulemaking is available at www.cisa.gov/circia.
Statement of Need: Congress directed CISA to promulgate regulations
requiring covered entities to report covered cyber incidents and ransom
payments to CISA.
Summary of Legal Basis: This regulation is statutorily mandated by
6 U.S.C. 681 et seq.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: CISA is continuing to assess the
anticipated costs and benefits of the final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 04/04/24 89 FR 23644
NPRM Comment Period Extended........ 05/06/24 89 FR 37141
NPRM Correction..................... 06/03/24 89 FR 47471
NPRM Comment Period End............. 06/03/24 .......................
NPRM Comment Period Extended End.... 07/03/24 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions,
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Local, State, Tribal
URL For More Information: https://www.regulations.gov
URL For Public Comments: https://www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Todd Klessman, CIRCIA Rulemaking Team Lead,
Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency, CISA--WB2 Stop 0612, 4200 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA
20598-0612
Phone: 202 964-6869
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1670-AA04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS--Customs Revenue Functions (CUSTREV) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
86. ELECTRONIC BOND TRANSMISSION
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66; 19 U.S.C. 1411(a)(2)(D); 19 U.S.C.
1623; 19 U.S.C. 1624
CFR Citation: 19 CFR part 113
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rulemaking amends the CBP regulations to require
that most bonds be transmitted to CBP electronically via a specialized
system
[[Page 52873]]
by the surety securing the bond, or by the principal on a bond secured
by cash in lieu of surety. The amendments eliminate the more onerous
and inefficient paper-based bond application and approval processes.
Moving forward, the amendments would implement the successful National
Customs Automation Program test for electronic bonds (``eBonds'').
Statement of Need: The rule is needed to modernize existing
regulations and reduce burdens on the public.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is currently considering the
specific impacts of the provisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/13/26 91 FR 6986
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/14/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... To Be Determined
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Kara Welty, Chief, Revenue Protection Branch,
Revenue Division, Department of Homeland Security, Customs Revenue
Functions, 8899 E 56th Street, Indianapolis, IN 46249
Phone: 202 875-3284
Email: [email protected]
Sharolyn McCann, Director, Commercial Operations, Revenue & Entry
Division, Department of Homeland Security, Customs Revenue Functions,
1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004
Phone: 202 384-8935
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Previously reported as 1515-AE49
RIN: 1685-AA24
BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT STATEMENT OF REGULATORY
PRIORITIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
Introduction
The Regulatory Plan for the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 highlights two significant
regulations that HUD seeks to publish during the upcoming fiscal year.
HUD is committed to promoting healthy, safe, and affordable housing
Under the leadership of Secretary Scott Turner, HUD is dedicated to
setting forth initiatives to reduce burdens on the public, improve
program integrity, and provide clearer information for program
participants across all HUD programs. HUD is intending to finalize 22
regulations to reduce burden, and propose another 15.
The rules highlighted in HUD's regulatory plan for FY 2026 reflect
HUD's efforts to continue its work in building strong and sustainable
communities and addressing the housing needs of all Americans.
Updating the Definition of Chassis To Promote Production of
Manufactured Homes
HUD's Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards (MHCSS)
regulations are currently interpreted to require that every
transportable section of a manufactured home be built and transported
on a permanent chassis. This proposed rule would revise HUD's
regulations to clarify that this requirement applies only to the lowest
floor of the manufactured home. This proposed rule would amend the
definition of ``manufactured home'' in the MHCSS, Model Manufactured
Home Installation Standards (MMHIS), and Manufactured Home Installation
Program (MHIP) to provide that a transportable section of a
manufactured home serving as part of an upper floor of a manufactured
home would not need to be transported or built on a permanent chassis.
Aggregate Costs and Benefits
Executive Order 12866, as amended, requires the agency to provide
its best estimate of the combined aggregate costs and benefits of all
regulations included in the agency's Regulatory Plan that will be
pursued in fiscal year 2026. HUD expects that the proposed rule would
reduce the costs associated with vertical density for manufactured
homes, leading to economic gains from lower costs for two-story
manufactured homes and growth in the manufactured housing market.
Statement of Need
The permanent chassis requirement adds thousands of dollars to the
cost of a multistory manufactured home for producers and consumers and
creates engineering and architectural challenges that complicate the
design and production of multistory manufactured homes. Consequently,
the permanent chassis requirement for every transportable section of a
multistory manufactured home hinders HUD's execution on the Act's
purposes of protecting the affordability of manufactured housing,
facilitating the availability of affordable manufactured homes, and
encouraging innovative and cost-effective construction techniques.
Multistory manufactured homes could be built more cost-effectively and
in a more innovative fashion if the permanent chassis requirement did
not apply to upper floors.
Alternatives
HUD considered whether retaining this requirement, in one form or
another, might serve an important purpose. Ultimately, HUD determined
that the requirement provides no practical, safety, aesthetic, or
design benefit for upper floors of multistory manufactured homes.
Therefore, no alternative short of eliminating the requirement would
meet HUD's goals.
Risks
This rule imposes no risks or additional costs on HUD.
Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible
Status
Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980,
as amended (``Section 214''), prohibits the Secretary of HUD from
making financial assistance available to persons other than United
States citizens or certain categories of eligible aliens in HUD's
public and specified assisted housing programs. This proposed rule
would revise HUD's Section 214 implementing regulations to require the
verification of U.S. citizenship or the eligible immigration status of
all applicants and recipients of assistance under a covered program
regardless of age. The proposed rule would also make prorated
assistance a temporary condition pending verification of eligible
status of family members, where permitted by statute, as opposed to
under HUD's current regulations where prorated assistance could
continue indefinitely.
Aggregate Costs and Benefits
Consistent with the current Administration's regulatory reform
efforts, these proposed regulatory amendments are consistent with the
principles of Executive Order 13828 and 14218 and the current
Administration's regulatory reform efforts. The policy changes will
bring HUD's regulations into greater alignment with the requirements of
Section 214 and make the administrative process for verification more
uniform for citizens and eligible noncitizens, as well as ensure that
only U.S. citizens or nationals and eligible noncitizens under Section
214 and other relevant legal authorities have access to HUD financial
assistance.
[[Page 52874]]
The proposed rule would impose administrative costs on responsible
entities and HUD. Most of the costs of the rule would be upfront costs
of adjustment, borne by the households adversely affected.
Statement of Need
The proposed rule would ensure better implementation to statutory
authorities and align with President Trump's Executive Order to ensure
that federal public benefits do not go to unqualified aliens.
Alternatives
In developing this proposed rule, HUD considered alternatives.
Alternatives such as grandfathering in existing mixed families or
continuing to provide housing assistance to specific subsets of mixed
families would decrease administrative and transition costs. However,
these alternatives would lead to decreased compliance with Section 214
and this Administration's immigration priorities.
Risks
Verification costs for tenants and applicants may increase the
burden of complying with this rule. However, HUD believes based on
research and data that methods of verification offset this burden and
that verification costs are a necessary cost to ensure compliance with
the law.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD--Office of the Secretary (HUDSEC) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
87. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1980: VERIFICATION OF
ELIGIBLE STATUS (FR-6524)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1436a; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14218
CFR Citation: 24 CFR part 5, subpart E
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1980, as amended (Section 214) prohibits the Secretary of HUD from
making financial assistance available to persons other than United
States citizens, nationals, or certain categories of eligible
noncitizens in HUD's public and specified assisted housing programs.
This proposed rule would require the verification of U.S. citizenship
or eligible immigration status of recipients of assistance under a
covered program and make prorated assistance a temporary condition
pending verification of eligible status. The proposed rule also
proposes technical changes to remove outdated acronyms and terminology.
Statement of Need: The proposed rule would ensure better
implementation to statutory authorities and align with President
Trump's Executive Order to ensure that federal public benefits do not
go to unqualified aliens.
Summary of Legal Basis: This falls within HUD's authority to issue
regulations under section 7(d) of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)).
Alternatives: In developing this proposed rule, HUD considered
alternatives. Alternatives such as grandfathering in existing mixed
families or continuing to provide housing assistance to specific
subsets of mixed families would decrease administrative and transition
costs. However, these alternatives would lead to decreased compliance
with Section 214 and this Administration's immigration priorities.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Consistent with the current
Administration's regulatory reform efforts, these proposed regulatory
amendments are consistent with the principles of Executive Order 13828
and 14218 and the current Administration's regulatory reform efforts.
The policy changes will bring HUD's regulations into greater alignment
with the requirements of Section 214 and make the administrative
process for verification more uniform for citizens and eligible
noncitizens, as well as ensure that only U.S. citizens or nationals and
eligible noncitizens under Section 214 and other relevant legal
authorities have access to HUD financial assistance.
The proposed rule would impose administrative costs on responsible
entities and HUD. Most of the costs of the rule would be upfront costs
of adjustment, borne by the households adversely affected.
Risks: Verification costs for tenants and applicants may increase
the burden of complying with this rule. However, HUD believes based on
research and data that methods of verification offset this burden and
that verification costs are a necessary cost to ensure compliance with
the law.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/20/26 91 FR 8151
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/21/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Local, State
Agency Contact: Todd Thomas, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Office of Public Housing and Voucher Programs, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, Office of the Secretary, 451 7th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20410
Phone: 202 402-4542
Robert Iber, Senior Advisor, Office of Multifamily Housing
Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the
Secretary, 451 7th Street SW, Room 6106, Washington, DC 20410
Phone: 202 708-3055
RIN: 2501-AE16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD--Office of Housing (OH) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
88. REVISING THE DEFINITION OF ``MANUFACTURED HOME'' TO LOWER HOUSING
COSTS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5402, 42 U.S.C. 5403, 42 U.S.C. 5404, ;
42 U.S.C. 5424, 42 U.S.C. 3535(d)
CFR Citation: 24 CFR 3280, 3282, 3284, 3285, 3286, and 3288
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule would amend the definition of
manufactured home to provide that only the first floor of a multistory
transportable structure must be built on a permanent chassis. Under
this proposed rule, the portion of the transportable section serving as
the upper floor(s) would not need to be built on or transported on a
permanent chassis. The proposed rule would provide that any
transportable section of a manufactured home that does not include a
permanent chassis must solely be utilized as part of multistory
manufactured homes where the transportable section used for the ground
floor is built on a permanent chassis. Units produced by this method
would remain subject to all other provisions of the Manufactured Home
Construction and Safety Standards (24 CFR part 3280) and Procedural and
Enforcement Regulations (24 CFR part 3282) in their entirety under the
proposed rule.
Statement of Need: The permanent chassis requirement adds thousands
of dollars to the cost of a multistory manufactured home for producers
and consumers and creates engineering and architectural challenges that
complicate the design and production of multistory
[[Page 52875]]
manufactured homes. Consequently, the permanent chassis requirement for
every transportable section of a multistory manufactured home hinders
HUD's execution on the Act's purposes of protecting the affordability
of manufactured housing, facilitating the availability of affordable
manufactured homes, and encouraging innovative and cost-effective
construction techniques. Multistory manufactured homes could be built
more cost-effectively and in a more innovative fashion if the permanent
chassis requirement did not apply to upper floors.
Summary of Legal Basis: This falls within HUD's authority to issue
regulations under section 7(d) of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)).
Alternatives: HUD considered whether retaining this requirement, in
one form or another, might serve an important purpose. Ultimately, HUD
determined that the requirement provides no practical, safety,
aesthetic, or design benefit for upper floors of multistory
manufactured homes. Therefore, no alternative short of eliminating the
requirement would meet HUD's goals.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Executive Order 12866, as amended,
requires the agency to provide its best estimate of the combined
aggregate costs and benefits of all regulations included in the
agency's Regulatory Plan that will be pursued in fiscal year 2026. HUD
expects that the proposed rule would reduce the costs associated with
vertical density for manufactured homes, leading to economic gains from
lower costs for two-story manufactured homes and growth in the
manufactured housing market.
Risks: This rule imposes no risks or additional costs on HUD.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Jason McJury, Office of Manufactured Housing
Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of
Housing, 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20410
Phone: 202 251-4232
RIN: 2502-AJ80
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REGULATORY PLAN
2026 Unified Agenda
Introduction
The U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior or the Department)
manages the Nation's vast public lands and natural resources for the
benefit and enjoyment of the American people. This includes managing
approximately 500 million surface acres of Federal land or about 20
percent of the Nation's land area, approximately 700 million subsurface
acres of Federal mineral estate,\3\ and nearly 3.2 billion acres of
submerged lands on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).\4\ Through
development of our Nation's energy and mineral resources, timber and
grazing operations, and abundant recreation opportunities, Interior
powers American prosperity. The Department also protects wildlife and
ecosystems, manages water resources, and leads Federal wildland fire
management and response activities. Interior's work is done
collaboratively with States, local communities, federally recognized
Indian Tribes, Alaska Natives, the Native Hawaiian Community, and U.S.
Territories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/u.s.-department-of-the-interior-fy-2022-2026-strategic-plan.pdf.
\4\ https://www.boem.gov/factsheet/about-boem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interior plays a central role in the Trump administration's energy
dominance agenda. The development of domestic energy, minerals, and
other natural resources on Federal lands advances the Trump
administration's agenda and generates billions of dollars in revenue
for current and future generations. Interior is unleashing America's
natural resources with a focus on affordable and reliable energy and
prioritizing productive uses of Federal land, including grazing and
timber harvesting.
Interior provides access to some of the best recreation
opportunities in the Nation. Hundreds of millions of people visit
Interior-managed lands each year in order to engage in camping, hiking,
hunting, fishing, and various other forms of outdoor recreation, all of
which support local communities and their economies. Interior is
committed to increasing access to these opportunities.
Regulatory Reform Overview
The Department is committed to advancing President Trump's
deregulation agenda. Federal regulations have imposed massive costs on
millions of Americans and constrained our Nation's economy and
productive uses of public lands and natural resources. On February 3,
2025, the Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum issued Secretary's
Order (SO) 3421, ``Achieving Prosperity through Deregulation,'' which
implements the January 31, 2025, Executive Order (E.O.) 14192,
``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.'' SO 3421 ensures that
the Department's Bureaus and Offices are focused on cutting all red
tape to promote America's economic prosperity, further national
security, and foster the highest possible quality of life for each
United States citizen. Shortly thereafter, in SO 3418, ``Unleashing
American Energy,'' Secretary Burgum directed the Department to suspend,
rescind, or revise certain rules and guidance documents that may
conflict with the goal of unleashing affordable and reliable energy.
Interior has been methodically and expeditiously evaluating the rules
and guidance documents referenced in SO 3418. As discussed below,
Interior has proposed the repeal or modification of many of the rules
referenced in SO 3418, including the Biden administration's overly
burdensome rules regarding the Department's Endangered Species Act
regulations, management of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska,
and multiple use of public lands in the Conservation and Landscape
Health rule. During Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, the Department rescinded
dozens of obsolete, unnecessary, or redundant regulations to advance
the President's energy dominance agenda. These rescissions accord with
the Trump administration's broader commitment to decrease regulatory
burdens, streamline agency processes, and promote energy development on
public lands.
As part of President Trump's government-wide deregulatory agenda,
Interior published a request for information (RFI) inviting the public
to identify outdated, overly complex, or burdensome regulations. The
effort aims to lower costs and regulatory burdens on the American
people. The Department received hundreds of thoughtful comments and is
in the process of identifying ideas for implementation.
In FY 2026, Interior will continue its successful efforts to
identify and repeal, replace, or modify regulations that are unlawful,
unnecessary, ineffective, or impose costs that are not adequately
justified by benefits. Interior will also continue to encourage and
seek public input on these regulatory reform efforts, including through
its RFI, which remains open to the public. In FY 2026, Interior expects
to complete
[[Page 52876]]
deregulatory actions that will provide significant regulatory cost
savings.
Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
To help the Secretary advance his priorities to promote energy
dominance, affordability, and reliability, including by implementing SO
3418 and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA); right-size its
implementation of environmental statutes; increase access to
recreational opportunities on Federal land, and more. we are
highlighting a few key regulatory and deregulatory efforts below.
OBBB Implementation
Following President Trump's signing of the OBBBA, H.R. 1, on July
4, 2025, the Department began implementing statutory directives that
will promote U.S. energy production and timber development.
For example:
Applying for Commingling and Allocation Approval Onshore,
RIN 1004-AF38.
The Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) proposed rule ``Requirements
for Site Security and Production Handling; Applying for Commingling and
Allocation Approval,'' (RIN 1004-AF38), would revise its regulations to
make it easier for operators to combine production from multiple
leases--a practice known as commingling--in response to Congress'
direction in OBBBA section 50101(d)(3) to approve onshore commingling
applications. This approach allows oil and gas production from
different leases, often under different ownership, using the same well
pad, which reduces environmental impacts, lowers operating costs, and
increases overall efficiency. If finalized, the updated rule could
result in as much as $1.8 billion in industry savings annually.
Offshore Downhole Commingling Regulatory Updates, RIN
1014-AA68.
The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) published
the final rule ``Offshore Downhole Commingling Regulatory Updates.''
See 90 FR 38935, August 13, 2025. This rule revises the downhole
commingling regulations on the OCS to ensure consistency with the OBBB
when BSEE reviews a request for downhole commingling. This rule
clarifies that the Department should approve requests for commingling
with only limited exceptions.
Offshore Distribution Cap Changes, RIN 1012-AA41.
The Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) published the direct
final rule ``Offshore Distribution Cap Changes.'' See 90 FR 38938,
August 13, 2025. In this rule, ONRR amended its regulations at 30 CFR
1219.512 to raise the cap on the distribution of OCS revenues from $500
million to $650 million for FY 2025.
Right-Sizing Implementation of Environmental Statutes
The Department has made massive strides towards reforming its
implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
In June 2025, Secretary Burgum, in coordination with President
Trump, announced reforms to modernize the Department's NEPA regulations
and prevent them from being weaponized to delay American innovation and
energy infrastructure construction. These modifications implement
direction from all three branches of government (President Trump in
E.O. 14154 ``Unleashing American Energy;'' the U.S. Congress in its
BUILDER Act amendments as part of the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act;
and the U.S. Supreme Court in its recent landmark decision in Seven
County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County).
In response to SO 3418 and other directives, the Department
recently proposed new ESA rules that would better align the
Department's regulations with the text and intent of the ESA and would
reduce burdens on project proponents. This includes the following:
Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating
Critical Habitat, RIN 1018-BI73.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) published a proposed rule
on November 21, 2025, proposing to revise portions of its regulations
that implement section 4 of the ESA. This is a joint proposed rule with
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The proposed revisions
concern the procedures and criteria used for listing, reclassifying,
and delisting species on the Lists of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants and designating critical habitat, clarifying, among
other things, that the Department can only designate unoccupied habitat
if occupied habitat isn't enough for the preservation of the species.
Regulations Pertaining to Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants, RIN 1018-BI74.
FWS published a proposed rule on November 21, 2025, proposing to
revise its regulations concerning protection of threatened species
under the ESA. FWS proposes to remove the ``blanket rule'' option for
protecting newly listed threatened species pursuant to section 4(d) of
the ESA, right-sizing protections for threatened species and decreasing
permitting burdens in line with the best reading of the ESA.
Interagency Cooperation Regulations, RIN 1018-BI75.
FWS published a proposed rule on November 21, 2025, proposing to
revise portions of its regulations that implement section 7 of the ESA.
This is a joint proposed rule with NMFS. The proposed revisions to the
interagency cooperation implementing regulations confirm FWS' and NMFS'
longstanding application of statutory requirements for interagency
cooperation and aim to facilitate quicker consultations.
Regulations for Designating Critical Habitat, RIN 1018-
BI76.
FWS published a proposed rule on November 21, 2025, proposing to
amend portions of its regulations that implement section 4 of the ESA.
Specifically, FWS proposes to revise regulations related to ESA section
4(b)(2), which requires consideration of the economic, national
security, and any other relevant impacts of designating any particular
area as critical habitat. Section 4(b)(2)(d) authorizes the exclusion
of areas from critical habitat if the benefits of excluding the area
outweigh the benefits of designating it as critical habitat. Here, the
Department proposes text that would permit additional industry and
landowner participation when excluding lands from the designation of
critical habitat.
Definition of ``Harm'' Under the Endangered Species Act,
RIN 1018-BI38.
FWS published a proposed rule on April 17, 2025, to rescind the
regulatory definition of ``harm'' in its ESA regulations. This is a
joint proposed rule with NMFS. The existing regulatory definition of
``harm,'' which includes habitat modification, runs contrary to the
best meaning of the statutory term ``take.'' FWS undertakes this change
to adhere to the single, best meaning of the ESA.
Achieving U.S. Energy Dominance while Promoting Affordable and Reliable
Energy.
As discussed above, the Department is implementing the President's
and Secretary's energy dominance agenda as outlined in several
Executive and Secretary's orders.\5\ These orders direct the removal of
impediments imposed on
[[Page 52877]]
the development and use of our Nation's abundant energy and natural
resources by obsolete, unnecessary, and burdensome regulations. In FY
2026, the Department will continue to focus on deregulating with an eye
towards promoting affordable and reliable energy. This includes
potential changes to regulations involving energy and critical minerals
identification, permitting, leasing, development, production,
transportation, refining, distribution, exporting, and generation
capacity onshore and offshore.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See e.g., E.O. 14153 ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary
Resource Potential;'' E.O. 14154 ``Unleashing American Energy;''
E.O. 14156 ``Declaring a National Energy Emergency;'' SO 3417
``Addressing the National Energy Emergency;'' SO 3418 ``Unleashing
American Energy;'' SO 3422 ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary
Resource Potential.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will pursue finalizing the following rules to
advance the administration's energy dominance agenda:
Rescission of Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, RIN
1004-AF03.
On September 11, 2025, BLM proposed rescinding the Biden-era,
Conservation and Landscape Health rule. In its proposed rule, BLM
explained that the Conservation and Landscape Health rule is
inconsistent with the Federal Land Management and Policy Act's (FLPMA)
multiple-use mandate and that rescission would provide the framework
for future land management plans to better enable energy development as
well as ranching, grazing, timber production, and recreation across
America's public lands.
Risk Management and Financial Assurance for OCS Lease and
Grant Obligations, RIN 1010-AE26.
BOEM has reviewed market conditions of supply and demand in the
crude oil and gas markets, and, as a result, is proposing to amend its
existing risk management and financial assurance regulations. If
finalized, this revision will reduce the economic burden on OCS lessees
and grant holders and promote OCS oil and gas development. BOEM
estimates that a reduction of approximately $6.2 billion of financial
burden to the regulated community will be achieved through this
rulemaking. This reduction of the financial burden increases the amount
of capital available for oil and gas exploration and production on the
OCS.
Rescission of the Management and Protection of the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Regulations, RIN 1004-AF02.
On November 17, 2025, BLM published the final rule, Rescission of
the Management and Protection of the National Petroleum Reserve in
Alaska Regulations. See 90 FR 51470. This final rule is a major step
towards unlocking the energy potential of the roughly 23-million-acre
reserve. This rule implements direction that President Trump issued on
his first day in office through E.O. 14153 and responds to calls from
Alaskans, including North Slope leaders, to rescind restrictive
regulations that had downstream effects on energy development and
economic growth.
Federal Oil, Gas, and Coal Amendments, RIN 1012-AA39.
Consistent with Executive and Secretary's orders, ONRR is proposing
to clarify the scope of review for Director-level appeals and amend its
Federal oil, gas, and coal valuation regulations. Through this
rulemaking, ONRR seeks to propose changes that will reduce cost and
burden to industry by simplifying regulatory requirements.
Rights-of Way, Leasing, and Operations for Renewable
Energy, RIN 1004-AF32.
BLM intends to propose rescission of the final rule, Rights-of-Way,
Leasing, and Operations for Renewable Energy. If finalized, the rule
will eliminate biased renewable energy rules that advantage
intermittent energy over other energy sources. ``Eliminating the Biden
administration's preferential treatment of unaffordable, unreliable
intermittent projects and dismantling excessive, one-sided restrictions
on traditional energy sources like oil, gas, and critical minerals,
will unlock the full potential of America's natural resources,'' said
Secretary Burgum. ``This step will restore balance, strengthens our
energy independence, and ensures taxpayers get the maximum return from
the responsible use of our public lands.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-initiate-action-rescind-blms-intermittent-energy-rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil and Gas Leasing Rescission Rule, RIN 1004-AF05.
BLM proposes revising its oil and gas regulations regarding
allocation schedules in multi-party agreements that outline how
royalties are distributed across different leases within the agreement.
BLM also proposes to return the minimum bonds to the amounts that
existed before the 2024 rule. Finally, the proposed rule would improve
BLM's leasing process to ensure stewardship of public lands as required
by the Mineral Leasing Act.
Royalty for Oil and Gas Lost from Onshore Federal and
Indian Leases, 1004-AF33.
BLM proposes to modify its existing regulations pertaining to
royalties due on oil and natural gas lost on Federal and Tribal leases.
These modifications would reduce unnecessary compliance burdens for
operators and streamline BLM's royalty determinations on lost oil or
natural gas.
Revisions to the 2023 Well Control Rule, RIN 1014-AA63.
BSEE proposes to revise certain regulatory provisions in its 2023
well control rule (88 FR 57334, August 23, 2023) to clarify certain
reporting and recordkeeping requirements. This rule would reduce
duplicative submissions and provide consistency and clarity of
information available for BSEE review.
Increase Access to Recreational Opportunities on Public Land
The Department manages 480 million acres of public land and
welcomes over 565 million visitors each year. Interior offers
recreational activities like hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, and
sightseeing, which contribute over a trillion dollars to our Nation's
economy.\7\ The Department seeks to increase access to these activities
and improve access to public lands more generally. Rules that will
further this goal include the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://www.bia.gov/sites/default/files/dup/tcinfo/sp_final_for_consultation_and_comment.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process for Authorizing Seasonal Migratory Game Bird
Hunting, RIN 1018-BI04.
To better meet Federal, State, and Tribal rulemaking needs, reduce
the complexity and delays associated with the current process, and
ensure the timely start to hunting seasons, FWS proposes a streamlined
approach to authorizing annual hunting seasons. Essentially, FWS
proposes to change the authorization process from promulgating annual
Federal regulations with State hunting seasons to issuing general
Federal regulations that authorize States to establish regulations for
the seasonal hunting of migratory game birds in accordance with Federal
authorization conditions and the general regulations.
Deregulatory Actions for Migratory Bird and Eagle Permits,
RIN 1018-BF58.
FWS proposes to deregulate migratory bird and eagle permitting to
better serve the American public, streamline government operations, and
reduce permitting requirements. FWS proposes to leverage technology in
support of innovative approaches to permitting by using general permits
and regulatory authorizations. Specifically, FWS would create a general
permit option for 75 percent of existing migratory bird and eagle-
specific permits, primarily those that authorize possessions such as
exhibition and breeding. FWS also proposes replacing the current paper
system with an electronic registration system for the eight existing
depredation and control orders that authorize take of depredating,
[[Page 52878]]
overabundant, or otherwise injurious birds. FWS also intends to
eliminate situations where previously two Federal permits were required
for the same or similar actions.
Annual station-specific hunting and fishing regulations,
RIN 1018-BI01.
FWS annually proposes regulatory additions and revisions to hunting
and fishing at its national wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries. These
actions are part of an annual update for the national wildlife refuge
and the national fish hatchery systems to ensure adequate public notice
of openings and changes. These actions enhance conservation stewardship
and outdoor recreation and improve the management of game species and
their habitat. FWS seeks to maximize hunting and fishing opportunities
at its refuges and hatcheries to benefit the American people.
Alaska Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves, RIN
1024-AE96.
The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to amend its regulations
for hunting, fishing, trapping, and other natural resource harvest in
national preserves in Alaska and for the procedures used to restrict
public use and access in Alaska park lands. These changes restore
regulations adopted to implement the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-487) that were in effect for several
decades, which allows for bear baiting consistent with State law.
Rulemaking in 2015, 2017, and 2024 preempted methods of State-
authorized fish and wildlife harvests, revised codified and established
procedures for restricting public access and activities in Alaska park
lands. This rulemaking would walk back those 2024 changes.
Additional Regulatory Priorities by Bureau
The following sections give an overview of some of the other major
deregulatory and regulatory priorities of the Department's Bureaus and
Offices in FY 2026.
I. Bureau of Indian Affairs
The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) enhances the quality of life,
promotes economic opportunity, and protects and improves the trust
assets of approximately 1.9 million American Indians, Indian Tribes,
and Alaska Natives. BIA maintains a government-to-government
relationship with the 573 federally recognized Indian Tribes. BIA also
administers and manages 55 million acres of surface land and 57 million
acres of subsurface minerals held in trust by the United States for
American Indians and Indian Tribes.
Other Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions
Leasing of Osage Reservation Lands for Oil and Gas Mining,
RIN 1076-AF59.
The proposed rule was published on January 13, 2023 (88 FR 2430).
This final rule will revise the regulations in 25 CFR part 226 to
strengthen BIA's management of the Osage mineral estate and improve
accounting and production measurement standards; offer consistency in
production valuation; address inadequate bonding; support the
implementation of electronic reporting systems; enhance accountability;
clarify lessees' obligations; prevent waste; promote safe and
environmentally sound operations; and protect resource values. The
Department received Tribal government input through consultation
sessions held pursuant to E.O. 13175 and the Department's policy on
communication and collaboration with Tribal officials.
Agricultural Leasing of Indian Land, RIN 1076-AF66.
This proposed rule would update provisions addressing leasing of
Indian trust or restricted lands for agricultural purposes to reflect
updates that have been made to business and residential leasing
provisions and address outdated provisions.
Mineral Leasing Regulations, RIN 1076-AF76.
This rule proposes to modernize the Department's trust
responsibility in the areas of energy and minerals. This rule would
propose to increase the benefit to Indian beneficiaries by revising
definitions, authorities, bonding requirements, royalty rates, and
leasing and cooperative agreements. The Department will seek Tribal
government input through consultation sessions held pursuant to E.O.
13175 and the Department's policy on communication and collaboration
with Tribal officials
II. Bureau of Land Management
BLM manages more than 245 million acres of public land, known as
the National System of Public Lands, primarily located in 12 Western
States, including Alaska. BLM also administers 700 million acres of
sub-surface mineral estate throughout the Nation. As a steward, BLM
pursues its multiple-use mission, providing opportunities for economic
growth through uses such as energy development, ranching, mining and
logging, as well as outdoor recreation activities such as camping,
hunting, and fishing, while also supporting conservation efforts.
Public lands provide valuable, tangible goods and materials that we, as
Americans, use every day to heat our homes, build our roads, and feed
our families. BLM strives to be a good neighbor in the communities it
serves and is committed to keeping public landscapes healthy and
productive.
Other Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions
In addition to the deregulatory and regulatory actions addressed
above, the BLM intends to propose rules in FY 2026 re-imagining its
grazing regulations, land use planning regulations, and regulations
governing areas of critical environmental concern, among others. These
rules would help lower the price of beef by, among other things,
increasing the amount of cattle grazing on public lands and eliminate
red tape that is slowing down BLM's execution of its multiple-use
mandate.
Specifically, under the rulemaking, Grazing Administration-
Exclusive of Alaska (RIN 1004-AE82), BLM will be revisions to the
livestock grazing regulations found at 43 CFR part 4100. This
rulemaking includes removing subpart 4180 from the grazing regulations
and moving the Fundamentals of Rangeland Health to Part 1700 for the
evaluation and achievement of the fundamentals of land health across
all BLM programs. The proposed revisions are intended to modernize the
BLM's grazing program, increase flexibility for ranchers, better
protect rangeland health, and align with amendments to the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and recommendations of the Government
Accountability Office.
For the land use planning regulations, BLM will be proposing the
Planning and Designation of Areas of Critical Environment Concern ((RIN
1004-AF53) which intends to modernize the BLM's land use planning. The
proposed rule would eliminate unnecessary procedures that impose delays
and roadblocks to an efficient process and remove program-specific
procedures from the planning regulations while improving the BLM's
coordination responsibilities in a more streamlined process. The
proposed rule would also improve the readability of the planning
regulations.
III. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
BOEM is committed to ongoing efforts and initiatives vital to its
mission to manage development of the Nation's offshore energy, mineral,
and geological resources in an environmentally and economically
responsible way. BOEM's mission is foundational to advancing the
administration's oil and gas energy policies on the OCS.
[[Page 52879]]
Offshore energy development is a vital component of U.S. national
security and a critical driver of American prosperity. In accordance
with E.O. 14154 and SO 3418, both titled ``Unleashing American
Energy,'' E.O. 14192, titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation,'' and SO 3421, titled ``Achieving Prosperity Through
Deregulation,'' BOEM is committed to the safe development of our
offshore energy and mineral resources, with the goal of decreasing
regulatory burdens that unnecessarily restrict energy production,
constrain economic growth, and prevent job creation. During the coming
year, BOEM will continue to be committed to identifying deregulatory
opportunities and policies that lower costs and boost exploration,
investment, development, and production.
Other Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions
Offshore Wind Regulatory Reform, RIN 1010-AE38.
As part of the Interior Department's full review of offshore wind
energy regulations to ensure alignment with the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act and the President's energy priorities, BOEM will propose
revisions to the offshore wind regulations addressing bidding credits
and financial assurance.
IV. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement
BSEE's mission is to promote offshore development and production of
energy resources, while ensuring that offshore operations are safe and
environmentally sound. BSEE's priorities in fulfillment of its mission
are to, promote and regulate offshore energy development and build and
sustain the organizational, technical, and intellectual capacity within
and across BSEE's key functions in order to keep pace with offshore
industry technology improvements, innovate in economically sound
regulation and enforcement, and reduce risk through appropriate risk
assessment and regulatory and enforcement actions.
Consistent with the direction in E.O. 14154 and SO 3418, both
titled ``Unleashing American Energy,'' E.O. 14192, titled ``Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' and SO 3421, titled ``Achieving
Prosperity through Deregulation,'' BSEE has reviewed and will continue
to review its existing regulations to determine whether they
unnecessarily burden the development or use of domestically produced
energy resources, constrain economic growth, or prevent job creation.
BSEE is a well-positioned partner ready to help all stakeholders
maintain the Nation's position as a global energy leader and foster
energy independence for the benefit of the American people, while
ensuring that offshore oil and gas activity on the OCS is performed in
a safe and environmentally responsible manner.
Other Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions
Updates of Documents Incorporated by Reference--Oil and
Gas and Sulphur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf, RIN 1014-
AA56.
BSEE proposes to update the editions of industry documents (e.g.,
standards incorporated by reference in 30 CFR part 250). BSEE
incorporates by reference over 125 standards in its regulations.
Incorporation of a specific edition of a standard into the regulations
requires the regulated industry to comply with the terms of that
edition and will promote regulatory clarity.
Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located
Seaward of the Coast Line, RIN 1014-AA44.
BSEE proposes to update its existing regulations to incorporate the
latest advancements in spill response and preparedness policies and
technologies. These advancements include recent lessons learned and
recommendations from reports related to the Deepwater Horizon explosion
and subsequent oil spill..
Revisions to Subpart J--Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-
Way, RIN 1014-AA45.
BSEE proposes to revise specific provisions of the current
pipelines and pipeline rights-of-way regulations under 30 CFR part 250,
subpart J. This proposed rule would align with current technology and
state-of-the-art safety equipment and procedures, primarily through the
incorporation of industry standards.
V. Office of Natural Resources Revenue
ONRR collects, accounts for, and disburses revenues from Federal
offshore energy and mineral leases and from onshore mineral leases on
Federal and Indian lands. ONRR operates nationwide and is primarily
responsible for timely and accurate collection, distribution, and
accounting for revenues associated with mineral and energy production.
Other Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions
Federal Oil, Gas, and Coal Amendments, RIN 1012-AA39.
ONRR proposes to amend its oil, gas, and coal valuation regulations
and to specify the standard of review for Director-level appeals. This
proposed rule likely would reduce cost and administrative burden to
industry and the Federal Government by simplifying regulatory
requirements and would ultimately incentivize production to unleash
energy dominance.
VI. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE)
OSMRE was created by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
of 1977 (SMCRA). Under SMCRA, OSMRE has two principal functions,
regulation of surface coal mining and reclamation operations, and
reclamation and restoration of abandoned coal mine lands. In enacting
SMCRA, Congress directed OSMRE to ``strike a balance between protection
of the environment and agricultural productivity and the Nation's need
for coal as an essential source of energy.'' OSMRE seeks to develop and
maintain a regulatory program that provides a safe, cost-effective, and
environmentally sound supply of coal to help support the Nation's
economy and local communities.
Other Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions
Rescission of the ``Ten-Day Notices and Corrective Action
for State Regulatory Program Issues'' Rule, Issued April 9, 2024, RIN
1029-AC89.
OSMRE proposed rescinding the Biden-era 10-day notices and
corrective action rule. This rescission would align the regulations
with the single, best meaning of the statutory language in SMCRA,
streamline OSMRE's coordination with State regulatory authorities to
minimize duplication of efforts, and appropriately recognize that State
regulatory authorities are the primary regulatory authorities of non-
Federal, non-Indian lands within their borders.
VII. National Park Service
NPS preserves the natural and cultural resources and values within
433 units of the National Park System encompassing more than 85 million
acres of lands and waters for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration
of this and future generations.
Other Deregulatory and Regulatory Actions
During the coming year, NPS plans to develop deregulatory
actions that further the purposes of E.O. 14192 ``Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation,'' E.O. 14153 ``Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary
Resource Potential,'' E.O. 14219 ``Ensuring Lawful
[[Page 52880]]
Governance and Implementing the President's `Department of Government
Efficiency' Initiative,'' and E.O. 14314 ``Making America Beautiful
Again by Improving Our National Parks.'' These actions will create new
opportunities for recreational access in park areas through off-road
vehicle use, bicycling, horseback riding, fishing, hiking, use of
powered micromobility devices (e.g., e-scooters), use of motorized
vessels and personal watercraft, and hunting and trapping.
In addition to the Alaska Hunting and Trapping in National
Preserves rule referenced above, NPS highlights the following
deregulatory actions:
[cir] Olympic National Park; Fishing (1024-AF00). This rule would
give the superintendent more flexibility to allow salmon fishing in
park waters, consistent with a new fishery management plan under
development. This could result in the NPS opening the Elwha River to
salmon fishing by the general public for the first time in decades.
This would create a new, highly anticipated opportunity for
recreational fishing in the park, consistent with the direction in
Executive Order 14314, Making America Beautiful Again by Improving Our
National Parks, to improve the recreational experience in national
parks for American residents.
[cir] Revisions to Bicycle Regulations (1024-AE97). This rule would
remove unnecessary procedural requirements for the designation of
trails for bicycle use in park areas. Existing regulations require the
NPS to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact
statement to evaluate the potential impacts of bicycle use whether or
not they would be required by the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). As a result, the NPS conducts levels of review that may not be
justified by the scope of the action or needed under Federal law. These
regulations should therefore be modified consistent with the direction
in Executive Order 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing
the President's `Department of Government Efficiency' Deregulatory
Initiative.'' By streamlining the process for designating trails for
bicycle use in park areas, this rule may lead to increased
opportunities for recreation and access in park areas thereby improving
the recreational experience in national parks for American residents,
consistent with Executive Order 14314.
VIII. Other Regulatory Actions of the Department of the Interior
Practices Before the Department of the Interior. RIN 1094-
AA57.
The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) will make comprehensive
procedural changes to Federal regulations governing hearings and
appeals proceedings before Interior's administrative tribunals. OHA
will modify and update its regulations located in title 43 of the Code
of Federal Regulations in parts 4 and 30 to: (1) promote expeditious
and meaningful review of administrative decisions; (2) reflect changes
in the law; (3) reorganize and streamline procedures and retitle
subparts to improve clarity to parties; (4) consolidate redundant
language; (5) eliminate outdated procedures; and (6) allow OHA to
continue to modernize its practice and keep pace with technological and
other advancements, including the establishment of a regulatory
framework for an electronic filing and case docket management system.
BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOI--Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(BOEM) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
89. OFFSHORE WIND REGULATORY REFORM
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
Relevant Executive Orders: 14315
CFR Citation: 30 CFR 585
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule will propose revisions to the offshore wind
regulations. In 2024, BOEM promulgated the Renewable Energy
Modernization Rule. Now, to support Executive Order 14315 and
Secretary's Order 3437, and in accordance with the Department's August
7, 2025, announcement, BOEM will update the offshore wind regulations.
Statement of Need: The Department of the Interior, acting through
the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is proposing this regulatory
action to support Executive Order 14315, Ending Market Distorting
Subsidies for Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources (July 7,
2025), Secretary's Order 3437, Ending Preferential Treatment for
Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources in Department Decision-
Making (July 29, 2025), and the President's memorandum, Temporary
Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore
Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government's Leasing and
Permitting Practices for Wind Projects (January 20, 2025).
Summary of Legal Basis: Congress authorized the Secretary to grant
OCS leases for renewable energy activities when it enacted the Energy
Policy Act of 2005, which amended the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(OCSLA) by adding a new subsection 8(p), codified at 43 U.S.C. 1337(p).
Subsection 8(p) of OCSLA authorizes the Secretary to award OCS leases,
pipeline ROW grants, and RUE grants for activities not otherwise
authorized by other applicable law, if those activities produce or
support production, transportation, storage, or transmission of energy
sources other than oil or gas.
Subsection 8(p) requires the Secretary to award such leases, ROWs,
and RUEs on a competitive basis unless the Secretary determines,
following public notice, that competitive interest does not exist.
Additionally, subsection 8(p) also authorizes the Secretary to issue
regulations to carry out the subsection's grant of authority. The
Secretary delegated that authority to BOEM's and BSEE's predecessor,
the Minerals Management Service. Subsection 8(p)(8) of OCSLA (43 U.S.C.
1337(p)(8)) authorizes the Secretary to issue any necessary regulations
to carry out this subsection.
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Karen Thundiyil, Director, Office of Regulatory
Affairs, Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240
Phone: 202 742-0970
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1010-AE38
BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The mission of the Department of Justice is to uphold the rule of
law, to keep our country safe, and to protect civil rights. In carrying
out this mission, the Department is guided by the core
[[Page 52881]]
values of excellence, integrity, fairness, and commitment to promoting
the impartial administration of justice. Consistent with its mission
and values, the Department is prioritizing activities that protect the
public against foreign and domestic threats, enforce immigration laws,
strengthen enforcement of civil rights laws, defend against domestic
and international terrorism, combat violent crime while protecting
Second Amendment rights and reducing unnecessary burdens on the
regulated communities, prevent and control crime, and uphold our system
of criminal justice. Because the Department of Justice is primarily a
law enforcement agency, not a regulatory agency, it carries out its
principal investigative, prosecutorial, and other enforcement
activities through means other than the regulatory process.
Regulatory action is, however, a significant aspect of the mission
of the Department. The regulatory priorities of the Department include
initiatives in the areas of effective law enforcement, immigration
enforcement, civil rights, and illicit firearms trafficking reduction,
and are effectuated through rulemaking by the various components of the
Department. These initiatives, as well as others important to
components' accomplishing key law enforcement priorities, are
summarized below.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
ATF issues regulations to enforce and implement Federal laws
relating to the manufacture, importation, sale, and other commerce in
firearms and explosives. Such regulations are designed to promote the
ATF mission to curb illegal traffic in, and criminal use of, firearms
and explosives, and to assist state, local, Tribal, territorial, and
other Federal law enforcement agencies in reducing violent crime.
ATF will, as a priority during fiscal year 2026, streamline
firearms and explosives regulations to reduce unnecessary burdens on
the public consistent with Federal laws governing commerce in firearms
and explosives. In this way, ATF's approach is animated by an interest
in deregulation. ATF is pursuing a large rulemaking initiative, which
includes updating regulations, so the firearms industry and public are
not subject to inadvertent regulatory traps, removing outdated and
repetitive regulations, and reducing regulatory burdens to promote
business efficiencies while still promoting public safety. As one
priority, ATF is undertaking amendments to the regulations that govern
firearms transactions and the Firearms Transaction Record, ATF Form
4473. The rulemaking will streamline identity and residence
verification requirements, double the performance timeframe for
transactions following a Form 4473 and background check, permit
electronic forms and notices as well as auto-populating documents, and
address private party transfers and firearms handlers checks (RIN 1140-
AA82). As another priority, ATF is amending its regulations to conform
with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which reduced the tax
liability for certain firearms subject to the National Firearms Act of
1934 from $200 to $0, effective January 1, 2026 (RIN 1140-AA83). ATF is
also amending the regulatory definition of ``machine gun'' in response
to the Supreme Court decision in Garland v. Cargill to remove any
language pertaining to bump-stock devices (RIN 1140-AA60) and is
rescinding the final rule ``Factoring Criteria for Firearms with
Attached `Stabilizing Braces','' as it has rarely been in effect since
its publication due to ongoing litigation.
ATF's continuing priorities include proposing a rulemaking to
update certain provisions of the Federal explosives regulations at 27
CFR part 555, most of which have not been updated since the early 1970s
(RIN 1140-AA59). The rulemaking is expected to be deregulatory in
nature and address certain definitions of commonly used terms,
consolidate licensing and permitting, simplify record-keeping
provisions, and clarify certain aspects of storing and identifying
explosive materials by multiple licensees using a single magazine. ATF
is also publishing a final rule aimed at protecting first responders
that industry has long recommended as a safety measure. The final rule
amends 27 CFR part 555 to require persons who are subject to explosives
regulations, and thus already report to the local authority with
jurisdiction for fire safety in the locality when they begin storing
explosive materials at a location, to annually notify that local
authority of the current type, quantity, and location of each site
where the licensee is storing explosive materials within that
jurisdiction (RIN 1140-AA51).
Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
BOP issues regulations to enforce the Federal laws relating to its
mission to protect public safety by ensuring that Federal offenders
serve their sentences of imprisonment in facilities that are safe,
humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure, and to provide
reentry programming to ensure their successful return to the community.
The First Step Act (FSA) of 2018, Public Law 115-391, 132 Stat.
5194 (2018), has brought a host of regulatory changes for BOP. To date,
BOP has successfully enacted FSA-related regulations (1) to enable
eligible inmates to earn Time Credits towards prerelease custody or
early transfer to supervised release, and (2) to modify the amount of
Good Time Credit to which eligible inmates are entitled.
BOP has two remaining FSA-related regulatory measures it plans to
finalize. The first involves the Reservation of Funds for Reentry Under
the First Step Act final rule, which will implement an FSA provision
requiring BOP to reserve a portion of the compensation inmates would
otherwise receive for working to assist these inmates with costs
associated with release from prison. The second involves promulgating
an interim final rule that changes two specific sections of the First
Step Act Time Credits regulation to conform with recent case law
trends.
In February 2024, BOP published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) titled Inmate Discipline Program: Disciplinary Segregation and
Prohibited Act Code Changes, which proposed several significant
revisions and updates to the Inmate Discipline Program. BOP continues
to work toward a final rule.
Finally, BOP continues to take the lead on updating and clarifying
certain standards related to the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA),
working toward publication of a proposed rule before the end of 2025.
Civil Rights Division (CRT)
CRT works to uphold the civil and constitutional rights of all
persons in the United States, particularly some of the most vulnerable
members of our society, and also works to facilitate compliance among
regulated entities by addressing the regulatory burdens they face.
Consistent with this mission, CRT plans to engage in four separate
rulemakings on disability rights.
First and second, under Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 610), CRT intends to review the Americans with
Disabilities Act title II and title III regulations issued in 2010, at
28 CFR 35 and 28 CFR 36 respectively, to determine whether updates are
necessary. Third, CRT plans to reconsider whether some of the
regulatory provisions imposed by the April 24, 2024, title II rule
regarding the accessibility of web information and the services of
state and local government entities could be made less burdensome and
the deadlines for implementation extended. Fourth, CRT is proposing to
revise the ADA title III regulations to
[[Page 52882]]
establish specific criteria for determining when qualified small
businesses are presumed to be in compliance with their obligation to
remove readily achievable barriers in existing facilities.
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
DEA is primarily responsible for coordinating the drug law
enforcement activities of the United States and assisting in the
implementation of the President's National Drug Control Strategy. DEA
implements and enforces titles II and III of the Comprehensive Drug
Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 and the Controlled Substances
Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 801-971), as amended, collectively
referred to as the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
DEA's mission is to enforce the controlled substances laws and
regulations of the United States and bring to the criminal, civil, and
administrative justice systems those organizations and individuals
involved in the growing, manufacture, or distribution of controlled
substances and listed chemicals appearing in or destined for illicit
traffic in the United States. The CSA and its implementing regulations
are designed to prevent, detect, and eliminate the diversion of
controlled substances and listed chemicals into the illicit market
while providing for the legitimate medical, scientific, research, and
industrial needs of the United States.
Pursuant to its statutory authority, DEA intends to continue with
the following priority regulations:
On December 31, 2025, DEA, jointly with the Department of Health
and Human Services, issued a fourth temporary extension (Fourth
Temporary Rule) extending the full set of telemedicine flexibilities
regarding prescription of controlled medications as were in place
during the COVID-19 public health emergency, through December 31, 2026.
This extension authorized all DEA-registered practitioners to prescribe
schedule II-V controlled medications via telemedicine through December
31, 2026.
On January 17, 2025, DEA promulgated the ``Special Registrations
for Telemedicine and Limited State Telemedicine Registrations'' NPRM,
which proposed a framework for a Special Registration for telemedicine,
authorizing practitioners and mid-level practitioners to prescribe
controlled substances via audio-video telemedicine (and in limited
instances, video-only telemedicine) without having ever conducted a
prior in-person medical evaluation, provided they adhere to the
proposed prescription, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The
NPRM also proposed to require that certain Direct-to-Consumer (DTC)
telemedicine platforms register with DEA when they engage in
intermediary conduct integral to the provider-patient relationship.
DEA is currently reviewing the over 6,400 public comments submitted
on the Special Registration for Telemedicine (RIN 1117-AB40).
DEA intends to publish a final regulation to revise its regulations
relating to suspicious orders of controlled substances found at 21 CFR
1301.74 and 21 CFR 1301.76. DEA published an NPRM titled Suspicious
Orders of Controlled Substances in November of 2020, that proposed to
define the term suspicious order and specify the procedures a
registrant must follow upon receiving such orders. Due to the large
volume of public comments, DEA reopened the comment period until March
29, 2021 (RIN 1117-AB47).
Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR)
EOIR's primary mission is to adjudicate immigration cases by
fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly interpreting and administering the
Nation's immigration laws. Under delegated authority from the Attorney
General, EOIR conducts Immigration Court proceedings under the Office
of the Chief Immigration Judge (OCIJ), appellate reviews by the Board
of Immigration Appeals (BIA or the Board) of Immigration Judge
decisions and other matters specified by regulation, and administrative
hearings involving immigration-related employment practices,
discrimination claims, and document fraud cases under the Office of the
Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO). In Fiscal Year 2024,
Immigration Judges adjudicated over 700,000 cases to determine whether
aliens should be ordered removed from the United States or whether they
are eligible for relief or protection from removal.
EOIR's top regulatory priorities focus on revising and updating
regulations to increase efficiency in Immigration Court proceedings and
enable adjudicators to quickly resolve immigration cases, thereby
reducing the backlog of pending cases before EOIR. For example, EOIR is
working to finalize a rulemaking that would implement the statutorily
provided contempt authority, which will allow Immigration Judges to
better control their courtrooms by imposing civil money penalty
sanctions on individuals who engage in contemptuous behavior that
delays, disrupts, or obstructs the due course of immigration
proceedings (RIN 1125-AB02). EOIR is also finalizing a regulation
implementing electronic filing and records applications for all cases
before OCAHO (RIN 1125-AB23). This regulation will mandate electronic
filing for most parties in proceedings before OCAHO, which will create
significant efficiencies by reducing labor costs associated with using
paper case files and allowing case deadlines to be set quickly since
electronic filings do not require additional time to account for paper
mail delivery. Finally, pursuant to the OBBBA, EOIR is finalizing a
rule to update relevant EOIR regulations governing fees to ensure full
regulatory consistency with OBBBA's statutory changes.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
The FBI is responsible for protecting and defending the United
States against terrorist and foreign intelligence threats, upholding
and enforcing the criminal laws of the United States, and providing
leadership and criminal justice services to Federal, state, local,
tribal, territorial, and international agencies and partners. Only in
limited contexts does the FBI rely on rulemaking.
The FBI intends to publish a proposed rule regarding additional
permissible uses of the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System (NICS). This proposed rule will, among other things, allow
Federal firearms licensees (FFLs) to query the NICS regarding proposed
transfers of privately owned firearms and will allow for further uses
of the NICS Indices by criminal justice agencies, the FBI, ATF, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and other authorized agencies.
The FBI intends to publish a final rule regarding criteria for NICS
checks concerning firearm handlers and other eligible employees. This
final rule will implement a portion of the Bipartisan Safer Communities
Act (BSCA), 34 U.S.C. 40901, by authorizing and establishing the
process for FFLs to use NICS for the purpose of voluntarily conducting
background checks of certain current and/or prospective employees of
the FFL, to determine whether such employees are prohibited from
possessing or receiving firearms. (RIN 1100-AA35).
Finally, the FBI continues to actively work on additional
regulatory actions to implement other BSCA provisions, the Child
Protection Improvement Act, and the Private Security Officer Employment
Authorization Act that are on its long-term regulatory docket.
[[Page 52883]]
National Security Division (NSD)
In December 2021, the Department published a National Security
Division (NSD) Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) (86 FR
70787) soliciting comments about potential revisions to the Foreign
Agents Registration Act (FARA) regulations. Based on comments received,
the Department published an NPRM (90 FR 40) in early January 2025. NSD
has previously carefully considered comments received in response to
the NPRM, and is now considering a final rule that adopts many--but not
all--of the NPRM's proposals. Among others, changes anticipated in the
final rule will expand the availability of exemptions commonly relied
upon by corporations and law firms and provide requested clarity on
labeling digital media. In sum, the final rule will clarify ambiguities
in the existing regulations, update the regulations to keep pace with
technological change, and improve civil FARA administration while
reducing regulatory burdens on the public.
Additional Noteworthy Regulations
The Department of Justice is updating its existing procedures in 28
CFR part 61 concerning compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). The updates are necessary to respond to guidance
issued by the Council on Environmental Quality, as well as amendments
to NEPA made in 2023 by the Fiscal Responsibility Act.
The Department of Justice is also releasing a set of procedures and
criteria in 28 CFR part 107 regarding Applications for Relief from
Disabilities Imposed by Federal Laws with Respect to the Acquisition,
Receipt, Transfer, Shipment, Transportation, or Possession of Firearms.
The rule resurrects a moribund process under 18 U.S.C. 925(c) that had
previously been effectuated by the ATF. In July, the Department issued
an NPRM outlining the proposed criteria and guidelines for members of
the public to apply for this new process. The comment period for this
proposal ended in October 2025. The Department is reviewing comments
and working to draft a final rule which will adopt many of the proposed
rule's criteria. The development of this rule was necessary to satisfy
the public's request for relief under this long-dormant provision, and
the Department is committed to providing this valuable service in
support of citizens' Second Amendment rights.
BILLING CODE 4410-BP-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOJ--Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
90. SPECIAL REGISTRATIONS FOR TELEMEDICINE AND LIMITED STATE
TELEMEDICINE REGISTRATIONS
Priority: Economically Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 831(h); 21 U.S.C. 802(54); Pub. L. 115-
271, sec. 3232
Relevant Executive Orders: 12866; 13563
CFR Citation: 21 CFR 1301
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, October 24, 2019.
Abstract: The Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act
of 2008 (the Act) (Pub. L. 110-425) was enacted on October 15, 2008,
and amended the Controlled Substances Act by adding various provisions
to prevent the illegal distribution and dispensing of controlled
substances by means of the internet. Among other things, the Act
required an in-person medical evaluation as a prerequisite to
prescribing or otherwise dispensing controlled substances by means of
the internet, except in the case of practitioners engaged in the
practice of telemedicine. The definition of the ``practice of
telemedicine'' includes seven distinct categories that involve
circumstances in which the prescribing practitioner might be unable to
satisfy the Act's in-person medical evaluation requirement yet
nonetheless has sufficient medical information to prescribe a
controlled substance for a legitimate medical purpose in the usual
course of professional practice. One specific category within the Act's
definition of the ``practice of telemedicine'' includes ``a
practitioner who has obtained from the [DEA Administrator] a special
registration under [21 U.S.C. 831(h)].'' 21 U.S.C. 802(54)(E). The Act
also specifies certain criteria that the DEA must consider when
evaluating an application for such a registration. However, the Act
contemplates that the DEA must issue regulations to effectuate this
special registration provision.
On January 17, 2025, DEA promulgated the Special Registrations for
Telemedicine and Limited State Telemedicine Registrations NPRM, which
proposed a framework for a Special Registration for telemedicine,
authorizing practitioners and mid-level practitioners to prescribe
controlled substances via audio-video telemedicine (and in limited
instances, video-only telemedicine) without having ever conducted a
prior in-person medical evaluation, provided they adhere to the
proposed prescription, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The
NPRM also proposed to require that certain Direct-to-Consumer (DTC)
telemedicine platforms register with DEA when they engage in
intermediary conduct integral to the provider-patient relationship.
Statement of Need: DEA is currently reviewing the over 6,400 public
comments submitted on the Special Registration for Telemedicine NPRM
published on January 17, 2025, and is considering various alternatives
in drafting a Final Rule for Telemedicine Prescribing of Controlled
Substances when the Practitioner and the Patient Have Not Had a Prior
In-Person Medical Evaluation in order to promulgate effective
regulations responsive to the general public and industry concerns.
Summary of Legal Basis: DEA implements and enforces the CSA and the
Controlled Substances Import and Export Act, (21 U.S.C. 801-971), as
amended. DEA publishes the implementing regulations for these statutes
in 21 CFR parts 1300 to end. These regulations are designed to ensure a
sufficient supply of controlled substances for medical, scientific, and
other legitimate purposes, and to deter the diversion of controlled
substances for illicit purposes.
As mandated by the CSA, DEA establishes and maintains a closed
system of control for manufacturing, distribution, and dispensing of
controlled substances, and requires any person who manufactures,
distributes, dispenses, imports, exports, or conducts research or
chemical analysis with controlled substances to register with DEA,
unless they meet an exemption, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 822. The CSA
further authorizes the Administrator to promulgate regulations
necessary and appropriate to execute the functions of subchapter I
(Control and Enforcement) and subchapter II (Import and Export) of the
CSA. 21 U.S.C. 871(b), 958(f).
Alternatives: DEA is considering various alternatives, particularly
the proposed requirements outlined in the January 17, 2025, NPRM.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DEA anticipates this rule will be
economically significant (that is, that the rule will have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, territorial, or tribal governments or communities). DEA believes
the rule will reduce the cost of providing and receiving medical care,
increasing access, particularly for those
[[Page 52884]]
patients where an in-person medical evaluation is difficult, such as
patients in rural areas and with disabilities.
Risks: Failing to issue a rule on telemedicine would interfere with
DEA's mission to prevent, detect, and investigate the diversion of
controlled pharmaceuticals and listed chemicals from legitimate sources
while ensuring an adequate and uninterrupted supply for legitimate
medical, commercial, and scientific needs.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 03/01/23 88 FR 12875
NPRM Comment Period End............. 03/31/23
Temporary Rule...................... 05/10/23 88 FR 30037
Temporary Rule Effective............ 05/11/23
Second Temporary Rule............... 10/10/23 88 FR 69879
Second Temporary Rule Effective..... 11/11/23
Third Temporary Rule................ 11/19/24 89 FR 91253
Third Temporary Rule Effective...... 01/01/25
NPRM................................ 01/17/25 90 FR 6541
Fourth Temporary Rule............... 12/31/25 90 FR 61301
Fourth Temporary Rule Effective..... 01/01/26
Final Action........................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: DEA Docket number 407/Related rule 1117-
AB88 DEA407VA
URL For More Information: [email protected]
URL For Public Comments: www.regulations.gov
Agency Contact: Heather E. Achbach, Acting Section Chief,
Regulatory Drafting and Support Section, Department of Justice, Drug
Enforcement Administration, Diversion Control Division, 8701
Morrissette Drive, Springfield, VA 22152
Phone: 571 387-3185
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN:
Related to 1117-AB88
RIN: 1117-AB40
BILLING CODE 4410-BP-P
Department of Labor
2026 Regulatory Plan
Executive Summary: Putting the American Worker First
The Department of Labor's mission is to foster, promote, and
develop the welfare of America's wage earners, job seekers, and
retirees; improve working conditions; advance opportunities for
profitable employment; and assure work-related benefits and rights. The
Department advocates for workers by ensuring that employers are held
accountable for their legal obligations, while helping employers
understand and comply with the many laws and regulations affecting
their workplaces.
Under President Trump's leadership, the Department will continue to
place American workers first by focusing on policies that protect
American jobs, reduce unnecessary burdens on employers and workers
alike, and ensure workers share in the benefits of a strong economy.
The Department's regulatory agenda is guided by the President's
Executive Orders. Consistent with Executive Order E.O. 14192,
Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, the Department is
rescinding and revising unlawful, unconstitutional, and overly
burdensome rules that have stifled growth, imposed costs, and limited
opportunity for workers and employers alike. Under the Executive Order
Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, the Department is proposing to end
government mandates that pressured employers and contractors to make
employment decisions based on race, sex, gender identity, and similar
classifications. This includes eliminating divisive Diversity, Equity,
and Inclusion (DEI) requirements that encouraged unlawful group
preferences. The Department reaffirms the American principle that
hiring, promotion, and opportunity should be based on merit, not
identity politics. Consistent with Executive Orders 13877, Improving
Price and Quality Transparency in American Healthcare to Put Patients
First, and 14274, Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again Putting Americans
First, the Department will continue efforts to make health care
coverage more affordable and understandable for workers and retirees.
Finally, pursuant to Executive Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy,
the Department is aligning workplace standards with the goals of energy
independence and economic strength. A central part of this strategy is
maintaining protections for miners while ensuring America's energy
producers can expand operations without facing duplicative or
unnecessary regulatory burdens.
The Department is committed to fully and fairly enforcing the laws
under its jurisdiction. The vast majority of employers work hard to
keep their workplaces safe and to comply with wage and pension laws.
Acknowledging this, the Department is working to provide compliance
assistance, including through self-audit programs and the relaunch and
expansion of the opinion letter program, to give employers the
knowledge and tools they need to comply with their legal obligations.
The Department's Regulatory Plan To Accomplishing These Objectives
The Department's regulatory approach in 2026 will emphasize
clarity, restraint, and accountability. The Department recognizes that
workers benefit most from a strong and growing economy, and that
excessive, unlawful, or poorly tailored regulation can reduce
opportunity, raise costs, and weaken the very protections it was
intended to promote.
To carry out its mission, the Department will rely on three core
strategies. First, it will faithfully enforce the laws Congress has
enacted, ensuring that employers who disregard their obligations are
held accountable while providing compliance assistance to the vast
majority of employers who want to do right by their employees. Second,
it will rescind or revise rules that exceed statutory authority,
conflict with constitutional principles, or impose unnecessary costs.
Third, where regulation is needed, the Department will proceed through
notice-and-comment to provide transparency, solicit public input, and
ensure that rules are grounded in sound economic and scientific data.
This balanced approach will protect workers, retirees, and job
seekers while giving employers certainty and flexibility. The
Department will continue to prioritize deregulatory actions that
deliver meaningful cost savings, streamline compliance, and unleash
innovation, while also moving forward with targeted rulemakings that
secure retirement savings, ensure safe workplaces, and promote true
equal opportunity. Through this plan, the Department of Labor is
advancing the President's directives to unleash prosperity, restore
merit, and put American workers first, ensuring that every regulatory
action strengthens the economy, expands opportunity, and safeguards the
rights and benefits of the American people.
The Department's Regulatory Priorities
The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) will propose a
rule responsive to Executive Order 14330, Democratizing Access to
Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors, that will clarify the duties
that a fiduciary owes to plan participants under ERISA when deciding
whether to make available to plan participants an
[[Page 52885]]
asset allocation fund, including a fund that incorporates investments
in alternative assets. Consistent with Executive Orders 13877,
Improving Price and Quality Transparency in American Healthcare to Put
Patients First, and 14273, Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again Putting
Americans First, EBSA will work with the Departments of HHS and
Treasury to propose rules designed to improve transparency and reduce
costs in health care. EBSA also will propose a rule to reaffirm that
fiduciaries under ERISA must base their investment decisions on
financial considerations relevant to risk-adjusted economic value. This
approach ensures that retirement plans are not diverted by political or
social agendas, but instead remain focused on maximizing security for
American retirees.
The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP),
consistent with Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination
and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, will issue a final rule based on
its proposal to rescind regulations that pressured contractors to make
employment decisions based on race, sex, or other similar
classifications. These rules undermined equal employment opportunity by
encouraging unlawful group preferences and perpetuating divisive DEI
mandates. Their removal ensures that hiring and promotion in federal
contracting is based on merit, not group identity. The Department is
also removing other DEI-related rules across its programs, including
regulations that imposed unlawful and unauthorized requirements on
apprenticeship sponsors and grant recipients.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) enforces a
wide range of standards that are designed to reduce occupational
deaths, injuries, and illnesses. OSHA is committed to establishing
clear, common-sense standards to help accomplish this. OSHA will
finalize the heat illness prevention standard first proposed in 2024,
with a view toward avoiding excessive burdens that commenters
identified. OSHA will also finalize a standard for emergency responders
to ensure they are adequately protected while performing lifesaving
duties. OSHA will also propose comprehensive safety rules for the tree
care industry and to modernize the lockout/tagout standard to recognize
new technologies that both improve safety and reduce costs, ensuring
that regulatory requirements do not stand in the way of innovation.
The Wage and Hour Division (WHD) administers numerous laws that
establish the minimum standards for wages and working conditions in the
United States. WHD will issue a final rule based on a proposal to
restore the statutory exemptions from minimum wage and overtime
compensation requirements for home health workers, which, if finalized
as proposed, could lower the cost of care for seniors and persons with
disabilities. WHD has proposed and will finalize a rule that clarifies
when a worker is an independent contractor under several of the laws it
administers, which is intended to ensure that entrepreneurs and
freelancers can work freely while businesses have legal certainty.
Finally, WHD will also propose a rule to clarify joint employment under
those laws, reducing litigation risk and encouraging job growth.
The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) oversees
administration of federal job training and worker dislocation
adjustment programs, federal grants to states for public employment
service programs, unemployment insurance benefits, and foreign labor
certifications. ETA will finalize the rescission of costly regulatory
burdens on farmers who use the H-2A program while modernizing the
methodology used to determine the adverse effect wage rate for the
program. ETA proposed and will finalize reforms to the H-1B temporary
nonimmigrant and permanent immigrant visa program to improve wage and
employment protections for U.S. workers.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is responsible for
protecting the health and safety of the nation's miners. In 2026, MSHA
will propose revisions to its respirable silica standard to address new
developments in the mining industry and clarify existing requirements
while maintaining strong protections for miners.
The Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) promotes union
democracy through standards for union officer elections and
trusteeships over subordinate bodies. It also furthers financial
integrity in labor unions and safeguards union assets, in part through
reporting and disclosure requirements for labor unions and other
entities. OLMS seeks to modernize the annual financial reports filed by
labor organizations to ensure labor organizations are adhering to the
highest standards of responsibility and ethical conduct.
Conclusion
The Trump Administration's 2026 DOL Regulatory Plan places
America's workers first. By protecting retirement security, replacing
divisive DEI requirements with meritocracy, and unleashing prosperity
by reducing regulatory costs, the Department will strengthen America's
workforce, increase opportunity, and ensure that every American worker
has the chance to prosper.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Programs (OFCCP) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
91. RESCISSION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11246 IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: E.O. 14173
Relevant Executive Orders: 14192; 14173; 14219; 14267
CFR Citation: 41 CFR 60-1; 41 CFR 60-2; 41 CFR 60-3; 41 CFR 60-4;
41 CFR 60-20; 41 CFR 60-30; 41 CFR 60-40; 41 CFR 60-50; 41 CFR 60-999
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: On January 21, 2025, President Trump issued Executive
Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based
Opportunity, which revoked Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment
Opportunity. Accordingly, the United States Department of Labor is
rescinding its regulations implementing Executive Order 11246 found at
41 CFR part 60-1 et seq.
Statement of Need: The rule will rescind the implementing
regulations for E.O. 11246, which was revoked by E.O. 14173 on January
21, 2025. The rule will also address legal vulnerabilities related to
the regulation's affirmative action requirements, improve the
efficiency of the federal contracting process, decrease employer
burden, and provide regulatory certainty to Federal contractors and
other stakeholders by aligning the regulations with recent executive
orders impacting DOL's enforcement.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under development
Alternatives: Under development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: In the NPRM we estimated 10-year
cost savings of $6,998,112,173 at a 7% discount rate. However, my
understanding is ASP may add in additional cost savings in the final
rule so this is still under development. Benefits include potential
cost savings for covered contractors, removing unnecessary regulatory
burdens, and reducing confusion about contractors' current regulatory
obligations.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
[[Page 52886]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/01/25 90 FR 28472
Comment Period Ends................. 09/02/25
NPRM Comment Period Extended........ 09/04/25 90 FR 42711
NPRM Comment Period Extended End.... 09/17/25
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Kenneth Wolfe, Director, Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs, Department of Labor, Office of Federal Contract
Compliance Programs, 200 Constitution Ave NE, Washington, DC 20002
Phone: 202 693-0101
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1250-AA17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--Wage and Hour Division (WHD) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
92. EMPLOYEE OR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS UNDER THE FAIR LABOR
STANDARDS ACT, FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT, AND MIGRANT AND SEASONAL
AGRICULTURAL WORKER PROTECTION ACT
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq; 29 U.S.C. 1861; 29 U.S.C
2654
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 500.20(h)(4); 29 CFR part 795; 29 CFR 825.102
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: In 2024, the Department of Labor (Department) published a
final rule providing an analysis for determining employee or
independent contractor classification under the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA). See 89 FR 1638 (2024 IC Rule). The 2024 IC Rule took effect
on March 11, 2024. However, the 2024 IC Rule has been the subject of
five separate legal challenges. In this rulemaking, the Department
intends to rescind the 2024 IC rule and replace it with the analysis
that the Department previously adopted in an earlier 2021 rule, with a
few modifications. 91 FR 9932; see also 86 FR 1168 (2021 IC Rule). The
Department has also proposed to modify regulations interpreting the
Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Migrant and Seasonal
Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA) to clarify that the analysis
for determining employee or independent contractor status under the
FLSA also applies under the FMLA and MSPA.
Statement of Need: In 2024, the Department of Labor (Department)
published a final rule providing an analysis for determining employee
or independent contractor classification under the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA). See 89 FR 1638 (2024 IC Rule). The 2024 IC Rule took effect
on March 11, 2024. However, the 2024 IC Rule has been the subject of
five separate legal challenges. In this rulemaking, the Department has
proposed to rescind the 2024 IC rule and replace it with the analysis
that the Department previously adopted in an earlier 2021 rule, with a
few modifications. 91 FR 9932; see also 86 FR 1168 (2021 IC Rule). the
Department has also proposed to modify regulations interpreting the
Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Migrant and Seasonal
Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA) to clarify that the analysis
for determining employee or independent contractor status under the
FLSA also applies under the FMLA and MSPA.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department's authority to interpret the
FLSA comes with its authority to administer and enforce it. See 29
U.S.C. 201-219. The Department's authority to interpret the FMLA and
MSPA is delegated by statute. 29 U.S.C. 2654 (FMLA); 29 U.S.C. 1861
(MSPA).
Alternatives: The Department considered three alternatives to the
proposed rule, listed below from least to most restrictive of
independent contracting: (1) adoption of the common law control test,
which applies in distinguishing between employees and independent
contractors under various other federal laws; (2) adoption of the Wage
and Hour Division's current enforcement policy, which is comprised of
sub-regulatory guidance from before 2021 applying a multifactor
economic reality balancing test; and (3) adoption of an ABC test (which
a number of states have adopted).
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The Department estimates that the
proposed rule would impose an initial one-time regulatory
familiarization cost of $488.2 million. However, the Department also
estimates cost savings of $682.7 million per year attributable to
increased clarity. Assuming that the proposed rule increases the number
of independent contractors by 2 percent, the Department estimates
benefits to workers from new labor force entry could amount to $17.6
billion over 10 years, with an additional $14.9 billion accruing to
broader society in the form of taxes collected on the earnings of the
new labor. On an annualized basis, the Department estimates that the
benefits from increased labor force participation could amount to $3.25
billion per year at a 7 percent discount rate. See 91 FR 9962.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/27/26 91 FR 9932
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/28/26
Final Rule.......................... 10/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Daniel Navarrete, Director, Division of
Regulations, Legislation, and Interpretation (DRLI), Department of
Labor, Wage and Hour Division, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room S-3502,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-0406
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN:
Related to 1235-AA43, Related to 1235-AA34
RIN: 1235-AA46
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--WHD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
93. JOINT EMPLOYER STATUS UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT, FAMILY
AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT, AND MIGRANT AND SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL WORKER
PROTECTION ACT
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq; 29 U.S.C. 1861; 29 U.S.C.
2654
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 500.20(h)(5); 29 CFR 791; 29 CFR 825.106; 29
CFR 780.305(c) and 780.331(d)
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Since 2021, the Department has had no generally-
applicable regulatory guidance addressing joint employer liability
under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Department is
considering a notice of proposed rulemaking to provide interpretive
guidance on FLSA joint employer liability at 29 CFR part 791 (where it
was located prior to 2021), and also to amend provisions in the
Department's regulations for the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Workers Protection Act (MSPA) to
advise that joint employer status under those laws should be determined
using the Department's FLSA analysis.
Statement of Need: Since 2021, the Department has had no generally-
[[Page 52887]]
applicable regulatory guidance addressing joint employer liability
under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Department is
considering a notice of proposed rulemaking to provide interpretive
guidance on FLSA joint employer liability at 29 CFR part 791 (where it
was located prior to 2021), and also to amend provisions in the
Department's regulations for the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Workers Protection Act (MSPA) to
advise that joint employer status under those laws should be determined
using the Department's FLSA analysis.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Department's authority to interpret the
FLSA comes with its authority to administer and enforce it. See 29
U.S.C. 201-219. The Department's authority to interpret the FMLA and
MSPA is delegated by statute. 29 U.S.C. 2654 (FMLA); 29 U.S.C. 1861
(MSPA).
Alternatives: Under development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Under development
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Daniel Navarrete, Director, Division of
Regulations, Legislation, and Interpretation (DRLI), Department of
Labor, Wage and Hour Division, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room S-3502,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-0406
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1235-AA48
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--WHD Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
94. APPLICATION OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT TO DOMESTIC
SERVICE
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(15); 29 U.S.C. 213(b)(21); Pub.
L. 93-259, 29(b), 88 Stat. 76
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 552
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Section 13(a)(15) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA
or the Act) provides an exemption from the Act's minimum wage and
overtime pay requirements for domestic service employees engaged in
providing companionship services for individuals who (because of age or
infirmity) are unable to care for themselves. Section 13(b)(21) of the
FLSA provides an exemption from the Act's overtime pay requirement for
domestic service employees who reside in the household in which they
provide services. In this rulemaking, the Department proposes to
rescind a 2013 rule which, among other changes, precluded third-party
employers from claiming either exemption and established limits on the
amount of certain types of duties that exempt companions could perform.
See 78 FR 60454 (Oct. 1, 2013).
Statement of Need: Section 13(a)(15) of the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA or the Act) provides an exemption from the Act's minimum wage
and overtime pay requirements for domestic service employees engaged in
providing companionship services for individuals who (because of age or
infirmity) are unable to care for themselves. Section 13(b)(21) of the
FLSA provides an exemption from the Act's overtime pay requirement for
domestic service employees who reside in the household in which they
provide services. In this rulemaking, the Department has proposed to
rescind a 2013 rule which, among other changes, precluded third-party
employers from claiming either exemption and established limits on the
amount of certain types of duties that exempt companions could perform.
91 FR 28976; see also 78 FR 60454 (2013 rule).
Summary of Legal Basis: The exemptions at issue in this rulemaking
were added to the FLSA by Congress in the 1974 FLSA Amendments, which
included a broad grant of rulemaking authority empowering the Secretary
of Labor to ``prescribe necessary rules, regulations, and orders with
regard to the amendments made by this Act.'' 1974 Amendments, Public
Law 93-259, 29(b), 88 Stat. 76. Additionally, the FLSA's sec. 13(a)(15)
exemption for employees who provide companionship services provides
that the scope of that exemption should be defined and delimited by
regulations of the Secretary. 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(15).
Alternatives: The Department considered two alternatives in its
proposed rule. First, the Department considered the alternative of
preserving the status quo under the current regulations. Second, the
Department considered the alternative of retaining some changes from
the 2013 rule in lieu of a wholesale return to the pre-2013 regulations
specifically, retaining all changes to the regulatory text in part 552
introduced by the 2013 rule except for the third party provision
codified at 29 CFR 552.109 and limits on the provision of care codified
in 29 CFR 552.6(b). This approach would, for example, keep the 2013
rule's updated definition of the job duties which constitute care and
its removal of outdated domestic service worker examples like
governesses, footmen, and grooms.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated costs for the final rule
are under development. In its proposal, the Department discussed
potential costs such as longer work hours and/or reduced pay for
affected home care workers, lower morale for home care workers,
increased worker turnover in the home care industry, added difficulty
attracting workers to the home care industry, and modest rule
familiarization costs. See 90 FR 28982. Anticipated benefits for the
final rule are also under development. In its proposal, the Department
discussed potential benefits such as reduced labor costs for home care
provider agencies, reduced costs for home care services for consumers,
reduced Medicaid expenditures for the Federal government, expanded
access to home care services, and reduced institutionalization of
individuals who are in need of care. See 90 FR 28981-82.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/02/25 90 FR 28976
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/03/25
Final Rule.......................... 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions,
Organizations
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Daniel Navarrete, Director, Division of
Regulations, Legislation, and Interpretation (DRLI), Department of
Labor, Wage and Hour Division, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room S-3502,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-0406
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1235-AA51
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--Employment and Training
Administration (ETA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52888]]
95. IMPROVING WAGE PROTECTIONS FOR THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT
EMPLOYMENT OF CERTAIN FOREIGN NATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(5)(A); 8 U.S.C. 1182(p) ; 8
U.S.C. 1182(n)(1)(A)(i)(I) and (II) ; 8 U.S.C. 1182(t)(1)(A)(i)(I) and
(II) ; 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b)
CFR Citation: 20 CFR 656.40 and 656.41; 20 CFR 655.731
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101, et
seq .) requires that for most employment-based immigrant admissions to
the United States, the Secretary of Labor must first certify that the
employment of the immigrant will not adversely affect the wages and
working conditions of U.S. workers similarly employed and that U.S.
workers are unavailable for the position. The Immigration and
Nationality Act also requires that an individual may not be admitted
into the United States on an H-1B nonimmigrant visa unless the employer
attests that they will pay the individual the higher of the actual wage
paid to other workers with similar experience or the prevailing wage in
the area of employment. The Department of Labor's (Department)
Employment and Training Administration is initiating rulemaking
governing prevailing wages for employment opportunities that United
States (U.S.) employers seek to fill with foreign workers on a
permanent or temporary basis through certain employment-based immigrant
visas and H-1B, H-1B1, or E-3 nonimmigrant visas. Specifically, in
response to President Trump's proclamation, the Department is
initiating a rulemaking to revise prevailing wage levels, in accordance
with section 4(a) of the September 19, 2025, Presidential Proclamation,
Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, consistent with
section 212(n) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(n). The proposed rule will
amend the Departmental regulations governing permanent labor
certifications and temporary labor condition applications (LCA) to
incorporate changes to the computation of wage levels under the
Department's four-tiered wage structure based on the Occupational
Employment and Wage Statistics wage survey administered by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. The primary purpose of these changes is to update
the computation of prevailing wage levels under the existing four-
tiered wage structure to better reflect actual wages earned by
similarly-employed U.S. workers. With this revision, the Department
will be able to more effectively ensure under these programs that the
employment of immigrant and nonimmigrant workers does not adversely
affect wages for U.S. workers.
Statement of Need: On September 19, 2025, President Trump issued
the Presidential Proclamation, Restriction on Entry of Certain
Nonimmigrant Workers. Section 4(a) of the proclamation requires the
Secretary of Labor shall initiate a rulemaking to revise the prevailing
wage levels to levels consistent with the policy goals of this
proclamation consistent with section 212(n) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(n). In response to the proclamation, the Department is initiating
a rulemaking to revise the methodology used to compute prevailing wage
levels. The proposed rule will amend the Departmental regulations
governing permanent labor certifications and temporary labor condition
applications to incorporate changes to the computation of wage levels
under the Department's four-tiered wage structure based on the
Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics wage survey administered by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The primary purpose of these changes is
to update the computation of prevailing wage levels under the existing
four-tiered wage structure to better reflect actual wages earned by
similarly-employed U.S. workers. With this revision, the Department
will be able to more effectively ensure under these programs that the
employment of immigrant and nonimmigrant workers does not adversely
affect wages for U.S. workers.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)
(8 U.S.C. 1101, et seq .) requires that for most employment-based
immigrant admissions to the United States, the Secretary of Labor must
first certify that the employment of the immigrant will not adversely
affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers similarly
employed and that U.S. workers are unavailable for the position. The
Immigration and Nationality Act also requires that an individual may
not be admitted into the United States on an H-1B nonimmigrant visa
unless the employer attests that they will pay the individual the
higher of the actual wage paid to other workers with similar experience
or the prevailing wage in the area of employment. The Department of
Labor's (Department) Employment and Training Administration is
initiating rulemaking governing prevailing wages for employment
opportunities that United States (U.S.) employers seek to fill with
foreign workers on a permanent or temporary basis through certain
employment-based immigrant visas and H-1B, H-1B1, or E-3 nonimmigrant
visas. In accordance with the Presidential Proclamation, the Department
will engage in rulemaking to ensure it is fulfilling its mandate under
the INA.
Alternatives: The Presidential Proclamation directed the Secretary
of Labor to engage in rulemaking, so no alternatives to rulemaking were
considered.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The Department expects that the
proposed rule will result in costs and transfer payments. The proposed
rule will have an annualized cost of $3.37 million and a total 10-year
cost of $23.66 million at a discount rate of 7 percent in 2024 dollars.
The NPRM will result in annualized transfer payments (U.S. employers to
other entities and individuals, including foreign workers) of up to
$15.76 billion and total 10-year transfer payments of up to $110.66
billion at a discount rate of 7 percent in 2024 dollars.
One benefit of the NPRM 's increase in prevailing wages is the
economic incentive to increase employee retention, training, and
productivity which will increase benefits to both employers and U.S.
workers. Strengthening prevailing wages will also help promote and
protect jobs for U.S. workers. By ensuring that the employment of any
foreign worker is commensurate with the wages paid to similarly
employed U.S. workers, the Department will be protecting the types of
white-collar, middle-class jobs that are critical to ensuring the
economic viability of communities throughout the country. Finally,
ensuring that skilled occupations are not performed at below-market
wage rates by foreign workers will provide greater incentives for firms
to expand education and job training programs. These programs can
attract and develop the skills of a younger generation of U.S. workers
to enter occupations that currently rely on elevated levels of foreign
workers.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 03/27/26 91 FR 15454
NPRM Comment Period End............. 05/26/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52889]]
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Local, State
Agency Contact: Brian Pasternak, Administrator, Department of
Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW, Office of Foreign Labor Certification; Room N-5311, FP Building,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8200
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1205-AC30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--ETA Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
96. ADVERSE EFFECT WAGE RATE METHODOLOGY FOR THE TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT
OF H-2A NONIMMIGRANTS IN NON-RANGE OCCUPATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1188
CFR Citation: 20 CFR 655, Subpart B
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Labor (DOL) amended its regulations
governing the certification of agricultural labor or services to be
performed by temporary foreign workers in H-2A nonimmigrant status (H-
2A workers). Specifically, the Department amended its regulations to
revise the methodology by which it determines the Adverse Effect Wage
Rates (AEWRs) for non-range agricultural occupations through an Interim
Final Rule issued October 2, 2025. DOL intends to issue a final rule
after considering all of the comments received.
Statement of Need: Under development
Summary of Legal Basis: Under development
Alternatives: Under development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Under development
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 10/02/25 90 FR 47914
Interim Final Rule Effective........ 10/02/25
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 12/01/25
End.
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Brian Pasternak, Administrator, Department of
Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue
NW, Office of Foreign Labor Certification; Room N-5311, FP Building,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8200
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1205-AC24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--ETA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
97. RESCISSION OF FINAL RULE: IMPROVING PROTECTIONS FOR WORKERS IN
TEMPORARY AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1188; 29 U.S.C. 49 et. seq.
CFR Citation: 20 CFR 655 Part B
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Labor (DOL) proposed to amend its
regulations governing the certification of agricultural labor or
services to be performed by temporary foreign workers in H-2A
nonimmigrant status (H-2A workers) and enforcement of the contractual
obligations applicable to employers of such nonimmigrant workers. The
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposed rescinding provisions
contained within a final rule published by the Department on April 29,
2024, which adopted a number of unnecessary, burdensome, and costly
requirements on employers. The proposed regulatory changes may impact
the regulations for the Employment Service and the H-2A non-immigrant
visa program at 29 CFR part 501 and 20 CFR parts 651, 653, 654, 655,
and 658.
Statement of Need: On April 29, 2024, the Department published a
final rule entitled Improving Protections for Workers in Temporary
Agricultural Employment in the United States, which adopted a number of
unnecessary, burdensome, and costly requirements on employers. The 2024
Final Rule was the subject of four distinct legal challenges, two of
which resulted in the Department being preliminarily enjoined from
enforcing all or part of the 2024 Final Rule in certain States and for
certain parties, and one of which resulted in a nationwide stay. On
July 2, 2025, the Department proposed to rescind most requirements that
were introduced by the 2024 Final Rule to ensure that the H-2A
program's regulatory framework is a more reasonable balance between the
statute's competing goals of providing an adequate labor supply and
protecting the jobs of domestic agricultural workers.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA),
as amended by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA),
establishes an H-2A nonimmigrant visa classification for a worker
having a residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of
abandoning who is coming temporarily to the United States to perform
agricultural labor or services . . . of a temporary or seasonal nature.
8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a); see also 8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(1) and 1188.
Agricultural labor or services includes the types of labor and services
defined by the Secretary of Labor in regulations, as well as the
Internal Revenue Code definition of agricultural labor at section
3121(g) of title 26, the Fair Labor Standards Act definition of
agriculture at section 203(f) of title 29, and the pressing of apples
for cider on a farm . . . . 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a). The
Secretary of Labor has delegated the authority to issue temporary
agricultural labor certifications to the Assistant Secretary for
Employment and Training, who in turn has delegated that authority to
ETA's Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC). In addition, the
Secretary has delegated to the Department's Wage and Hour Division
(WHD) the responsibility under sec. 218(g)(2) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1188(g)(2), to assure employer compliance with the terms and conditions
of employment under the H-2A program.
Alternatives: In its NPRM, the Department considered two
alternatives to this proposal. First, the Department considered
preserving the current regulations at 20 CFR parts 651, 653, 655, and
658, and 29 CFR part 501, as modified by the 2024 H-2A Final Rule,
until litigation is resolved. Second, the Department considered
reverting back to the regulations in 20 CFR parts 651, 653, 655, and
658, and 29 CFR part 501, as of June 27, 2024. This option would remove
all changes effectuated by the 2024 H-2A Final Rule, regardless of
their utility.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Anticipated costs and benefits for
this final rule are under development. In its proposal, the Department
estimated total quantifiable annualized net cost savings from the
rescissions in this proposed rule as $1.02 million and the annualized
transfer payments (from employees to H-2A employers) at $12.66 million,
each at a discount rate of 7 percent over a 10-year analysis period.
[[Page 52890]]
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/02/25 90 FR 28919
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/02/25
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Kimberly Vitelli, Administrator, Office of
Workforce Investment, Department of Labor, Employment and Training
Administration 200 Constitution Avenue NW FP Building, Room C-4526
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-3980
Email: [email protected]
Daniel Navarrete, Director, Department of Labor, Wage and Hour
Division, 200 Constitution Ave. NW, Suite S-3016, Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-1134
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1205-AC25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--Employee Benefits Security
Administration (EBSA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
98. PRUDENCE AND LOYALTY IN SELECTING PLAN INVESTMENTS AND EXERCISING
SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1104 (ERISA sec. 404); 29 U.S.C. 1135
(ERISA sec. 505)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14366; 14219
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 2550.404a-1
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This regulatory action is in response to Executive Order
14219, entitled Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's ``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory
Initiative, and would revise the Department's regulation at 29 CFR
2550.404a-1 so that plan fiduciaries select investments and exercise
shareholder rights based only on financial considerations relevant to
the risk-adjusted economic value of a particular investment, and not to
advance social causes.
Statement of Need: The Employee Retirement Income Security Act is a
comprehensive statute designed to protect the interests of employees
and their beneficiaries in employee benefit plans. It does this
primarily by imposing, in section 404, a number of stringent duties on
plan fiduciaries, including a duty of loyalty, a duty to act for the
exclusive purpose of providing plan benefits and defraying reasonable
expenses, and a duty of prudence. 29 U.S.C. 1104(a)(1)(A), (B). This
regulatory action is needed to ensure that plan fiduciaries select
investments and exercise shareholder rights based only on financial
considerations relevant to the risk-adjusted economic value of a
particular investment, and not to advance social causes. See Executive
Order 14219, titled Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's Department of Government Efficiency Deregulatory
Initiative. See also Executive Order 14366 of December 11, 2025, titled
Protecting American Investors from Foreign-Owned and Politically-
Motivated Proxy Advisors.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under development
Alternatives: Under development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed regulation will provide
clarity regarding the factors that can be considered when making
investment selection, as well as the circumstances in which fiduciaries
to are required to participate in shareholder activities on behalf of
plan participants. Estimates of the cost are still under development
and will be reflected in the notice of proposed rulemaking.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rulemaking.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Elizabeth Schumacher, Acting Director, Office of
Regulations and Interpretations, Department of Labor, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Room
N-5655, Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8339
RIN: 1210-AC37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--EBSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
99. FIDUCIARY DUTIES IN SELECTING DESIGNATED INVESTMENT
ALTERNATIVES
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1104 (ERISA sec. 404); 29 U.S.C. 1135
(ERISA sec. 505)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14330
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This action implements Executive Order 14330 (Aug. 2,
2025), titled Democratizing Access to Alternative Assets for 401(k)
Investors, 90 FR 3891 (Aug. 12, 2025), which directs the Secretary of
Labor, within 180 days of the date of the order, to clarify, as she
deems appropriate and consistent with applicable law, the Department of
Labor's position on alternative assets and the appropriate fiduciary
process associated with offering asset allocation funds containing
investments in alternative assets under the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA). Such clarification must aim to identify the
criteria that fiduciaries should use to prudently balance potentially
higher expenses against the objectives of seeking greater long-term net
returns and broader diversification of investments. The Secretary shall
also propose rules, regulations, or guidance, as the Secretary deems
appropriate, that clarify the duties that a fiduciary owes to plan
participants under ERISA when deciding whether to make available to
plan participants an asset allocation fund that includes investments in
alternative assets, which rules, regulations, and guidance may include
appropriately calibrated safe harbors. In carrying out the directives
in this section to further the policy set forth in E.O. 14330, the
Secretary shall prioritize actions that may curb ERISA litigation that
constrains fiduciaries' ability to apply their best judgment in
offering investment opportunities to relevant plan participants.
Statement of Need: The Employee Retirement Income Security Act
(ERISA) is a comprehensive statute designed to protect the interests of
employees and their beneficiaries in employee benefit plans. It does
this primarily by imposing, in section 404, a number of stringent
duties on plan fiduciaries, including a duty of prudence. 29 U.S.C.
1104(a)(1)(B). This regulatory action is needed to relieve the
regulatory burdens and litigation risk that impede American workers'
retirement accounts from achieving the competitive returns and asset
diversification necessary to secure a dignified, comfortable
retirement. This regulatory action will clarify the duties that a
fiduciary owes to plan participants under ERISA when deciding whether
to make available to plan participants an asset allocation
[[Page 52891]]
fund that includes investments in alternative assets, which rules,
regulations, and guidance may include appropriately calibrated safe
harbors. See Executive Order 14330 titled Democratizing Access to
Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under development
Alternatives: Under development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: By clarifying the steps fiduciaries
may take to prudently balance potentially higher expenses against the
objectives of seeking greater long-term net returns and broader
diversification of investments when selecting investment opportunities
to relevant plan participants, the proposed regulation will enable
responsible plan fiduciaries to consider all prudent and appropriate
investment vehicles when making menu selections in order to improve
retirement savings outcomes for plan participants and beneficiaries.
Estimates of the cost are still under development and will be reflected
in the notice of proposed rulemaking.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 03/31/26 91 FR 16088
NPRM Comment Period End............. 06/01/26
Analyze Comments.................... 08/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Jeffrey J. Turner, Director, Office of Regulations
and Interpretations, Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security
Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N-5655,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8500
RIN: 1210-AC38
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--EBSA Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
100. IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY INTO PHARMACY BENEFIT MANAGER FEE
DISCLOSURE
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: This action may affect the private sector under
PL 104-4.
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1135; 29 U.S.C. 1108
Relevant Executive Orders: 14273
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 2550.408b-2
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This action will implement section 12 of Executive Order
14273 to improve employer health plan transparency into the direct and
indirect compensation received by pharmacy benefit managers.
Statement of Need: This regulatory action would improve
transparency into pharmacy benefit manager fee disclosure with respect
to group health plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA). These disclosures are needed so that fiduciaries
can assess the reasonableness of the contracts or arrangements with
these service providers, including the reasonableness of the service
providers' compensation. These disclosure requirements would apply for
purposes of ERISA's statutory prohibited transaction exemption for
services arrangements. This proposal implements section 12 of President
Trump's Executive Order 14273, Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again
Putting Americans First, which instructs the Department to propose
regulations to improve employer health plan transparency into the
direct and indirect compensation received by pharmacy benefit managers.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under development
Alternatives: Under development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: By addressing the influence of PBMs
and promoting transparent pricing, President Trump's Executive Order
aims to create a fairer and more competitive prescription drug market
that lowers costs and ensures accountability across the health-care
system by better enabling plan fiduciaries to better monitor the PBMs
actions to ensure the service contract or arrangement is reasonable.
Estimates of the cost are still under development and will be reflected
in the notice of proposed rulemaking.
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 01/30/26 91 FR 4348
NPRM Comment Period Extended........ 03/02/26
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/15/26
Final Rule.......................... 09/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Elizabeth Schumacher, Acting Director, Office of
Regulations and Interpretations, Department of Labor, Employee Benefits
Security Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Room
N-5655, Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8339
RIN: 1210-AB37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--EBSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
101. TRANSPARENCY IN COVERAGE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 111-148, E.O. 14221
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This proposed rule would amend the Transparency in
Coverage final rule published November 12, 2020 (85 FR 82158) to
improve the quality, accessibility, usability, and transparency of
healthcare price data pursuant to Executive Order 14221.
Statement of Need: This regulatory action contains policy proposals
to advance the goals of Executive Order 14221 Making America Healthy
Again by Empowering Patients With Clear, Accurate, and Actionable
Healthcare Pricing Information by amending the Transparency in Coverage
2020 final rules to improve the standardization, accuracy, and
accessibility of public pricing disclosures and increase access to
pricing information for participants, beneficiaries, and enrollees by
requiring cost-sharing information to be provided over the phone, in
addition to through an online self-service tool and in paper form.
Summary of Legal Basis: Being developed in jointly with HHS and
Treasury.
Alternatives: Being developed in jointly with HHS and Treasury.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Being developed in jointly with HHS
and Treasury.
Risks: Being developed in jointly with HHS and Treasury.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RFI................................. 06/20/25 90 FR 23303
NPRM................................ 12/23/25 90 FR 60432
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/23/26
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Elizabeth Schumacher, Acting Director, Office of
Health Plan Standards and Compliance Assistance, Department of Labor,
[[Page 52892]]
Employee Benefits Security Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW,
Suite N-5653, Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-8339
RIN: 1210-AC30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--Mine Safety and Health Administration
(MSHA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
102. RESPIRABLE CRYSTALLINE SILICA
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811; ; 30 U.S.C. 813(h);; 30 U.S.C. 957
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14219; 14261; 14267
CFR Citation: 30 CFR 56; 30 CFR 57; 30 CFR 60; 30 CFR 72
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: MSHA proposes to amend the Agency's existing respirable
crystalline silica standards and respiratory protection provisions
established by the 2024 final rule titled Lowering Miners' Exposure to
Respirable Crystalline Silica and Improving Respiratory Protection. The
proposed rule would include clarification and updates to requirements
in 30 CFR part 60 for exposure monitoring, methods of compliance,
respiratory protection, and medical surveillance without reducing
protections afforded to miners. The proposal would also include
conforming amendments in 30 CFR parts 56, 57, 60, and 72.
Statement of Need: MSHA is preparing a notice of proposed
rulemaking, titled Respirable Crystalline Silica and Respiratory
Protection, to propose changes targeted towards resolving issues raised
in litigation. MSHA's 2024 final rule titled Lowering Miners' Exposure
to Respirable Crystalline Silica and Improving Respiratory Protection
(2024 Silica Final Rule) is currently being challenged in the 8 th
Circuit Court of Appeals, which issued a stay of enforcement pending
resolution. Some petitioners (e.g., National Stone, Sand, and Gravel
Association and National Mining Association) have requested Agency
clarification on aspects of the rule and indicated that the sampling
and medical surveillance requirements impose excessive burdens without
a corresponding increase in protection for miners.
The proposed rule clarifies and modifies provisions of the
respirable crystalline silica and respiratory protection standards that
were established in the 2024 Silica Final Rule. The proposed rule
includes clarifications and updates to requirements for exposure
monitoring, methods of compliance, respiratory protection, and medical
surveillance without reducing protections afforded to miners. The
proposals improve clarity of key provisions for the regulated community
and support the Administration's goal of reducing unnecessary
regulatory burdens without compromising miner health and safety. MSHA
anticipates the rulemaking would be cost-neutral or have cost-savings
for the regulated community.
Summary of Legal Basis: The statutory authority for this proposed
rule is provided by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as
amended (Mine Act) under sections 101(a), 103(h), and 508. 30 U.S.C.
811(a), 813(h), and 957.
Section 101(a) of the Mine Act gives the Secretary the authority to
develop, promulgate, and revise mandatory health standards to address
toxic materials or harmful physical agents. Under Section 101(a), a
standard must protect lives and prevent injuries in mines and be
improved over any standard that it replaces or revises. 30 U.S.C.
811(a).
Section 103(h) of the Mine Act gives the Secretary the authority to
promulgate standards involving recordkeeping and reporting. 30 U.S.C.
813(h). Additionally, section 103(h) requires that every mine operator
establish and maintain records, make reports, and provide this
information as required by the Secretary. Id.
Section 508 of the Mine Act gives the Secretary the authority to
issue regulations to carry out any provision of the Mine Act. 30 U.S.C.
957.
Alternatives: MSHA will consider the existing standards as the
alternative to the proposed changes.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This proposed rule includes changes
to provisions for exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, and
respiratory protection. MSHA expects the overall impact of this
proposed rule to be cost-neutral or have net cost-savings for the
regulated community.
Risks: The 2024 Silica Final Rule took effect on June 17, 2024.
Compliance deadlines were set for April 14, 2025, for coal mine
operators and April 8, 2026, for metal and nonmetal mine operators.
However, on April 11, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit issued an order staying the 2024 Silica Final Rule's
compliance deadlines until the Court completes a substantive review of
the petition. As a result, MSHA has temporarily paused enforcement of
the requirements in the 2024 Silica Final Rule for mine operators.
Additionally, proposed revisions face risk of legal challenge from
other stakeholders (e.g., miner advocacy groups and worker unions). In
light of this likely additional litigation, any proposed revisions must
be in careful compliance with the Mine Act, particularly section
101(a)(9). This section of the Mine Act prohibits MSHA from issuing
rules that reduce the protection afforded to miners by existing
mandatory health or safety standards. Miner welfare advocates and
organized labor groups are likely to oppose perceived rollback of
protections.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Jessica Senk, Acting Director, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health
Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-9440
Fax: 202 693-9441
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1219-AC22
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL--Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
103. LOCK-OUT/TAG-OUT UPDATE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 655(b); 29 U.S.C. 651 et seq; 5 U.S.C.
553
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910.147
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Recent technological advancements that employ computer-
based controls of hazardous energy (e.g., mechanical, electrical,
pneumatic, chemical, and radiation) conflict with the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) existing lock-out/tag-out
(LOTO) standard. The use of these computer-based controls has become
more prevalent as equipment manufacturers modernize their designs to
increase productivity. Additionally, National Consensus Standards have
[[Page 52893]]
evolved, and international approaches to the use of computer-based
controls are increasingly recognized. In light of these advancements,
there is a need to modernize United States regulations to better align
with current technologies, ensuring improved safety effectiveness and,
indirectly, potential benefits such as increased operational
efficiency. OSHA issued a Request for Information (RFI) in May 2019 to
understand the strengths and limitations of this new technology, as
well as potential impacts on worker safety.
Statement of Need: The Lockout/Tagout Standard currently requires
that all hazardous energy from power sources and energy stored in the
machine itself be controlled using energy isolating devises (EIDs) when
an employee is performing servicing or maintenance of the machine or
equipment. OSHA's definition of ``energy isolating device'' expressedly
excludes push buttons, selector switches, and other control-circuit-
type devices. OSHA recognizes that recent technological advances may
have resulted in safety improvements to control-circuit-type devices.
Modernizing the standard to better align with current technologies may
improve safety effectiveness and, indirectly, potentially increase
operation efficiency.
This rulemaking is consistent with the intent of Executive Order
14219 (Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's
``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory Initiative)
because the agency has good cause to believe that the existing
regulation significantly and unjustifiably impedes technological
innovation and economic development. By modernizing the exiting
regulation, OSHA will allow new technologies that both increase
productivity and reduce the regulatory burden on employers.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under development
Alternatives: Under Development
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Under development
Risks: Under development
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request for Information (RFI)....... 05/20/19 84 FR 22756
RFI Comment Period End.............. 08/19/19
NPRM................................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Andrew Levinson, Director, Directorate of Standards
and Guidance, Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N-3718,
Washington, DC 20210
Phone: 202 693-1950
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 1218-AD00
BILLING CODE 4510-HL-P
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Introduction: Departmental Mission
The mission of the U.S. Department of Transportation (Department or
DOT) is to deliver the world's leading transportation system, serving
the American people and economy through the safe and efficient movement
of people and goods.
The Department's Regulatory Philosophy, Initiatives, and Priorities
The safety of our transportation system is the Department's number
one priority. As such, DOT issues regulations to make America's
transportation system the safest in the world for the benefit of all
who use it, including by leveraging proven interventions and modern
technology. Towards this goal, DOT regulates safety in the aviation,
motor carrier, railroad, motor vehicle, commercial space, transit, and
pipeline transportation areas. The Department also writes the necessary
implementing rules for programs involving highways, airports, mass
transit, the maritime industry, railroads, motor transportation, and
vehicle safety. In addition, DOT is responsible for developing policies
that implement a wide range of regulations that govern programs such as
acquisition and grants management, access for people with disabilities,
information technology, worker safety and health, property asset
management, seismic safety, security, emergency response, and the use
of aircraft and vehicles.
During the first Trump Administration, the Department oversaw the
Federal Government's largest deregulatory program. DOT intends to build
upon this success in the second Trump Administration. Therefore, DOT is
seeking to remove regulatory requirements that impose undue burdens or
impede timely project delivery to encourage and to incentivize American
ingenuity. Consolidating and updating transportation policies and
regulations, while promoting and enforcing more efficient and effective
requirements where necessary, will reduce barriers to project delivery
and rapid development in technological advancements. DOT has initiated
many efforts to improve the regulatory process by enhancing
transparency; ensuring compliance with requirements applicable to DOT
rulemakings; and implementing best practices for rulemaking, including
economic analyses and appropriate outreach to interested parties. The
Department produces its most effective work when it adheres to the best
reading of the statute and is informed by robust public input, reliable
data, and sound economics. These improvements to DOT's regulatory
procedures increase opportunities to obtain those essential building
blocks for good governance, thereby strengthening the overall quality
and fairness of the Department's administrative actions.
Unleashing innovation is also a DOT priority. The development and
adoption of transportation technology in recent decades has accelerated
the transformation of every mode of transportation. DOT and its
regulatory actions must adapt so that Americans can receive the full
benefits of our global leadership in transportation innovation. The
Regulatory Plan reflects this Administration's commitment to unleashing
American ingenuity and enabling the commercial deployment of innovative
transportation technologies while maintaining key safety standards. The
Department will achieve this objective through strategies including,
but not limited to, the development of an automated vehicle regulatory
framework, as well as the removal of barriers for new entrants in
aviation.
To improve America's transportation, DOT is rescinding burdensome
and costly regulations; unleashing American innovation; and reaffirming
DOT's priority to safety. This work is informed by various Executive
Orders, such as Executive Order 14154, ``Unleashing American Energy,''
90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025); Executive Order 14151, ``Ending Radical and
Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,'' 90 FR 8339 (Jan.
29, 2025); Executive Order 14148, ``Initial Rescissions of Harmful
Executive Orders and Actions,'' 90 FR 8237 (Jan. 28, 2025); Executive
Order 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' (90 FR
9065 (Feb. 6, 2025); and Executive Order 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful
Governance and Implementing the President's `Department of Government
Efficiency' Deregulatory Initiative,'' (90 FR 10583 (Feb. 19, 2025).
The Department carries out its responsibilities through the Office
of the Secretary (OST) and the following operating administrations
(OAs):
[[Page 52894]]
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA); Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA); Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA); Federal Transit Administration (FTA);
Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (GLS); Maritime
Administration (MARAD); National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA); and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA). Since each OA has its own area of focus, we summarize the
regulatory priorities of each below. More information about each of the
rules discussed below can be found in the DOT Unified Agenda.
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
OST provides leadership in formulating and executing well-balanced
national and international transportation objectives, policies, and
programs, and oversees the regulatory processes for the Department. OST
implements the Department's regulatory policies and procedures and is
responsible for ensuring the involvement of senior officials in
regulatory decision making. Through the Office of the General Counsel
(OGC), OST is also responsible for ensuring that the Department
complies with the Administrative Procedure Act; Executive Orders,
including Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 14192; DOT's
regulatory policies and procedures; and other legal and policy
requirements affecting the Department's rulemaking activities.
At the start of the Trump Administration, OST put in place DOT-wide
policies and procedures to increase accountability, to ensure more
robust public participation, and to strengthen the overall quality and
fairness of DOT's administrative actions. These policies and procedures
place DOT at the forefront of the Federal government's effort to
eliminate unnecessary, excessively complex, and legally dubious Federal
regulations that impose excessive costs that limit our Nation's
economic growth and ability to build and to innovate in the
marketplace, while at the same time ensuring the safest and most
efficient transportation system in the world. Regulated entities and
the public will benefit from these enhanced policies and procedures
through improved agency deliberations, more opportunities to comment on
rulemakings and guidance documents, and increased fairness in
regulatory enforcement actions. OST provides guidance and training
regarding compliance with regulatory requirements and processes for
personnel throughout the Department. In addition, OST plays an
instrumental role in the Department's efforts to improve our economic
analyses; regulatory flexibility analyses; other related analyses;
retrospective reviews of rules; and data quality, including peer
reviews. OGC is the lead office that works with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), in the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), to comply with the requirements of Executive Orders,
including Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 14192, and Executive
Order 14219; to coordinate the Department's response to OMB's
intergovernmental review of other agencies' significant rulemaking
documents; and to implement other relevant Administration rulemaking
directives. OGC also works closely with representatives of other
agencies, the White House, and congressional staff to provide
information on how various proposals would affect the ability of the
Department to perform its safety, infrastructure, and other missions.
OST is engaged in a rulemaking to ensure that the Department
operates its Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) and Airport
Concession Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (ACDBE) Programs in a
nondiscriminatory fashion, in line with the law and the Constitution.
In addition, OST is taking steps to protect aviation consumers. OST is
working on a rulemaking to enhance the safety of air travel for
individuals with disabilities who use wheelchairs. This rulemaking is
intended to restore commonsense governance while maintaining core
accessibility protections for air travelers with disabilities.
Federal Aviation Administration
FAA is charged with operating and maintaining the most complex
aviation system in the world safely and efficiently. FAA is conducting
a rulemaking that would require all cockpit voice recorders within
existing aircraft to increase the current two-hour recording duration
requirement to 25 hours for covered aircraft. This rulemaking is being
undertaken in response to a statutory mandate and a recommendation from
the National Transportation Safety Board.
FAA is also proceeding with a rulemaking to support the integration
of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the national airspace system by
enabling the design and operation of UAS at low altitudes beyond visual
line of sight and for third-party services that support these
operations. This rulemaking is intended to provide a predictable and
clear pathway for safe, routine, and scalable UAS operations in various
sectors.
In addition, FAA will proceed with rulemakings to advance aerospace
innovation through the regulation and development of supersonic flight.
FAA will also proceed with rulemakings to support American innovation
in new space-based industries, space exploration capabilities, and
cutting-edge defense systems.
Federal Highway Administration
FHWA carries out the Federal highway program in partnership with
State and local agencies to meet the Nation's transportation needs.
FHWA's mission is to improve the quality and performance of our
Nation's highway system and its intermodal connectors. FHWA is working
on a ``Buy America'' rulemaking to encourage the use of American-
manufactured products by adding a ``Buy America'' standard for electric
vehicle (EV) chargers. The new standard would direct that EV chargers
comply with the applicable requirements for manufactured products
except that for projects obligated on or after the effective date of
the rule, chargers would be manufactured in the United States and the
cost of components of a charger that are mined, produced, or
manufactured in the United States would be 100 percent of the total
cost of all components of the charger. This proposal is designed to
provide a strong incentive for manufacturers to shift more rapidly
toward domestic manufacturing processes.
FHWA, in collaboration with FTA and FRA, is proceeding with a
rulemaking to update the Department's approach to National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance. Those updates include
streamlining the public involvement process, implementing new
flexibilities under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, establishing new
categorical exclusions, and making other updates to the Department's
NEPA process to make it more streamlined and efficient.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
The mission of FMCSA is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities
involving commercial trucks and buses. FMCSA regulations establish
minimum safety standards for motor carriers, commercial drivers,
commercial motor vehicles, and State agencies receiving certain motor
carrier safety grants and issuing commercial drivers' licenses.
FMCSA is committed to improving safety on our Nation's roads. As
one
[[Page 52895]]
means of accomplishing this goal, FMCSA promulgated a rulemaking to
limit the authority for State Driver Licensing Agencies to issue non-
domiciled Commercial Learner's Permits and Commercial Driver's Licenses
to individuals domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction. This change
strengthens the security of the Commercial Driver's License issuance
process and enhances the safety of commercial motor vehicle operations.
In addition, FMCSA and NHTSA continue to work together on a
rulemaking to require automatic emergency braking systems for certain
heavy vehicles. This rulemaking responds to a statutory mandate and
will improve roadway safety by reducing the number of crashes, and the
fatalities and injuries resulting from those crashes, in which the
heavy vehicle is the striking vehicle.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
The mission of NHTSA is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce
economic costs due to roadway crashes. The statutory responsibilities
of NHTSA relating to motor vehicles include reducing the number, and
mitigating the effects of, motor vehicle crashes and related fatalities
and injuries; providing safety performance information to aid
prospective purchasers of vehicles, child restraints, and tires; and
improving automotive fuel efficiency requirements. NHTSA pursues
policies that enable safety technologies and encourages the development
of non-regulatory approaches when feasible in meeting its statutory
mandates. NHTSA issues new standards, regulations, and amendments to
existing standards and regulations, when appropriate.
NHTSA has proposed revisions to existing Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) standards applicable to vehicles produced in model years
2022-2031 to bring the CAFE program into compliance with relevant
statutory requirements, including the legal prohibition on considering
dedicated alternative and dual-fuel vehicles and credit trading when
setting CAFE standards. This review is being conducted in accordance
with Secretary Sean Duffy's Memorandum, ``Fixing the CAFE Program''
(Jan. 28, 2025).
NHTSA is also committed to modernizing the Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standards (FMVSS) to accommodate the safe deployment of
automated driving system (ADS)-equipped vehicles, or automated vehicles
(AVs). NHTSA's AV Framework, part of DOT's innovation agenda, has three
principles: (1) to prioritize the safety of ongoing AV operations on
public roads; (2) to unleash innovation by removing unnecessary
regulatory barriers; and (3) to enable commercial deployment of AVs to
enhance safety and mobility for the American public. NHTSA continues to
advance rulemakings aimed at achieving these principles, including
rulemakings to address the applicability of certain FMVSS to ADS-
equipped vehicles that lack manual controls.
Federal Railroad Administration
FRA's mission is to enable the safe, reliable, and efficient
movement of people and goods for a strong America, now and in the
future. FRA exercises regulatory authority over all areas of railroad
safety and, where feasible, incorporates flexible performance
standards. FRA is reviewing its regulations to ensure that, as the
railroad industry looks to deploy state-of-the-art technology to make a
safe system even safer, FRA's regulations do not hinder safety
advancements. FRA is also focused on removing or updating unnecessary,
redundant, or outdated regulatory requirements.
FRA, in collaboration with FTA and FHWA, is also proceeding with a
rulemaking to update the Department's approach to National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance. Those updates include
streamlining the public involvement process, implementing new
flexibilities under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, establishing new
categorical exclusions, and making other updates to the Department's
NEPA process to make it more streamlined and efficient.
Federal Transit Administration
The mission of FTA is to improve public transportation for
America's communities. To further that end, FTA provides financial and
technical assistance to local public transit systems, including buses,
subways, light rail, commuter rail, trolleys, and ferries; oversees
safety measures; and helps develop next-generation technology research.
FTA's regulatory activities implement the laws that apply to
recipients' uses of Federal funding and the terms and conditions of FTA
grant awards.
FTA, in collaboration with FHWA and FRA, is also proceeding with a
rulemaking to update the Department's approach to National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance. Those updates include
streamlining the public involvement process, implementing new
flexibilities under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, establishing new
categorical exclusions, and making other updates to the Department's
NEPA process to make it more streamlined and efficient.
Maritime Administration
MARAD administers Federal laws and programs to improve and
strengthen the maritime transportation system to meet the economic and
security needs of the Nation. To that end, MARAD's efforts are focused
on ensuring a strong American presence in the domestic and
international trades and expanding maritime opportunities for American
businesses and workers.
MARAD's regulatory objectives and priorities reflect its
responsibility to ensure the availability of water transportation
services for American shippers and consumers and, in times of war or
national emergency, for the U.S. armed forces.
MARAD is proceeding with a rulemaking to establish procedures for
processing deepwater port applications. In doing so, MARAD will
transfer certain responsibilities for processing deepwater port
applications from the United States Coast Guard to the Maritime
Administration. This rulemaking will effectuate more efficient
processing of deepwater port applications.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
PHMSA has responsibility for rulemaking focused on hazardous
materials transportation and pipeline safety. In addition, PHMSA
administers programs under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
PHMSA is proceeding with a rulemaking to address class location
requirements for natural gas transmission pipelines, specifically as
they pertain to actions operators are required to take following class
location changes due to population growth near the pipeline. Operators
have suggested that performing integrity management measures on
pipelines where class locations have changed due to population
increases would be an equally safe, but less costly, alternative to the
current requirements of either reducing pressure, pressure testing, or
replacing pipe.
In addition, PHMSA is committed to reducing unnecessary regulatory
burden by proceeding with a rulemaking to amend the Hazardous Materials
Regulations. In doing so, PHMSA will be reducing costs for hazardous
materials transporters and eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens
on fuel transportation, all while maintaining or
[[Page 52896]]
increasing the level of safety provided in the Hazardous Materials
Regulations.
Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
GLS's mission is to serve the U.S. intermodal and international
transportation system by improving the operation and maintenance of a
safe, reliable, and efficient deep-draft waterway, in cooperation with
its Canadian counterpart. GLS also encourages the development of trade
through the Great Lakes Seaway System, which contributes to the
comprehensive economic development of the entire Great Lakes region.
GLS has two rulemakings executed annually pursuant to international
agreement. One rulemaking reviews and revises GLS's joint regulations
with the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation of Canada (SLSMC).
The other rulemaking, also executed in coordination with SLSMC, sets
forth the levels of tolls assessed on all commodities and vessels
transiting the facilities operated by GLS and SLSMC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOT--Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE (CDL) STANDARDS [2126-AD03]
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31308
Relevant Executive Orders: 14286
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
is proposing to amend its regulations to enhance the security standards
for the State-issued commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) and commercial
learner's permits (CLPs). This action would strengthen the integrity of
the CDL and CLP issuance process and reduce the risk of fraud. The
proposed changes would update requirements for document verification
and record retention, helping to ensure the identity of CDL and CLP
holders and contributing to the safety and security of the nation's
transportation system.
Statement of Need: TBD
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 06/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: State
Agency Contact: Wendy Liberante, Department of Transportation,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590
Phone: 202 366-2551
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2126-AD03
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOT--Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
104. COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE (CDL) STANDARDS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31308
Relevant Executive Orders: 14286
CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
is proposing to amend its regulations to enhance the security standards
for the State-issued commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) and commercial
learner's permits (CLPs). This action would strengthen the integrity of
the CDL and CLP issuance process and reduce the risk of fraud. The
proposed changes would update requirements for document verification
and record retention, helping to ensure the identity of CDL and CLP
holders and contributing to the safety and security of the nation's
transportation system.
Statement of Need: TBD
Summary of Legal Basis: TBD
Alternatives: TBD
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD
Risks: TBD
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: State
Agency Contact: Wendy Liberante, Department of Transportation,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590
Phone: 202 366-2551
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2126-AD03
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The primary mission of the Department of the Treasury is to
maintain a strong economy and create economic and job opportunities by
promoting the conditions that enable economic growth and stability at
home and abroad, strengthen national security by combatting threats and
protecting the integrity of the financial system, and manage the U.S.
Government's finances and resources effectively.
Consistent with this mission, regulations of the Department and its
constituent bureaus are promulgated to interpret and implement the laws
as enacted by Congress and signed by the President. It is the policy of
the Department to comply with applicable requirements to issue a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and carefully consider public comments before
adopting a final rule. Also, the Department invites interested parties
to submit views on rulemaking projects while a proposed rule is being
developed.
To the extent permitted by law, it is the policy of the Department
to adhere to the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 14192 and 14219 to develop regulations
that maximize aggregate net benefits to society while minimizing the
economic and paperwork burdens imposed on persons and businesses
subject to those regulations.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) issues
regulations to implement and enforce Federal laws relating to alcohol,
tobacco, firearms, and ammunition excise taxes and certain non-tax laws
relating to alcohol. TTB's mission and regulations are designed to:
(1) Collect the taxes on alcohol, tobacco products, firearms, and
ammunition;
(2) Protect the consumer by ensuring the integrity of alcohol
products;
(3) Ensure only qualified businesses enter the alcohol and tobacco
industries; and
(4) Prevent unfair and unlawful market activity for alcohol and
tobacco products.
In FY 2026, TTB will continue its ongoing effort to make regulatory
changes that reduce burdens, streamline and simplify requirements,
reduce potential barriers to entry to new regulated businesses, and
improve
[[Page 52897]]
service and responsiveness to those regulated businesses.
The projects TTB plans to prioritize in FY 2026 are described
below:
Streamlining and Modernizing the Permit Application
Process (RINs: 1513-AC46, 1513-AC47, and 1513-AC48, Modernization of
Permit and Registration Application Requirements for Distilled Spirits
Plants, Permit Applications for Wineries, and Qualification
Requirements for Brewers, respectively).
Between FY 2022 and FY 2025, TTB proposed regulatory changes to its
regulations to substantially reduce industry burdens associated with
applying for, or otherwise qualifying for, authorization to engage in
regulated alcohol businesses. Three notices of proposed rulemaking
solicited comment on proposed changes that would be integrated into a
new online permitting system to be deployed in FY 2027. The changes are
expected to reduce the amount of information industry members must
submit to TTB in connection with permit and similar applications,
reduce the types of operational activities that require prior approval,
and reduce the overall regulatory burden on both new and existing
businesses. The changes, along with the new online permitting system,
are expected to greatly improve the applicant experience.
Removing Limitations on Use of Certain Class and Type
Designations on Labels of Malt Beverages with Less Than 0.5% Alcohol by
Volume (RIN: 1513-AC74).
TTB is proposing amendments to the TTB regulations issued under the
Federal Alcohol Administration Act to remove limitations on the use of
class and type designations, such as ale, porter, and stout, in the
labeling of malt beverage with less than 0.5% alcohol by volume. The
proposed changes regarding the use of those terms are intended to
provide greater flexibility to industry members in the marketing of
their products, while also ensuring sufficient information to prevent
consumer confusion regarding the product.
Streamlining of Tax Return and Report Requirements (RIN:
1513-AC68)
TTB is currently engaging in work to simplify and streamline the
reporting that regulated businesses are required to do for Federal
excise tax purposes under the Internal Revenue Code. As part of this
effort, TTB is piloting new forms that consolidate the tax return with
operational reporting, significantly reducing the overall amount of
information submitted by the regulated businesses. Subsequently, TTB
intends to obtain public comment on amending the regulations to
consolidate and streamline tax return and operational reporting, to
ensure that the amendments meet TTB's streamlining and process
simplification goals.
Amendments to Standards of Use for Certain Authorized Wine
Treating Materials to Reflect ``Good Manufacturing Practice'' (RIN:
1513-AC75)
In response to a petition from an industry association, TTB is
proposing amendments to the TTB regulations that authorize wine
treating materials, to replace numerical limitations on the use of
certain wine treating materials with a limitation of ``good
manufacturing practice'' where the treating material does not pose
health concerns. The proposed amendments will also address any new
authorizations of wine treating materials and processes that have been
administratively approved in response to industry member requests but
not yet incorporated into the regulations. Adding wine treating
materials and processes to the TTB regulations may increase the
acceptability in export markets of wine produced using these materials
and processes.
Removal of Prohibition on Labeling of Wine to Indicate
Added Distilled Spirits (RIN: 1513-AC29)
TTB intends to finalize rulemaking that amends its wine labeling
and advertising regulations to remove a specific prohibition against
statements which indicate that a wine contains distilled spirits. This
proposed deregulatory action, in response to a petition from an
industry association, will allow wine makers to provide additional
information to consumers about certain wines, while still providing
consumers with adequate and non-misleading information as to the
identity and quality of the products they purchase.
OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) charters,
regulates, and supervises all national banks and Federal savings
associations (FSAs). The agency also supervises the Federal branches
and agencies of foreign banks. The OCC's mission is to ensure that
national banks and FSAs operate in a safe and sound manner, provide
fair access to financial services, treat customers fairly, and comply
with applicable laws and regulations.
Regulatory priorities for fiscal year 2026 are described below.
Regulation on Implementing GENIUS Act for Entities Subject
to OCC Jurisdiction
The OCC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to implement the
GENIUS Act, 12 U.S.C. 5901 et seq., with respect to entities for which
the OCC is authorized to issue regulations or exercise its enforcement
authority under the Act.
Regulation to Define Unsafe or Unsound Practices, Matters
Requiring Attention
The proposed regulation would define the term ``unsafe or unsound
practice'' for purposes of section 8 of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Act (12 U.S.C. 1818) and revise the supervisory framework for the
issuance of matters requiring attention and other supervisory
Communications.
FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK
As administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), the Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is responsible for developing and
implementing regulations that are the core of the Department's anti-
money laundering (AML) and countering the financing of terrorism (CFT)
efforts. In fulfilling its responsibilities, FinCEN seeks to enhance
U.S. national security by making the financial system increasingly
resistant to abuse by money launderers, terrorists and their financial
supporters, and other perpetrators of crime, and to provide highly
useful information to law enforcement to use in the fight against
crime.
The Secretary of the Treasury, through FinCEN, is authorized by the
BSA to issue regulations requiring financial institutions to file
reports and keep records that are highly useful in criminal, tax, or
regulatory investigations, risk assessments, or proceedings, or
intelligence or counter-intelligence activities, including analysis, to
protect against terrorism. The BSA also authorizes FinCEN to require
that certain financial institutions establish AML/CFT programs and
compliance procedures. More recent legislation has given FinCEN the
authority and responsibility to develop a system under which certain
legal entities in the United States report their beneficial owners. To
implement and realize its mission, FinCEN has established regulatory
objectives and priorities to safeguard the financial system from the
abuses of financial crime, including terrorist financing, proliferation
financing, money laundering, and other illicit activity.
These objectives and priorities include: (1) issuing, interpreting,
and enforcing compliance with regulations implementing the BSA; (2)
supporting, working with, and as appropriate
[[Page 52898]]
overseeing compliance examination functions delegated by FinCEN to
other Federal regulators; (3) managing the collection, processing,
storage, and dissemination of data related to the BSA and beneficial
ownership; (4) maintaining government-wide access services to that same
data for authorized users with a range of interests; (5) conducting
analysis in support of policymakers, law enforcement, regulatory and
intelligence agencies, and (for compliance purposes) the financial
sector; and (6) coordinating with and collaborating on AML/CFT
initiatives with domestic law enforcement and intelligence agencies, as
well as foreign financial intelligence units. As applicable, FinCEN
will describe how relevant rulemakings promote principles of fiscal
responsibility and program integrity in one or all of the following
three categories: (1) enhancing oversight; (2) strengthening
eligibility standards; and (3) streamlining implementation.
FinCEN's regulatory priorities for fiscal year 2026 include:
Revisions to Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting
Requirements
In accordance with the Secretary of the Treasury's commitment to
reducing burden on businesses, FinCEN adopted an interim final rule
(IFR) on March 26, 2025 that removed the requirement for domestic
reporting companies and U.S. persons to report their beneficial
ownership information to FinCEN. The IFR otherwise retained the
requirement for foreign reporting companies to report beneficial
ownership information (BOI) about their beneficial owners (excluding
U.S. persons) to FinCEN, while extending the deadline for those
companies to file initial BOI reports, or update or correct previously
filed BOI reports, to 30 days after the date of the publication of the
IFR (April 25, 2025) or 30 days after their registration to do business
in the United States, whichever comes later. The IFR provided the
public with a 60-day comment period which ended on May 27, 2025, and
FinCEN intends to issue a final rule taking into account the public
comments on the IFR.
Delaying the Effective Date of the AML/CFT Program and
Suspicious Activity Report Filing Requirements for Registered
Investment Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers
FinCEN amended the AML/CFT program and suspicious activity report
(SAR) filing requirements for registered investment advisers (RIAs) and
exempt reporting advisers (ERAs) (IA AML Rule) to delay the effective
date by two years. The final rule amended the effective date to January
1, 2028.
Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of
Terrorism Programs.
Pursuant to the Department of the Treasury and FinCEN's efforts to
modernize the Bank Secrecy Act and to implement provisions of the Anti-
Money Laundering Act of 2020, FinCEN is proposing a new rule to revise
the requirements for financial institutions' anti-money laundering and
countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) programs. This
forthcoming NPRM will supersede the proposed rule on AML/CFT programs
that FinCEN issued in July 2024, which FinCEN does not intend to
finalize.
Section 6314. Updating Whistleblower Incentives and Protection.
FinCEN issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on April 1,
2026, to establish a whistleblower award program for eligible
individuals who provide information regarding certain violations of the
BSA and certain national security laws, including U.S. economic
sanctions laws. The proposed regulations would implement section 6314
of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (the AML Act), which amends
the whistleblower provisions of the BSA found at 31 U.S.C. 5323, as
well as the Anti-Money Laundering Whistleblower Improvement Act, which
further amended 31 U.S.C. 5323 by establishing a revolving fund (the
Financial Integrity Fund) from which awards can be paid without the
need for further appropriations. Public comments on the NPRM are due by
June 1, 2026.
Customer Identification Programs for Registered Investment
Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers
FinCEN intends to reissue a joint NPRM with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, implementing Section 326 of the Uniting and
Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to
Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act) with
regard to customer identification program (CIP) requirements for
certain investment advisers. This proposal would replace the previous
IA CIP NPRM that FinCEN published on May 21, 2024. Specifically, as in
the originally proposed rule, FinCEN would require an RIA and an ERA to
establish a CIP as part of an AML/CFT program. RIAs and ERAs would be
required to implement reasonable procedures to identify and verify the
identity of their customers, among other requirements, in order to form
a reasonable belief that RIAs and ERAs know the true identity of their
customers. FinCEN anticipates, however, that in the reissued proposed
rule these requirements would be more effectively tailored to the
diverse business models and risk profiles of types of firms within the
investment adviser sector than in the originally proposed rule.
Imposition of Special Measure Regarding Transactions
Involving Ten Mexican Gambling Establishments as a Class of
Transactions of Primary Money Laundering Concern
FinCEN intends to issue a final rule, pursuant to section 311 of
the USA PATRIOT Act, that finds transactions involving ten identified
Mexico-based gambling establishments to be a class of transactions of
primary money laundering concern, and imposes a special measure to: (1)
prohibit U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a
correspondent account for any foreign banking institution if such
account is used to process transactions involving any of the gambling
establishments, and (2) require U.S. financial institutions to apply
special due diligence to their correspondent accounts that is
reasonably designed to guard against the use of such accounts to
process transactions involving any of the gambling establishments.
Revisions to Customer Due Diligence Requirements for
Financial Institutions.
FinCEN intends to issue an NPRM titled ``Revisions to Customer Due
Diligence Requirements for Financial Institutions,'' relating to
Section 6403(d) of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). Section
6403(d) of the CTA requires FinCEN to revise its customer due diligence
requirements for financial institutions to account for the changes
created by the beneficial ownership information reporting and access
requirements set out in the CTA.
Amendments to the Regulations on Reports of Foreign Bank
and Financial Accounts
FinCEN intends to issue an NPRM to amend the regulations
implementing the BSA regarding reports of foreign bank and financial
accounts (FBAR). The proposed rule will relieve burden on certain
individuals from FBAR filing requirements. Among other deregulatory
objectives, the proposed rule would codify into regulation temporary
exceptive relief provided to individuals with signature authority over,
but no financial interest in, certain types of reportable accounts.
Other Requirements.
FinCEN also will continue to issue rulemaking actions pursuant to
section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, as appropriate. Finally, FinCEN
expects that it may propose or finalize various technical and other
regulatory
[[Page 52899]]
amendments in conjunction with ongoing efforts to implement beneficial
ownership information reporting requirements and modernize BSA
reporting thresholds and processes required by sections 6204 and 6205
of the AML Act, including the comprehensive review of existing
regulations to enhance regulatory efficiency required by section 6216
of the AML Act.
BUREAU OF THE FISCAL SERVICE
The Bureau of the Fiscal Service (Fiscal Service) administers
regulations pertaining to the Government's financial activities,
including: (1) implementing Treasury's borrowing authority, including
regulating the sale and issue of Treasury securities; (2) administering
Government revenue and debt collection; (3) administering government-
wide accounting programs; (4) managing certain Federal investments; (5)
disbursing the majority of Government electronic and check payments;
(6) assisting Federal agencies in reducing the number of improper
payments; and (7) providing administrative and operational support to
Federal agencies through franchise shared services.
During fiscal year 2026, Fiscal Service will accord priority to the
following regulatory projects:
Public Dissemination of the Identity of a Delinquent
Debtor
Fiscal Service is proposing to amend 31 CFR part 285 to establish
minimum required procedures for Federal agencies to follow prior to
publicly disseminating information regarding the identity of delinquent
debtors and the standards for determining when use of this debt
collection tool is appropriate.
Re-Write of DCIA Offset Regulations in 31 CFR part 285
Subpart A
Fiscal Service is proposing to amend 31 CFR part 285 Subpart A.
These regulations govern how Fiscal Service administers the offset of
federal and state payments to collect federal and state debt through
the Treasury Offset Program. Fiscal Service proposes to revise the
existing TOP regulations for several reasons, including to: (1) restore
statutory flexibility that was unnecessarily restricted; (2) implement
new authorities; (3) eliminate repetitive and unnecessary language; (4)
reword certain provisions for clarity, consistent with the requirements
of the Plain Writing Act of 2010 and Executive Order 12866 (Sept.
1993); and (5) better organize the regulations for easier
comprehension.
Revision of the Federal Claims Collection Standards
Fiscal Service is proposing to amend the Federal Claims Collections
Standards (FCCS), codified in 31 CFR parts 900-904, which is jointly
administered by Treasury and the Department of Justice. The FCCS set
standards for administrative collection, compromise, and suspension or
termination of collection activity for federal nontax debts. They also
set standards for referring federal nontax debts to DOJ for litigation.
The proposed amendments, which have been jointly prepared by Treasury
and DOJ, include revisions to conform to developments since the last
publication of the regulations in 2000.
Amendment to Electronic Payment Regulation
Fiscal Service intends to propose to amend 31 CFR part 208,
Management of Federal Agency Disbursements, to implement Executive
Order 14247 (`Modernizing Payments To and From America's Bank
Account''). Among other things, Fiscal Service intends to propose to
revise the waivers that are available to individual federal payment
recipients and federal entities for the purpose of further limiting the
circumstances under which paper checks may be authorized and to advance
the United States's policy, as stated in the E.O., to defend against
financial fraud and improper payments, increase efficiency, reduce
costs, and enhance the security of Federal payments.
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), working with Treasury's Office
of Tax Policy, promulgates regulations that interpret and implement the
Internal Revenue Code (Code), and other internal revenue laws of the
United States. The purpose of these regulations is to carry out the tax
policy determined by Congress in a fair, impartial, and reasonable
manner, taking into account the intent of Congress, the realities of
relevant transactions, the need for the Government to administer the
rules and monitor compliance, and the overall integrity of the Federal
tax system. The goal is to make the regulations practical and as clear
and simple as possible, which reduces the burdens on taxpayers and the
IRS.
During fiscal year 2026, a priority of the IRS and the Office of
Tax Policy is to provide guidance, including proposed and final rules
in certain cases, regarding implementation of Public Law 119-21, known
as the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act. A number of provisions in Public
Law 119-21 are effective immediately or effective at the beginning of
2025, such as ``No Tax on Tips'' and ``No Tax on Car Loan Interest,''
so timely implementing guidance is necessary for taxpayers and for the
IRS. The IRS and Office of Tax Policy also have identified deregulatory
actions in response to Executive Order 14219 and are working diligently
to undertake these actions. Finally, the IRS and Office of Tax Policy
will focus on other key areas, including guidance addressing section
501(c)(3) issues, Tribal tax issues, digital assets, and the SECURE 2.0
Act of 2022 (SECURE 2.0 Act), enacted as Division T of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law 117-328.
Every year, Treasury and the IRS identify guidance projects that
are priorities for allocation of resources during the year in the
Priority Guidance Plan (PGP) (available on irs.gov and
regulations.gov). The plan represents projects that Treasury and the
IRS intend to actively work on during the plan year. See, for example,
the 2026-26 Priority Guidance Plan (Sept. 30, 2025). To facilitate and
encourage suggestions, Treasury and the IRS have developed an annual
process for soliciting public input for guidance projects. The annual
solicitation is done through the issuance of a notice inviting
recommendations from the public for items to be included on the PGP for
the upcoming plan year. See, for example, Notice 2025-19 (April 4,
2025). We also invite the public to provide us with their comments and
suggestions for guidance projects throughout the year.
DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES
The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S.
Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act (Pub. L. 119-27) tasks Treasury (and various
other federal agencies) with issuing regulations that encourage
innovation in payment stablecoins while also providing an appropriately
tailored regime to protect consumers, mitigate potential illicit
finance risks, and address financial stability risks. Implementation of
the GENIUS Act is a key priority of Treasury Departmental Offices in
Fiscal Year 2026. On September 19, 2025, Treasury issued an Advance
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (90 FR 45159) to seek public comment on
potential regulations that may be promulgated by Treasury, including
regarding regulatory clarity, prohibitions on certain issuances and
marketing, Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) anti-money laundering (AML) and
sanctions obligations, the balance of state-level oversight with
federal oversight, comparable foreign regulatory and supervisory
regimes, and tax issues, among other things. Treasury generally expects
to invite further public
[[Page 52900]]
comment on proposed regulations before adopting any final regulations.
BILLING CODE 4810-AK-P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Statement of Regulatory Priorities for Fiscal Year 2026
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administers services and
benefits that recognize the important Federal obligations to those who
served this nation. VA's regulatory responsibility is to faithfully
execute the mandates of the laws enacted by Congress relating to
programs for Veterans and their families. VA's major regulatory
objective is to implement these laws with fairness, justice,
efficiency, and fiscal responsibility.
Most of the regulations issued by VA relate to functions of the
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), the Veterans Health
Administration (VHA), and the National Cemetery Administration (NCA).
The primary mission of VBA is to provide high-quality and timely non-
medical benefits to eligible Veterans and their dependents. The primary
mission of VHA is to provide timely, high-quality health care to
eligible Veterans through its system of medical centers, nursing homes,
domiciliaries, outpatient medical and dental facilities, and through a
vast network of community providers. The primary mission of NCA is to
honor and bury eligible Veterans and their dependents in VA National
Cemeteries, maintaining these cemeteries as national shrines in
perpetuity and commemorating their service and sacrifice to our nation.
In addition to the primary missions for each VA component listed
above, VA's FY26 regulatory agenda emphasizes fiscal responsibility,
aligning with the deregulatory priorities in Executive Order (E.O.)
14219, and modernizing regulations to enhance VA's efficiency and
transparency. This agenda will prudently allocate resources while
appropriately providing benefits and services for our nation's
Veterans, spouses, survivors, dependents, and caregivers. Key policy
focuses include:
Fiscal Responsibility: Ensuring regulatory activities and
initiatives are cost-effective, provide the best value for Veterans and
taxpayers, and reduce the financial burden on Veterans.
Deregulation and E.O. 14219 Compliance: Reducing
regulatory burdens and eliminating unnecessary regulations to foster
innovation and streamline processes.
Program Integrity and Efficiency: Removing outdated or
duplicative regulations to improve efficiency, ensure optimal adherence
to statutory authority, and clarify VA's legal and administrative
processes.
Modernizing Regulations: Updating and refining VA's
regulations to reflect current best practices, enhance health care
services, advance technological integration, and meet the evolving
needs of Veterans.
In pursuit of the aforementioned goals, VA highlights the following
regulatory accomplishments during FY25:
Extension of Program of Comprehensive Assistance for
Family Caregivers Eligibility for Legacy Participants and Legacy
Applicants (2900-AR28). VA extended through September 2028 the
transition period for participants, applicants, and Family Caregivers
known as the ``legacy cohort.'' This action prevented termination of
this cohorts' eligibility to ensure that they continue to receive the
services, stipends, and other benefits that they have come to rely on.
Health Care Professionals Practicing Telehealth (2900-
AQ59). VA implemented the authorities of the VA MISSION Act of 2018 and
the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2021 to maximize health care resource utilization and
provide safe and convenient national health care to Veterans using
telehealth. The finalization of this national telehealth authority also
strengthens VA's role in supporting national and State responses to
war, terrorism, national emergencies, and natural disasters.
Reproductive Health Services (2900-AS31). VA proposed to
reverse an unnecessary and unwise 2022 revision to the medical benefits
package and reinstate the full exclusion of abortions and abortion
counseling, restoring VA's medical benefits package to where it had
been working effectively since it was first established in 1999. This
rule was finalized in FY26.
Priority Regulatory Actions
VA is committed to maintaining a regulatory framework that ensures
Veterans and their families timely receive all benefits, health care,
and burial services guaranteed to them under law. To achieve this, VA
continually reviews and updates its regulations, removing outdated
rules and enhancing the clarity and efficiency of existing programs.
This ongoing effort aligns with E.O. 14192, which guides agencies to
fine-tune their regulatory agendas to address contemporary needs,
ensure equity, and honor statutory and operational mandates. Among the
key directives of Executive Order 14192 is the call for agencies to
enact deregulatory measures where feasible, particularly focusing on
removing outdated, redundant, or unnecessarily onerous regulations.
In FY25, VA conducted a comprehensive review of its pending
rulemaking actions. Upon completing this review, VA identified a total
of 118 regulatory and deregulatory actions for inclusion in its FY26
agenda, an increase of 45 actions from the Spring 2025 agenda. The FY26
agenda includes pending actions from the FY25 agenda, previously
removed actions, and newly created measures, all aligned with the
current Administration's priorities, recent legislative changes, and
program-level needs. These actions span all stages, including proposed
rules, final rules, and long-term actions based on several criteria
such as whether notice and comment is required prioritization of those
with significant impacts on benefits delivery, deregulation, and those
with statutory or legal deadlines.
VBA. VBA is advancing several deregulatory initiatives designed to
streamline internal processes, eliminate obsolete programs, and clarify
existing policies. Efforts include removing outdated adjudication
regulations, eliminating redundant eligibility procedures, and refining
claims processing guidelines. Such initiatives, which are not all
listed in the priority regulations below, reflect the Administration's
commitment to regulatory efficiency and responsiveness by improving
benefits and insurance programs; enhancing access to legal, financial,
and education services; and updating disability claims regulations.
Concurrently, VBA is focused on targeted regulatory actions designed to
overcome ongoing obstacles to accessing benefits, to make program
requirements clearer, and to ensure that VBA policies are consistent
with legislative directives. These actions draw on operational
insights, feedback from stakeholders, and best practices learned over
time.
VHA. VHA is committed to maintaining a regulatory framework that
supports the delivery of high-quality, accessible, and equitable health
care to Veterans and is advancing several deregulatory actions that
streamline internal processes, rescind obsolete programs, and clarify
existing authorities. These include actions such as rescinding
regulations for discontinued grant programs, removing outdated
provisions from legacy programs, and clarifying VA's authority to
collect from third-party insurers. Such initiatives, which are not all
listed
[[Page 52901]]
in the priority regulations below, reflect the Department's broader
commitment to regulatory efficiency and responsiveness. At the same
time, VHA continues to pursue targeted regulatory actions that address
persistent barriers to health care, to clarify program requirements,
and to align VHA policy with statutory authority. These actions are
informed by operational experience, stakeholder input, and current
practice.
VA's regulatory priority plan consists of eight priority
regulations--five from VBA, two from VHA, and one from VA's Office of
Acquisition, Logistics and Construction (OALC).
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS--FDA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
105. REMOVING BARRIERS TO SERVICE CONNECTION BY UPDATING HYPERTENSION
NOTES
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1116; 2 U.S.C. 1532
CFR Citation: 38 CFR 4.104
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to
remove Note (1) under diagnostic code (DC) 7101 pertaining to
hypertensive vascular disease (hypertension and isolated systolic
hypertension). This proposed revision would ensure that VA's Schedule
for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) aligns with current medical
understanding of hypertension and remove an unintended barrier to
service connection, facilitating appropriate awards of service
connection for our nation's veterans.
Statement of Need: Similar to 2900-AQ72, 2900-AQ73, and 2900-AQ82,
this proposed rule will update the VASRD to incorporate medical
advancements that have occurred since the last revision, update current
medical terminology, and provide clear evaluation criteria for
hypertensive vascular disease (hypertension and isolated systolic
hypertension).
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 1155. VA will revise 38 CFR 4.104
and Diagnostic Code (DC) 7101, which sets forth the criteria for
hypertension.
Alternatives: VA cannot update the VASRD through non-regulatory
action. VA could choose to leave the VASRD criteria as is, but failure
to update the notes under DC 7101 would leave outdated medical
standards for hypertension in place. One of VA's main objectives for
the VASRD is to ensure it accurately reflects medical advancements and
improved technology. Since VA cannot accomplish this goal through non-
regulatory action, failure to pursue a regulatory update does not align
to VA's objectives. VA also considered replacing the definition of
hypertension in DC 7101 with the currently accepted definition from the
American Heart Association (AHA). While this approach would satisfy
VA's goal of ensuring the criteria aligns to current medical standards,
it would require VA to continuously update DC 7101 following any
updates to AHA's definition of hypertension, which could lead to
confusion. Since there is no regulatory need for VA to maintain a
hypertension definition within the VASRD, complete removal is the most
effective approach to ensure accurate claims processing.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The total budgetary impact is
estimated to be $348.8 million over five years and $357.5 million over
10 years.
Risks: By processing claims for compensation benefits using
outdated criteria, VA risks overcompensating or undercompensating
Veterans for these service-connected conditions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Michael Zybarth, Assistant Director, VASRD--
Compensation Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
20420
Phone: 602 627-2999
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AS24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
106. EXPANDING OPTIONS FOR VETERANS TO AVOID HOME FORECLOSURES
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3720; 38 U.S.C. 3732; 38 U.S.C. 3737
CFR Citation: 38 CFR part 36
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend
its regulations to ensure servicers provide veterans with appropriate
options, including a partial claim, in an effort to avoid foreclosure
of a VA-guaranteed loan. This proposed rule implements the Veterans
Home Loan Program Reform Act (the Act), including prescribing a
mandatory sequence of loss mitigation options for servicers and
establishing a temporary, five-year partial claim program.
Statement of Need: With this rulemaking, VA will propose its
implementation of the provisions of the VA Home Loan Program Reform Act
(Pub. L. 119-31), which mandates action in cases of home loan defaults
under the VA Home Loan Program. The proposed rule would provide the
Secretary with the authority to avert foreclosures and introduce a
partial claim program, thereby supporting Veterans in maintaining home
ownership and financial stability.
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 3720, 3732. VA would add new
regulations to 38 CFR part 36.
Alternatives: VA considered several alternatives, including
maintaining the status quo or enhancing current loan modification
programs without introducing partial claims. However, the partial claim
program was selected as the best approach because it provides a more
flexible and effective method to reducing the burden on Veterans facing
imminent default on their home loan.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs are still being determined.
This rulemaking will bring the VA Home Loan Program into alignment with
the requirements of Public Law 119-31.
Risks: This proposed rule would establish regulations to ensure
that the Secretary can implement loss mitigation procedures, including
partial claims, to prevent foreclosures. Establishing a partial claims
process would preserve freedom of choice and allow Veterans to access
tailored financial assistance to avoid foreclosure, thus reducing long-
term risks and costs associated with defaults.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Andrew Trevayne, Assistant Director--Loan Guaranty
Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC 20420
Phone: 202 632-8795
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AS78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52902]]
107. SCHEDULE FOR RATING DISABILITIES: EAR, NOSE, THROAT, AND AUDIOLOGY
DISABILITIES; SPECIAL PROVISIONS REGARDING EVALUATION OF RESPIRATORY
CONDITIONS; SCHEDULE FOR RATING DISABILITIES: RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a); 38 U.S.C. 1155
CFR Citation: 38 CFR 4.85; 38 CFR 4.87; 38 CFR 4.96; 38 CFR 4.97
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) amends its
regulations to revise the sections that address the ear, nose, throat,
audiology, and respiratory systems and adds a diagnostic code for
constrictive bronchiolitis (or obliterative bronchiolitis) to the
regulations that govern the respiratory system. The purpose of these
changes is to update medical terminology, incorporate medical advances
that have occurred since the last review, and provide well-defined
criteria in accordance with actual clinical practice.
Statement of Need: The VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD)
has not undergone a complete revision since 1945 and contains certain
outdated, inaccurate, or obsolete medical, scientific, and/or economic
information. With this final rule, VA will incorporate medical
advancements that have occurred since the last revision, update current
medical terminology, and provide clear evaluation criteria for
disabilities of the ear, nose, and throat (ENT), audiology, and
respiratory systems.
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 1155. VA will revise the
regulations in 38 CFR parts 3 and 4 that address ENT, audiology, and
respiratory systems.
Alternatives: VA cannot update the VASRD through non-regulatory
action. VA could choose to leave the VASRD criteria as is, but failure
to update the criteria would result in continued application of
outdated medical, scientific, and economic data in the evaluation of
disabilities. Applying outdated criteria could render disability
evaluations inadequate, inaccurate, and, in some cases, in conflict
with current medical and economic understanding of disability. This
would result in inadequate assessment of disabilities and lead to
reduced efficiency in claims processing and delivery of benefits, as VA
could not rely on modern medical records (when available) to quickly
assess impairment.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The total budgetary impact is
estimated to be a savings of $6.6 billion over five years and $25.5
billion over 10 years. This final rule will allow for more accurate and
adequate disability evaluations.
Risks: By processing claims for disability compensation benefits
using outdated criteria, VA risks overcompensating or undercompensating
Veterans for these service-connected conditions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/15/22 87 FR 8474
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/18/22 .......................
Supplemental NPRM................... 09/12/24 89 FR 74162
Supplemental NPRM Comment Period End 10/15/24 .......................
Final Action........................ 04/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Dr. Gary Reynolds, Medical Officer, VASRD--
Compensation Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
20420
Phone: 202 461-9700
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AQ72
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
108. SCHEDULE FOR RATING DISABILITIES: NEUROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND
CONVULSIVE DISORDERS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Fully or Partially Exempt
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a); 38 U.S.C. 1155
CFR Citation: 38 CFR 4.120; 38 CFR 4.123; 38 CFR 4.124
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) amends the
portion of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities that addresses
neurological conditions and convulsive disorders. These amendments will
incorporate medical advancements that have occurred since the last
revision, update current medical terminology, and provide clear
evaluation criteria.
Statement of Need: Similar to 2900-AQ72, this final rule will
update the VASRD to incorporate medical advancements that have occurred
since the last revision, update current medical terminology, and
provide clear evaluation criteria for neurological conditions and
convulsive disorders.
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 1155. VA will revise 38 CFR 4.120
through 4.124a that address neurological conditions and convulsive
disorders.
Alternatives: VA cannot update the VASRD through non-regulatory
action. VA could choose to leave the VASRD criteria as is, but failure
to update the criteria would result in continued application of
outdated medical, scientific, and economic data in the evaluation of
disabilities. Applying outdated criteria could render disability
evaluations inadequate, inaccurate, and, in some cases, in conflict
with current medical and economic understanding of disability. This
would result in inadequate assessment of disabilities and lead to
reduced efficiency in claims processing and delivery of benefits, as VA
could not rely on modern medical records (when available) to quickly
assess impairment due to a neurological condition or convulsive
disorder. Alternatively, VA could only update the portions of the
neurological rating criteria that are most out of date, but this
piecemeal approach could lead to the same problems as outlined above
for the criteria that would not be updated. This approach would fail to
maximize efficiency in claims processing and delivery of benefits.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The total budgetary impact is
estimated to be a savings of $838 million over five years and $3.3
billion over 10 years.
Risks: By processing claims for compensation benefits using
outdated criteria, VA risks overcompensating or undercompensating
Veterans for these service-connected conditions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/12/24 89 FR 88917
NPRM Comment Period End............. 01/13/25 .......................
Final Action........................ 04/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Dr. Gary Reynolds, Medical Officer, VASRD--
Compensation Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
20420
Phone: 202 461-9700
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AQ73
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52903]]
109. SCHEDULE FOR RATING DISABILITIES: MENTAL DISORDERS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a); 38 U.S.C. 1155
CFR Citation: 38 CFR 4.130
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) amends the
portion of the rating schedule pertaining to mental disorders,
including revising the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders and
removing the separate General Rating Formula for Eating Disorders in
the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities. This final rule reflects
changes made by the American Psychological Association's Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM-5) advances in medical
knowledge, and recommendations from VA's Mental Disorders Work Group.
Statement of Need: Similar to 2900-AQ72 and 2900-AQ73, this final
rule will update the VASRD to incorporate medical advancements that
have occurred since the last revision, update current medical
terminology, and provide clear evaluation criteria for mental
disorders.
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 1155. VA will revise 38 CFR 4.126
and 4.130, which pertain to mental disorders.
Alternatives: VA cannot update the VASRD through non-regulatory
action.
VA could choose to leave the VASRD criteria as is, but failure to
update the criteria would result in continued application of outdated
medical, scientific, and economic data in the evaluation of
disabilities. The current criteria for mental disorders was adopted in
1996 based on the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual (DSM-IV), but the DSM-5 was published in 2013 and updated
evaluation criteria. Continuing to evaluate mental disorders using
criteria based on the now outdated DSM-IV could be inadequate and in
conflict with current scientific knowledge, medical practice, and the
economic understanding of disability. By implementing new evaluation
criteria that more accurately reflect functional impairment caused by
mental disorders, VA will conform with current medical standards and
provide more adequate compensation for the earnings losses experienced
by Veterans with service-connected mental disorders.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The total budgetary impact is
estimated to be $24.5 billion over five years and $62.1 billion over 10
years.
Risks: By processing claims for compensation benefits using
outdated criteria, VA risks overcompensating or undercompensating
Veterans for these service-connected conditions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/15/22 87 FR 8498
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/18/22 .......................
Final Action........................ 08/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Michael Zybarth, Assistant Director, VASRD--
Compensation Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
20420
Phone: 602 627-2999
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AQ82
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
110. AMENDMENTS TO THE PROGRAM OF COMPREHENSIVE ASSISTANCE FOR FAMILY
CAREGIVERS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1720G
CFR Citation: 38 CFR part 17
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) adopts as final,
with revisions, proposed regulations governing VA's Program of
Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC). Among other
efficiencies and improvements, these revisions will enhance program
administration, enable more consistent benefits delivery, and broaden
eligibility requirements.
Statement of Need: This final rule will respond to comments and
make changes to the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family
Caregivers (PCAFC) and Program of General Caregiver Support Services
(PGCSS) to improve program operations, update eligibility criteria, and
ensure appropriate access to the programs for eligible Veterans,
servicemembers, and their caregivers. These changes will further align
PCAFC regulations with the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit in Veteran Warriors, Inc. v. Sec'y of Veterans
Affairs, 29 F.4th 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2022), which set aside VA's
definition of need for supervision, protection, and instruction.
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 1720G. VA will update its
regulations in 38 CFR part 71, which governs PCAFC.
Alternatives: VA determined that there are no acceptable policy
alternatives to implement the desired changes, particularly in light of
the Court's determination in Veteran Warriors.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs are still being determined and
will need to consider any changes made based on considerable comments
received on the proposed rule.
Risks: Delayed access to PCAFC benefits for eligible Veterans and
their Family Caregivers, and decisions that do not align with legal
mandates.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/06/24 89 FR 97404
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/04/25 .......................
Final Action........................ 11/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Colleen Richardson, Executive Director--Caregiver
Support Program, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC 20420
Phone: 202 461-7337
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AR96
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
111. TELEHEALTH GRANT PROGRAM
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Not subject to, not significant
Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 2011; 42 U.S.C. 254b(b)(3)
CFR Citation: 38 CFR 17.108; 38 CFR 62.2; 38 CFR 79.5
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its
regulations to implement a statutory authority establishing a
telehealth grant program. Under this authority, VA will enter into new
agreements, and expand existing ones, to enhance telehealth
capabilities and provide telehealth services through the establishment
of telehealth access points in rural, highly rural, or medically
underserved areas. This rule also amends the copayment regulation by
expanding the copayment exemption for certain telehealth encounters to
include all telehealth encounters. These changes will increase veteran
access to health care particularly in rural and medically underserved
areas.
Statement of Need: Veterans in rural and underserved areas face
persistent
[[Page 52904]]
barriers to care, including limited broadband, long travel distances,
and health care provider shortages. This final rule will establish a
grant program pursuant to Section 701 of the Commander John Scott
Hannon Veterans Mental Health Care Improvement Act of 2019 to fund
telehealth access points.
Summary of Legal Basis: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1710, 1720, 1722B; Pub. L.
116-171. This final rule will add regulations governing the grant
program in new 38 CFR part 84.
Alternatives: VA considered expanding mobile clinics or increasing
travel reimbursements, but these options were less scalable and more
costly.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Estimated cost is $43.4 million over
five years, including $4.6 million in administrative costs and $38.8
million in transfers. Benefits include improved access, reduced travel
costs, and enhanced Veteran satisfaction. VA anticipates $779,000 in
travel savings and a loss of $7.9 million in copayment revenue, which
would be offset by broader system efficiencies.
Risks: The main risk is underutilization of telehealth access
points, which will be mitigated by targeting high-need areas and
integrating oversight through VA's Office of Connected Care. Increases
on demand are expected to be minimal and manageable.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/13/24 89 FR 89519
NPRM Comment Period End............. 01/13/25 .......................
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Dr. Leonie Heyworth, Deputy Director for Clinical
Services--Office of Connected Care, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Washington, DC 20420
Phone: 202 461-6525
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AS20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112. IMPLEMENTING REGULATION FOR NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
(NEPA): ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
ACTIONS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4332(B)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14219
CFR Citation: 38 CFR part 26
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its
regulations for implementing the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Since VA last updated its NEPA
regulations in 1989, the Council on Environmental Quality removed its
NEPA regulations that applied to all agencies, the Fiscal
Responsibility Act of 2023 revised the NEPA statute, and significant
changes have occurred within the Department. The revisions to VA's NEPA
regulations provide a new, comprehensive approach aligning the NEPA
process with decision-making across VA by more clearly focusing the
NEPA process and analyses on the planning stages of VA actions,
improving consistency in NEPA implementation throughout VA, improving
the efficiency and quality of VA's NEPA process, updating the VA
categorical exclusion list to reflect current VA activities, and
ensuring compliance with the NEPA statute.
Statement of Need: With this interim final rule, VA will amend its
regulations that implement the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as mandated by E.O. 15154.
Summary of Legal Basis: E.O. 15154; 24 U.S.C. 401, et seq. ; 38
U.S.C. 501. VA will revise 38 CFR part 26, which provides guidance on
the application of the NEPA process to VA activities.
Alternatives: No alternatives were considered as this action is
mandated by E.O. 15154 and the changes must be codified in regulation.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: VA expects minor cost savings that
cannot be quantified. VA does not have specific data to assess the
economic impact of this interim final rule because such data do not
exist and would be difficult to develop. This rulemaking will bring VA
into alignment with the requirements of E.O. 15154.
Risks: Failure to comply with the requirements of E.O. 15154.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 06/15/26 91 FR 36044
Interim Final Rule Effective........ 06/15/26 .......................
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 07/15/26 .......................
End.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Glenn Elliott, Director--Construction and
Facilities Management, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC
20420
Phone: 202 632-5879
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2900-AS33
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
Environmental Protection Agency
Statement of Priorities
Overview
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers the laws
enacted by Congress and signed by the President to protect human health
and the environment. Under the leadership of President Donald J. Trump
and Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA is implementing its statutory
mandates and simultaneously Powering the Great American Comeback. The
Powering the Great American Comeback initiative balances environmental
protection with economic growth to energize the American economy while
protecting all Americans from risks to human health and the environment
where they live, learn and work. Administrator Zeldin has identified
and established five pillars to achieve this initiative, and EPA's 2026
Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions focuses on carrying out
these five pillars.
Pillar 1: Clean Air, Land, and Water for Every American
Every American should have access to clean air, land, and water.
EPA will continue to fulfill its mission to protect human health and
the environment by building upon the progress made in President Trump's
first administration when EPA advanced conservation, reduced toxic
emissions in the air and water, and cleaned up hazardous land sites
while fostering economic growth for families nationwide.
Pillar 2: Restore American Energy Dominance
Pursuing energy independence and dominance is paramount to ceasing
our nation's reliance on energy sources from adversaries. Importantly,
energy independence lowers fuel costs for hardworking American
families, farmers, and small businesses while producing and developing
the cleanest energy on the planet. To further this goal, the EPA
Administrator has already announced targeted efforts to bolster
American energy dominance and provide affordable energy to American
families. Throughout 2026, EPA will expand on these efforts to continue
to meet the nation's growing electric demand.
[[Page 52905]]
Pillar 3: Permitting Reform, Cooperative Federalism, and Cross-Agency
Partnership
Building upon successes in the President Trump's previous term, EPA
will strengthen relationships with its partners at State and Federal
levels to ensure critical infrastructure, mineral, manufacturing,
pharmaceutical, and energy projects are quickly approved. Streamlining
permitting processes while partnering with businesses to follow the
necessary statutory requirements is essential to boosting industrial
competitiveness. Through the actions in this regulatory agenda, EPA
will continue to cooperate with our State, Tribal, and local
counterparts to promote cooperative federalism, protect ecosystem
diversity and economic productivity.
Pillar 4: Make the United States the Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Capital of the World
The United States continues to advance as an AI leader. EPA will
bolster this advancement by ensuring data centers and related
facilities necessary for the AI revolution can be powered and operated
with American-made energy by removing barriers to energy development,
production, and delivery. EPA plans to further support AI development
by encouraging responsible, streamlined permitting for these critical
projects that are essential to our nation's security.
Pillar 5: Protecting and Bringing Back American Auto Jobs
EPA is adding to efforts to bring back American auto jobs and
invest in domestic manufacturing to revitalize the American auto
industry. EPA is developing smart, durable regulations that will
support the American auto industry while providing protection to our
air, water, and land. In the coming year, the EPA will use statutory
authorities delegated to it by Congress to deliver smart and effective
regulations that will allow for American workers to lead a great
comeback of the auto industry.
Highlights of EPA'S 2026 Regulatory Plan
EPA's nearly fifty-five years of protecting human health and the
environment demonstrates our nation's commitment to reducing pollution
that can threaten the air we breathe, the water we use, and the
communities we live in. This Regulatory Plan contains information on
some of EPA's most important upcoming regulatory and deregulatory
actions, including the actions aimed at unleashing American energy
dominance, lowering the cost of living for American families, and
advancing cooperative federalism. As always, the EPA's Agenda of
Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions contains information on a broader
spectrum of the EPA's upcoming actions, but we highlight priority
actions here that are consistent with the EPA's primary statutory
requirements.
Improving Air Quality
As part of its mission to protect human health and the environment,
the EPA is dedicated to improving the quality of the nation's air.
EPA's work to control emissions of air pollutants is critical to
continued progress in reducing public health risks and improving the
quality of the environment. The Agency will continue to deploy existing
regulatory tools where statutorily mandated, appropriate, and
warranted. Using the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA will work with States
and tribes to accurately measure air quality and ensure that more
Americans are living and working in areas that meet air quality
standards. The EPA will continue to develop standards, as directed by
the CAA, for both mobile and stationary sources, to reduce emissions of
sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, toxics, and other
pollutants.
Reconsideration of Criteria Pollutant Standards for Light-Duty and
Medium-Duty Vehicles
Consistent with Administrator Zeldin's March 12, 2025, announcement
of 31 deregulatory actions to Power the Great American Comeback, the
EPA will initiate a rulemaking to reconsider the criteria pollutants
standards established in the April 2024 multi-pollutant standards rule
for Model Years 2027 and later for light-duty and medium-duty vehicles.
Amendments to the Model Year 2027 and Later Heavy-Duty Highway Engine
Criteria Pollutant Program
EPA also will initiate a rulemaking to reevaluate the criteria
pollutant standards established in the January 2023 final rule titled
Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and
Vehicle Standards.
Carbon Pollution Standards Repeal
In April 2024, the EPA issued the Carbon Pollution Standards (CPS),
which limited greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing fossil
fuel-fired power plants, under Clean Air Act section 111. The CPS
directed states to set standards of performance for existing fossil
fuel-fired steam generating power plants and further tightened New
Source Performance Standards that were first issued in 2015. Consistent
with Executive Order 14154, ``Unleashing American Energy''; Executive
Order 14241, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's `Department of Government Efficiency' Deregulatory
Initiative''; and Executive Order 14261, ``Reinvigorating America's
Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241,'' the
EPA is revisiting these standards. On June 11, 2025, the EPA proposed
to repeal greenhouse gas emissions standards for fossil fuel-fired
power plants promulgated under Clean Air Act section 111.
Revision to ``Begin Actual Construction'' in the New Source Review
Preconstruction Permitting Program
The EPA is proposing revisions to its New Source Review (NSR)
preconstruction permitting regulations to clarify which on-site
construction activities an owner or operator may lawfully undertake
before obtaining an NSR preconstruction air permit. These changes aim
to provide greater flexibility and clarity on which construction
activities owners and operators can engage in prior to obtaining an NSR
permit, while still protecting public health and welfare through the
NSR preconstruction permitting requirements. The revisions will be
applicable to new major stationary sources and major modifications at
existing major stationary sources of air pollution subject to the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program or the
Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) program.
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Reconsideration
The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) requires reporting of
greenhouse gas (GHG) data and other relevant information from certain
large GHG emission sources, fuel and industrial gas suppliers, and CO2
injection sites in the U.S. A total of 47 industrial sectors are
required to report under the GHGRP, including more than 8,000
facilities. On September 12, 2025, the EPA proposed a rule to remove
the obligations of the GHGRP for most source categories, including the
distribution segment of the petroleum and natural gas systems source
category (Subpart W). The EPA also proposed to suspend reporting
obligations for the remaining subpart W segments until 2034.
[[Page 52906]]
Providing Clean and Safe Water for Every American
The Nation's water resources are the lifeblood of our communities,
supporting our health, economy, and way of life. Clean and safe water
is a vital resource that is essential to the protection of human
health. The EPA is committed to ensuring clean and safe water for all.
Since the enactment of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA), the EPA and its State, local and Tribal partners have
made significant progress toward improving the quality of our waters
and ensuring a safe drinking water supply. Along with the full set of
water actions listed in the regulatory agenda, the regulatory
initiatives highlighted below will help ensure that this important
progress continues.
Updated Definition of ``Waters of the United States''
The EPA and the Department of the Army are undertaking a rulemaking
to revise key topics of the ``waters of the United States'' definition
following the Supreme Court's decision in Sackett v. Environmental
Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), including ``continuous surface
connection,'' ``relatively permanent,'' and jurisdictional versus non-
jurisdictional ditches. These revisions focus on clarity, simplicity,
and improvements that will stand the test of time. This action will
streamline implementation of Clean Water Act programs by aligning the
definition of waters of the United States with Sackett, which
significantly narrowed the definition under the Clean Water Act.
Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guideline Reconsideration Rule
To avert unwarranted power plant retirement decisions and maintain
abundant and affordable electricity supply in a time of rising demand,
the EPA is also considering revising some of the existing requirements
in the effluent limitation guidelines and standards for the Steam
Electric Generating Point Source Category promulgated in 2024. The EPA
intends that this rulemaking would potentially revise the limitations
in the subcategory for discharges of unmanaged combustion residual
leachate. The rulemaking may also seek to revise the technology basis
for the 2024 rule's zero-discharge limitations and standards, as well
as re-evaluate existing compliance pathways. This rule will streamline
implementation by setting a national-level best available technology
economically achievable, ensuring fair and transparent competition
across the country.
Clean Water Act Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for PFAS
Manufacturers Under the Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic
Fibers Point Source Category
As announced in the Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 15, the EPA is
revising the existing Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards to address per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances discharges from facilities manufacturing
PFAS. This rule will streamline implementation by setting a national-
level best available technology economically achievable, ensuring fair
and transparent competition across the country.
Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification Improvement
Rule
The EPA is undertaking a rulemaking to clarify implementation
challenges and regulatory uncertainty associated with the 2023 Rule,
including the scope of certification. This action will streamline
implementation of Section 401 by increasing transparency, efficiency,
and predictability for co-regulators and the regulated community.
Rescission of Regulatory Determinations and Removal of Related
Provisions for Four PFAS Substances (PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA (GenX), and
the Mixture of These Three PFAS Plus PFBS)
The EPA intends to propose to rescind its regulatory determinations
to regulate four per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA),
hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid and its ammonium salt (HFPO-DA,
commonly known as GenX), and the mixture of these three PFAS plus
perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) under the SDWA. The EPA also
intends to propose to rescind all associated regulatory provisions
associated with the Final PFAS NPDWR currently codified in 40 CFR part
141 and 142 exclusive to these PFAS that were promulgated pursuant to
the regulatory determinations that the EPA is now proposing to rescind.
If finalized, this action would streamline the 2024 PFAS National
Primary Drinking Water Regulation by removing implementation complexity
and would ensure that the determinations and any resulting drinking
water regulation correctly follow the legal process laid out in the
SDWA.
Revitalizing Land and Preventing Contamination for Every American
The EPA works to improve the health and livelihood of all Americans
by cleaning up and returning land to productive use, preventing
contamination, and responding to emergencies. The EPA collaborates with
other Federal agencies, industry, States, Tribes, and local communities
to enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods. The
EPA recognizes the progress made in cleaning up and returning land to
productive use, preventing contamination, and responding to
emergencies, and works to incorporate new technologies and approaches
that allow EPA to more efficiently and effectively provide for an
environmentally sustainable future.
Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs
Under the Clean Air Act: Common Sense Approach to Chemical Accident
Prevention
EPA is undertaking a rulemaking to amend the existing Risk
Management Program (RMP) regulations by making several proposed changes
to the 2024 Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention (SCCAP)
rule. The proposed amendments seek to improve chemical process safety
by avoiding duplicative requirements, realigning RMP requirements with
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Process Safety
Management (PSM) requirements, and eliminating unnecessary burdens
placed on facilities where there is not specific data available to show
that the current RMP standards would reduce or have reduced the number
of accidental releases. The EPA is proposing to revise the current RMP
regulations to address the administrations priorities in Executive
Order 14154 ``Unleashing American Energy'' and Executive Order 14148
``Initial Recission of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions'' by
streamlining implementation and focusing on avoiding duplicative
requirements, reducing unnecessary burden, and establishing regulatory
consistency.
Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal
Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities: Legacy/CCRMU Amendments
EPA is proposing revisions to requirements finalized under the 2024
Legacy Coal Combustion Residual (CCR) Surface Impoundments and CCR
Management Units Rule, which impacted active CCR facilities and
inactive CCR facilities with legacy CCR surface impoundments. This
proposed rule is seeking to address needed corrections in the 2024 Rule
and is considering additional methods of
[[Page 52907]]
closure, alternative groundwater monitoring compliance points, and
other responsible changes to the Federal CCR rules.
Ensuring Safety of Chemicals for People and the Environment
EPA is responsible for ensuring the safety of chemicals and
pesticides to protect human health and the environment. EPA gathers and
assesses information about the risks associated with chemicals and
pesticides and acts to appropriately address risks consistent with
statutory obligations under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA),
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
Among its duties under these statutes, EPA works to address the
unreasonable risk of existing chemical substances under TSCA. Upon
determining that an existing chemical presents unreasonable risks of
injury to health or the environment under its conditions of use, the
Agency must initiate an action to apply, by rule, requirements under
TSCA to the extent necessary to eliminate the unreasonable risks. EPA
may consider a range of risk management options under TSCA, including
labeling, recordkeeping or notice requirements, actions to reduce human
exposures or environmental releases, or a ban of the chemical or of
certain uses of the chemical.
Updating Procedures for Evaluating the Risks Existing Chemical
Substances Under TSCA To Increase Efficiency and Follow the Law
EPA promulgated changes to the procedures for chemical risk
evaluations under section 6(b) of TSCA in May 2024. The Agency recently
completed a review of the 2024 final rule and related public comments
and concerns, including those from other Federal agencies, and
initiated further rulemaking to reexamine multiple aspects of this rule
for consistency with the law and Administration policy. On September
23, 2025, EPA published a proposed rule, Procedures for Chemical Risk
Evaluation Under TSCA, to reflect its proposed path forward to ensure a
timely review of chemicals while bolstering its commitment to safeguard
public health and the environment. This path forward must ensure the
Agency can efficiently and effectively protect human health and the
environment and follow the law while, among other things, preserving
the Agency's discretion under TSCA to determine: the conditions of use
and exposure routes and pathways to be considered in a risk evaluation;
how it will take occupational exposure controls into account when
conducting risk evaluations and making risk determinations; and, the
basis upon which it will issue risk determinations.
Addressing the Unreasonable Risks of Existing Chemical Substances Under
TSCA
EPA plans to promulgate several final risk management regulations
and to seek public comment on proposed rules to address the
unreasonable risks of formaldehyde and the legacy uses and associated
disposal of Asbestos. In addition, EPA has initiated rulemaking efforts
to address implementation concerns arising after the promulgation of
final rules under TSCA section 6(a) concerning trichlorethylene (TCE),
perchloroethylene (PCE) and carbon tetrachloride (CTC).
Improving Data Collection Efforts to Inform EPA's Understanding of
Environmental and Human Health Impacts of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances (PFAS) and Combat PFAS Contamination
The Agency is reconsidering PFAS data collection efforts under TSCA
section 8(a)(7) to collect necessary information, as Congress
envisioned and consistent with TSCA, without overburdening small
businesses and article importers. The Agency has identified several
aspects of the TSCA section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting regulation published
October 11, 2023, for potential revision to conform to the mandates of
TSCA section 8(a)(5).
Compliance With Executive Order 14192
Section 3 of Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation, requires that for every promulgated new regulation,
agencies ``shall identify at least 10 existing regulations to be
repealed'' and ``to ensure that the total incremental cost of all new
regulations. . .being finalized this year shall be significantly less
than zero. . . .'' Each action in the EPA's Fall 2025 Regulatory Plan
and Semiannual Regulatory Agenda contains information about whether an
action is anticipated to be ``regulatory'' or ``deregulatory'' in
fulfilling this executive order EPA will continue to evaluate all its
activities to ensure adherence to statutory requirements while
balancing the need to comply with Executive Orders, such as 14192.
Rules Expected To Affect Small Entities
By better coordinating small business activities, the EPA aims to
improve its technical assistance and outreach efforts, minimize burdens
to small businesses in its regulations, and simplify small businesses'
participation in its voluntary programs. Actions that may affect small
entities can be tracked on the EPA's Regulatory Flexibility website
(https://www.epa.gov/reg-flex) at any time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
113. AMENDMENTS TO THE MODEL YEAR 2027 AND LATER HEAVY-DUTY HIGHWAY
ENGINE CRITERIA POLLUTANT PROGRAM
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7542, 7545, and 7601(a).; 42
U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.; 49 U.S.C. 32901-23919q,
Pub. L. 109-58.; 5 U.S.C. 552, 552a, 553; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 534; 31
U.S.C. 3717.; 42 U.S.C. 7414 and 7511b(e).; 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7522-
7525, 7541, 7542, 7543, 7545, 7547, 7550, and 7601.; 33 U.S.C. 1901-
1912.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR part 86; 40 CFR part 1037; 40 CFR part 1036;
40 CFR part 1065; 40 CFR part 1068
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Consistent with Administrator Zeldin's March 12, 2025,
announcement, the EPA will initiate a rulemaking to reconsider the
criteria pollutant standards program established in the January 2023
final rule titled Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles:
Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards (88 FR 4296; January 24, 2023).
Statement of Need: In light of updated information provide by
industry about the costs of the program EPA is reconsidering the
existing program requirements.
Summary of Legal Basis: Clean Air Act Sections 202, 206, and 207.
Alternatives: The EPA is still evaluating potential alternatives
that may be considered for the proposal.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is still evaluating the
associated costs and benefits associated with the forthcoming proposed
rule.
Risks: The EPA is still evaluating the scope and risks associated
with the forthcoming proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... To Be Determined
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52908]]
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Sectors Affected: 811198 All Other Automotive Repair and
Maintenance; 336120 Heavy Duty Truck Manufacturing; 336310 Motor
Vehicle Gasoline Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing; 333618 Other
Engine Equipment Manufacturing
Agency Contact: Jessica Brakora, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air and Radiation, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734-214-4936
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2060-AU41
RIN: 2060-AW83
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OAR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
114. REVISION TO ``BEGIN ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION'' IN THE NEW SOURCE REVIEW
PRECONSTRUCTION PERMITTING PROGRAM
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. Clean Air Act
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14219; 14318
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 51; 40 CFR 52
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EPA is proposing to revise the New Source Review
(NSR) preconstruction permitting program's definition of begin actual
construction. The EPAs proposed definition will address which physical
on-site construction activities an owner or operator may, prior to
obtaining an NSR permit, lawfully undertake that would not constitute
construction activities on a stationary source. This action is intended
to provide additional flexibility and clarity for owners or operators
to engage in construction on non-emitting structures and equipment
before an NSR permit is issued.
Statement of Need: The EPA is proposing revisions to its New Source
Review air permitting regulations to clarify which on-site construction
activities an owner or operator may lawfully undertake before obtaining
an NSR preconstruction permit. This deregulatory permitting reform
aligns with the Administration's goals of addressing America's energy
needs and promoting the development of data centers critical to making
the U.S. the Artificial Intelligence (AI) capital of the world, all
while taking the necessary steps to protect human health and safeguard
our environment.
Summary of Legal Basis: Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(c) provides
the framework that requires state implementation plans contain a
program to provide for regulation of the modification and construction
of any stationary source as necessary to assure that NAAQS are
achieved. Furthermore, for major sources located in attainment areas,
one of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions in CAA
section 165(a) prohibits construction of a major emitting facility
unless a permit has been issued for such proposed facility. For major
sources in nonattainment areas, the Nonattainment New Source Review
provision in Clean Air Act section 172(c)(5) includes similar language
that applicable implementation plans shall require permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area.
Alternatives: The EPA is soliciting comment on alternative
regulatory revisions to the begin actual construction definition as
well as other related applicable definitions.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is still evaluating costs
and benefits associated with the forthcoming proposed regulatory
revisions.
Risks: The EPA is still evaluating the scope and risks associated
with the forthcoming proposed regulatory revisions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... To Be Determined
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Andrew Kormos, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709
Phone: 919 541-4566
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2060-AW84
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OAR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
115. REVISION OF TIER 4 PHASE-IN SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY AND
MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLES
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14156; 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR part 86
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Consistent with Administrator Zeldin's March 12, 2025,
announcement, the EPA will initiate a rulemaking to reconsider the
phase-in of the criteria pollutant standards established in the April
2024 multi-pollutant standards rule for Model Years 2027 and later for
light-duty and medium-duty vehicles (89 FR 27842; April 18, 2024).
Statement of Need: This action is needed in light of the
significant changes in future vehicle product plans which have occurred
in the past year which impact automotive manufacturers compliance
plans.
Summary of Legal Basis: Clean Air Act Section 202.
Alternatives: The EPA is still evaluating potential alternatives
that may be considered for the proposal.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is still evaluating the
associated costs and benefits associated with the forthcoming proposed
rule.
Risks: The EPA is still evaluating the scope and risks associated
with the forthcoming proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... To Be Determined
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Agency Contact: John Kasab, Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Air and Radiation, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Phone: 734 214-4559
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2060-AW96
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
116. FORMALDEHYDE; REGULATION UNDER THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT
(TSCA)
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
[[Page 52909]]
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic Substances Control Act
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751
Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, January 3, 2026, Statutory: TSCA
section 6(c). Final, Statutory, January 3, 2027, Statutory: TSCA
section 6(c).
Abstract: This rulemaking will address the unreasonable risk of
injury to health from formaldehyde. Section 6(a) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires that EPA, when it determines in
a TSCA risk evaluation that a chemical substance presents unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment, apply one or more
requirements under TSCA section 6(a) by rule to the extent necessary so
the chemical substance no longer presents unreasonable risk. EPA's
final risk evaluation for formaldehyde, describing formaldehyde's
conditions of use and presenting EPA's determination of unreasonable
risk is in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0438, with additional information
including the draft risk evaluation and public comments received in
docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2023-0613.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is needed to address the
unreasonable risk of formaldehyde that was identified in a risk
evaluation completed under TSCA section 6(b). EPA reviewed the
exposures and hazards of formaldehyde, the magnitude of risk, exposed
populations, severity of the hazard, uncertainties, and other factors.
EPA sought input from the public and peer reviewers as required by TSCA
and associated regulations.
Summary of Legal Basis: In accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if
EPA determines in a final risk evaluation completed under TSCA section
6(b) that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use,
or disposal of a chemical substance or mixture, or that any combination
of such activities, presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health
or the environment, the Agency must issue regulations requiring one or
more of the following actions to the extent necessary so that the
chemical substance no longer presents an unreasonable risk: (1)
Prohibit or otherwise restrict manufacture, processing, or distribution
in commerce of the substance, or limit the amount of the substance
which may be manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce; (2)
Prohibit or otherwise restrict manufacture, processing, or distribution
in commerce of the substance for a particular use or for a particular
use above a set concentration, or limit the amount of the substance
which may be manufactured, processed, or distributed in commerce for a
particular use or for a particular use above a set concentration; (3)
Require minimum warnings and instructions with respect to use,
distribution in commerce, or disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or
testing by manufacturers or processors; (5) Prohibit or regulate any
manner or method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit or regulate any manner
or method of disposal for commercial purposes; and/or (7) Direct
manufacturers or processors to give notice of the unreasonable risk to
distributors, other persons and the public and replace or repurchase
the substance.
Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) requires EPA to address by rule
chemical substances that the Agency determines present unreasonable
risk upon completion of a final risk evaluation. As required under TSCA
section 6(c), EPA will consider one or more primary alternative
regulatory actions as part of the development of a proposed rule.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA will prepare a regulatory impact
analysis as the Agency develops the proposed rule.
Risks: As EPA determined in the TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation,
formaldehyde presents an unreasonable risk to human health. EPA must
issue risk management requirements so that this chemical substance no
longer presents an unreasonable risk. For more information, visit:
https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-existing-chemicals-under-TSCA.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 08/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 08/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Federalism: This action may have federalism implications as defined
in E.O. 13132.
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical Manufacturing
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-formaldehyde
Agency Contact: Jeffrey Putt, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-3703
Email: [email protected]
Ana Corado, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code
7404M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-0140
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2070-AL22
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OCSPP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
117. PERCHLOROETHYLENE (PCE); AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION UNDER
THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA)
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic Substances Control Act
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: EPA is considering amendments to certain aspects of the
December 2024 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 6(a) rule
addressing the unreasonable risk presented by perchloroethylene (PCE).
Section 6 of TSCA requires EPA to address any unreasonable risk that
the Administrator has determined is presented by a chemical substance
under the conditions of use. Following a risk evaluation carried out
under the authority of TSCA section 6(b), EPA determined that PCE
presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health. EPA is initiating a
rulemaking to amend previously promulgated provisions to address this
unreasonable risk as appropriate. EPA will solicit public comment on
potential amendments through a notice of proposed rulemaking. EPA's
risk evaluation, describing the conditions of use and presenting EPA's
determinations of unreasonable risk, is in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-
0502, with the 2022 revised risk determination and additional
information in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0732. EPAs final rule,
Perchloroethylene (PCE); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA), published on December 18, 2024, and is in docket EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2020-0720.
Statement of Need: As promulgated in December 2024, the TSCA risk
management action addressed the
[[Page 52910]]
unreasonable risk of injury to health presented by perchloroethylene
under its conditions of use by requiring various workplace exposure
controls, prohibiting certain industrial and commercial uses, and
preventing consumer access to the chemical, among other provisions.
Several legal challenges to the rule were initiated in 2025. EPA
determined that the December 2024 risk management rule should be
reconsidered and is initiating rulemaking efforts to seek further
public comment.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under TSCA section 6(a) (15 U.S.C.
2605(a)), if EPA determines through a TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation
that a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to
health or the environment under its conditions of use, EPA must by rule
apply one or more requirements listed in TSCA section 6(a) to the
extent necessary so that the chemical substance or mixture no longer
presents such risk. Unless provided otherwise by law, an agency may
change existing positions (e.g., reconsider, revise, or rescind prior
actions) so long as it acknowledges the change in position, provides a
reasoned explanation for the change, and takes any serious reliance
interests into account. See, e.g., FDA v. Wages & White Lion Invs.,
L.L.C., 145 S. Ct. 898, 917 (2025); Encino Motorcars v. Navarro, 579
U.S. 211, 221 (2016); FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S.
502, 515 (2009).
Alternatives: In accordance with TSCA section 6(c), EPA published a
proposed rule in 2023 to address the unreasonable risk of injury to
health presented by PCE under its conditions of use that presented a
statement based on reasonably available information with respect to the
reasonably ascertainable economic consequences of the rule, including
consideration of the costs and benefits and the cost effectiveness of
the proposed regulatory action and one or more primary alternative
regulatory actions considered by the Agency. EPA identified two primary
alternative regulatory actions in the proposed rule. The alternative
regulatory actions addressed prohibitions and related compliance
timeframes; workplace chemical protection program (WCPP) requirements
to address risks from inhalation and dermal exposures, and related
compliance timeframes; prescriptive controls, including workplace
requirements for laboratory use; paperwork requirements; and
exemptions. EPA's reconsideration of the December 2024 final rule will
include, but may not be limited to, such considerations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA will prepare an analysis of the
incremental costs and benefits of potential regulatory changes during
the rulemaking process.
Risks: As EPA determined in the TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation,
perchloroethylene presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human
health under its conditions of use. EPA must issue risk management
requirements so that this chemical substance no longer presents an
unreasonable risk. For more information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-existing-
chemicals-under-tsca.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
Federalism: This action may have federalism implications as defined
in E.O. 13132.
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Additional Information: Docket #: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0720.
Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical Manufacturing
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-perchloroethylene-pce
Agency Contact: Peter Deck, Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0488
Email: [email protected]
Ingrid Feustel, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, Mail Code 7404M, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-3199
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2070-AL39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OCSPP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
118. TRICHLOROETHYLENE (TCE); AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION UNDER
THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA)
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic Substances Control Act
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: EPA is considering amendments to certain aspects of the
December 2024 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 6(a) rule
addressing the unreasonable risk presented by trichloroethylene (TCE).
Section 6 of TSCA requires EPA to address any unreasonable risk that
the Administrator has determined is presented by a chemical substance
under the conditions of use. Following a risk evaluation carried out
under the authority of TSCA section 6(b), EPA has determined that TCE
presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health. EPA is initiating a
rulemaking to amend previously promulgated provisions to address this
unreasonable risk as appropriate. EPA will solicit public comment on
potential amendments through a notice of proposed rulemaking. EPA's
risk evaluation, describing the conditions of use and presenting EPA's
determinations of unreasonable risk, is in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-
0500, with additional information in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0737.
EPA's final rule, Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), published on December 17, 2024, and is
in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0642.
Statement of Need: As promulgated in December 2024, the TSCA risk
management action addressed the unreasonable risk of injury to health
presented by trichloroethylene under its conditions of use by requiring
various workplace exposure controls for most conditions of use,
prohibiting certain industrial and commercial uses, and establishing
other requirements. Several legal challenges to the rule were initiated
in 2025. EPA determined that the December 2024 risk management rule
should be reconsidered and is initiating rulemaking efforts to seek
further public comment.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under TSCA section 6(a) (15 U.S.C.
2605(a)), if EPA determines through a TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation
that a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk
[[Page 52911]]
of injury to health or the environment under its conditions of use, EPA
must by rule apply one or more requirements listed in TSCA section 6(a)
to the extent necessary so that the chemical substance or mixture no
longer presents such risk. Unless provided otherwise by law, an agency
may change existing positions (e.g., reconsider, revise, or rescind
prior actions) so long as it acknowledges the change in position,
provides a reasoned explanation for the change, and takes any serious
reliance interests into account. See, e.g., FDA v. Wages & White Lion
Invs., L.L.C., 145 S. Ct. 898, 917 (2025); Encino Motorcars v. Navarro,
579 U.S. 211, 221 (2016); FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556
U.S. 502, 515 (2009).
Alternatives: The primary alternative regulatory action considered
by EPA combines prohibitions and requirements for a workplace chemical
protection program (WCPP). While in some ways it is similar to the
proposed regulatory action, the primary alternative regulatory action
differed from the proposed regulatory action by providing longer
timeframes for prohibitions, and by describing an existing chemical
exposure limit (ECEL) based on a different health endpoint (i.e.,
immunotoxicity instead of developmental toxicity), as part of the WCPP
that would be required for the conditions of use of TCE that would be
permitted to continue for longer than one year after publication of the
final rule until the prohibition compliance dates. EPA requested
comment on the primary alternative regulatory action and whether any
elements of this primary alternative regulatory action described in
this unit should be considered as EPA developed the final regulatory
action. EPA also requested comment on the practicability of the
timeframes outlined in primary alternative regulatory action compared
to the timeframes identified for the proposed regulatory action. For
the primary alternative regulatory action, EPA also analyzed the need
for additional exemptions for essential uses of open-top and closed-
loop batch vapor degreasing for aerospace use (including for rayon
fabric scouring for rocket booster nozzle production) as well as narrow
tubing used in medical devices. EPA's reconsideration of the December
2024 final rule will include, but may not be limited to, such
considerations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA will prepare an analysis of the
incremental costs and benefits of potential regulatory changes during
the rulemaking process.
Risks: As EPA determined in the TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation,
trichloroethylene presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human
health under its conditions of use. EPA must issue risk management
requirements so that this chemical substance no longer presents an
unreasonable risk. For more information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-existing-
chemicals-under-tsca.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State
Federalism: This action may have federalism implications as defined
in E.O. 13132.
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical Manufacturing
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-trichloroethylene-tce
Agency Contact: Gabriela Rossner, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-2426
Email: [email protected]
Ingrid Feustel, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, Mail Code 7404M, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-3199
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2070-AL41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OCSPP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
119. CARBON TETRACHLORIDE (CTC); AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION
UNDER THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA)
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic Substances Control Act
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: EPA is considering amendments to certain aspects of the
December 2024 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 6(a) rule
addressing the unreasonable risk presented by carbon tetrachloride
(CTC). EPA is initiating a rulemaking to amend previously promulgated
provisions to address this unreasonable risk. EPA will solicit public
comment on potential amendments through a notice of proposed
rulemaking. Section 6 of TSCA requires EPA to address any unreasonable
risk that the Administrator has determined is presented by a chemical
substance under the conditions of use. Following a risk evaluation
carried out under the authority of TSCA section 6(b), EPA determined
that CTC presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health. EPA's risk
evaluation, describing the conditions of use and presenting EPAs
determinations of unreasonable risk, is in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-
0499, with the 2022 revised risk determination and additional
information in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0733. EPA's final rule, Carbon
Tetrachloride (CTC); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), published on December 18, 2024, and is in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2020-0592.
Statement of Need: As promulgated in December 2024, the TSCA risk
management action addressed the unreasonable risk of injury to health
presented by carbon tetrachloride under its conditions of use by
requiring various workplace exposure controls for most conditions of
use, prohibiting certain industrial and commercial uses, and
establishing other requirements. Several legal challenges to the rule
were initiated in 2025. EPA determined that the December 2024 risk
management rule should be reconsidered and is initiating rulemaking
efforts to seek further public comment.
Summary of Legal Basis: Under TSCA section 6(a) (15 U.S.C.
2605(a)), if EPA determines through a TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation
that a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to
health or the environment under its conditions of use, EPA must by rule
apply one or more requirements listed in TSCA section 6(a) to the
extent necessary so that the chemical substance or mixture no longer
presents such risk. Unless provided otherwise by law, an agency may
change existing positions (e.g., reconsider, revise, or rescind prior
actions) so long as it acknowledges the change in position, provides a
reasoned explanation for the change, and takes any serious reliance
[[Page 52912]]
interests into account. See, e.g., FDA v. Wages & White Lion Invs.,
L.L.C., 145 S. Ct. 898, 917 (2025); Encino Motorcars v. Navarro, 579
U.S. 211, 221 (2016); FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S.
502, 515 (2009).
Alternatives: The primary alternative regulatory action to the
December 2024 final rule included prescriptive workplace controls,
specifically respirators and dermal PPE, for the conditions of use for
which EPA had proposed a workplace chemical protection program (WCPP).
The primary alternative action also included a WCPP for processing,
industrial, and commercial uses of CTC that EPA had proposed to
prohibit. At the time of proposal, EPA did not have reasonably
available information indicating that any of the uses proposed for
prohibition were ongoing. EPA requested comment on whether any of the
uses the Agency proposed to prohibit are ongoing and if EPA should
consider a WCPP for those conditions of use of CTC. For the industrial
and commercial use of CTC as a laboratory chemical, the primary
alternative regulatory action considered by EPA included the
implementation of only the requirements of Direct Dermal Contact
Controls of the WCPP in combination with the use of fume hoods in
workplace laboratory settings and advanced engineering controls
specifically for DoD's use of CTC as a laboratory chemical in chemical
weapons destruction. The compliance timeframes for the controls as part
of the primary alternative regulatory action were the same as the
timeframes proposed. EPA's reconsideration of the December 2024 final
rule will include, but may not be limited to, such considerations.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA will prepare an analysis of the
incremental costs and benefits of potential regulatory changes during
the rulemaking process.
Risks: As EPA determined in the TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation,
carbon tetrachloride presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human
health under its conditions of use. EPA must issue risk management
requirements so that this chemical substance no longer presents an
unreasonable risk. For more information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/
assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-existing-
chemicals-under-tsca.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 09/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Federalism: This action may have federalism implications as defined
in E.O. 13132.
International Impacts: This regulatory action will be likely to
have international trade and investment effects, or otherwise be of
international interest.
Additional Information: Docket #: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0592
Sectors Affected: 325199 All Other Basic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing; 325998 All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and
Preparation Manufacturing; 327310 Cement Manufacturing; 325 Chemical
Manufacturing; 325194 Cyclic Crude, Intermediate, and Gum and Wood
Chemical Manufacturing; 327992 Ground or Treated Mineral and Earth
Manufacturing; 562211 Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal; 325120
Industrial Gas Manufacturing; 331410 Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum)
Smelting and Refining; 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing;
325180 Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing; 325320 Pesticide
and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing; 325110 Petrochemical
Manufacturing; 325211 Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing; 331
Primary Metal Manufacturing; 562213 Solid Waste Combustors and
Incinerators; 562 Waste Management and Remediation Services
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-carbon-tetrachloride
Agency Contact: Emilia Echeveste Briseno, Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, MC 7404M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-0543
Email: [email protected]
Rachel McAnallen, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Mail Code 7408M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-7401
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2070-AL42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Land and Emergency
Management (OLEM) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
120. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS: RISK MANAGEMENT
PROGRAMS UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT; COMMON SENSE APPROACH TO CHEMICAL
ACCIDENT PREVENTION
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r); 7601(a)(1)
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 68
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EPA is undertaking a rulemaking to amend its Risk
Management Program (RMP) regulations by making several proposed changes
to the 2024 Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention rule. The
proposed amendments will seek to improve chemical process safety by
avoiding duplicative requirements, realigning RMP requirements with
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Process Safety
Management requirements, and eliminating unnecessary burdens placed on
facilities where there is not specific data available to show that the
current RMP standards would reduce or have reduced the number of
accidental releases.
Statement of Need: On January 13, 2017, the EPA published a final
RMP rule (2017 Amendments). The 2017 Amendments were a result of
Executive Order 13650, Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security.
The 2017 Amendments rule contained various new provisions applicable to
RMP-regulated facilities addressing prevention program elements,
emergency coordination with local responders, and information
availability to the public. EPA received three petitions for
reconsideration of the 2017 Amendments rule under CAA section
307(d)(7)(B). On December 19, 2019, EPA promulgated a final RMP rule
(2019 Revisions) that acts on the reconsideration. The 2019 Revisions
rule repealed several major provisions of the 2017 Amendments and
retained other provisions with modifications. On January 20, 2021,
Executive Order 13990, Protecting Public Health and the Environment and
Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis (E.O. 13990), directed
federal agencies to review existing regulations and take action to
address priorities established by the Administration at the time, which
included bolstering regulations in response to the impacts of climate
change and prioritizing environmental justice. This resulted in the
2024 Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention (SCCAP) final
rule,
[[Page 52913]]
published on March 11, 2024. On January 20, 2025, Executive Order 13990
was revoked through Executive Order 14148, Initial Recissions of
Harmful Executive Orders and Actions. On the same date, Executive Order
14154, Unleashing American Energy, directed federal agencies to review
agency actions that potentially burden the development of domestic
energy resources. The EPA is proposing to revise the current RMP
regulations in this proposed action, which will address the
administration's priorities by streamlining implementation and focusing
on avoiding duplicative requirements, reducing unnecessary burden, and
establishing regulatory consistency.
Summary of Legal Basis: The CAA section 112(r)(7)(A) authorizes the
EPA Administrator to promulgate accidental release prevention,
detection, and correction requirements, which may include monitoring,
record keeping, reporting, training, vapor recovery, secondary
containment, and other design, equipment, work practice, and
operational requirements. The CAA section 112(r)(7)(B) authorizes the
Administrator to promulgate reasonable regulations and appropriate
guidance to provide, to the greatest extent practicable, for the
prevention and detection of accidental releases of regulated substances
and for response to such releases by the owners or operators of the
sources of such releases.
Alternatives: The EPA estimates that this action will result in
cost savings for regulated entities by removing redundant or
unnecessary regulatory requirements. Benefits will result from
providing regulatory clarity and realigning the Risk Management Program
with OSHAs PSM standard. If finalized, this proposed rule would ensure
long-term information access to the public to promote community
response planning and preparedness while balancing site security
concerns.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA estimates annualized cost
savings of $234.7-240.3 million at a 3% discount rate and $236.2-241.9
million at a 7% discount rate. In this proposed action, the EPA is
seeking to provide clarity, remove redundant or unnecessary regulatory
requirements, and realign the Risk Management Program with OSHAs PSM
standard. If finalized, this proposed rule would ensure long-term
information access to the public to promote community response planning
and preparedness while balancing site security concerns. The proposed
action would also refocus requirements for regulated facility owners
and operators on addressing areas that pose the greatest risk to a
process.
Risks: The proposed action would address the risks associated with
accidental releases of listed regulated toxic and flammable substances
to the air from stationary sources. Substances regulated under the RMP
program include highly toxic and flammable substances that can cause
deaths, injuries, property and environmental damage, and other on- and
off-site consequences if accidentally released. The proposed action
would reduce these risks by refocusing requirements for regulated
facility owners and operators on addressing areas that pose the
greatest risk to a process. The proposed action would not address the
risks of non-accidental chemical releases, accidental releases of non-
regulated substances, chemicals released to other media, and air
releases from mobile sources.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/24/26 91 FR 8970
NPRM Comment Period End............. 04/10/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Kristina Guarino, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Land and Emergency Management, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1235
Email: [email protected]
Rebecca Broussard, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Land
and Emergency Management, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 5104A,
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-6706
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2050-AH22
RIN: 2050-AH37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OLEM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
121. HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: DISPOSAL OF COAL
COMBUSTION RESIDUALS FROM ELECTRIC UTILITIES; LEGACY/CCRMU AMENDMENTS
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6912(a); 42 U.S.C. 6907(a); 42 U.S.C.
6944; 42 U.S.C. 6945(a)(d)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14156; 14262; 14261; 14153;
14213; 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 257
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: On May 8, 2024, EPA published the Legacy CCR Surface
Impoundments rule (Legacy Rule). The final rule went into effect
November 8, 2024. The Legacy Rule established requirements for the safe
disposal of CCR in a new type of regulated CCR unit--legacy surface
impoundments (SIs). It also established requirements for CCR management
units (CCRMU) to address the risks from previously unregulated solid
waste management of CCR that involves the direct placement of CCR on
the land at CCR facilities. This new rule will address needed
corrections and consider additional methods of closure, alternative
points of compliance, and other possible changes to the federal CCR
rules. In addition, this action will address the definition of CCR
beneficial use, taking into consideration public comments received on
the 2019 CCR beneficial use proposal and the 2020 Notice of Data
Availability on CCR beneficial use.
Statement of Need: This proposed rule is needed to increase
regulatory flexibility by proposing additional methods of closure,
alternative groundwater monitoring compliance points, and other
possible changes to the federal CCR rules. In addition, this action
will address the definition of CCR beneficial use, taking into
consideration public comments received on the 2019 CCR beneficial use
proposal and the 2020 Notice of Data Availability on CCR beneficial
use. These changes would address the administration's priorities by
streamlining implementation and reducing unnecessary burden while
remaining protective of human health and the environment.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal authority for this rulemaking can
be found in 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 42 U.S.C. 6907(a), 42 U.S.C. 6944, and
42 U.S.C. 6945(a)(d).
Alternatives: The Agency must provide public notice and opportunity
for comment on these issues and will solicit comment on regulatory
alternatives.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The RIA estimates that the
annualized cost savings of this action will be approximately:
$174-$194 million per year when discounting at 3%; and
[[Page 52914]]
$232-$262 million per year when discounting at 7%.
The RIA estimates that the annualized change in benefits of this
action will be approximately:
A $5 million decrease per year when discounting at 3%; and
A $4-$2 million decrease when discounting at 7%.
Overall, the RIA estimates that the net annualized cost savings and
benefits, net of benefits, of this action will be $169-$189 million per
year when discounting at 3% and $229-$260 million when discounting at
7%.
Risks: This rule creates an alternate pathway to compliance that
allows permit authorities the ability to approve technical standards
for the owner or operator to comply with to attain the RCRA standard of
no reasonable probability of adverse impacts.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 04/13/26 91 FR 18968
NPRM Comment Period End............. 06/12/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Sectors Affected: 221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/coalash
Agency Contact: Cecilia De Robertis, Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Land and Emergency Management, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-5132
Email: [email protected]
Taylor Holt, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Land and
Emergency Management, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 5304T,
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1439
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2050-AH14
RIN: 2050-AH39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Water (OW) Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
122. CLEAN WATER ACT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR
PFAS MANUFACTURERS UNDER THE ORGANIC CHEMICALS, PLASTICS AND SYNTHETIC
FIBERS POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. secs.1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1361
Relevant Executive Orders: 14313; 14303
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 414
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: As announced in the Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 15,
the EPA is revising the existing Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and
Synthetic Fibers Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards (40 CFR
part 414) to address per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances discharges
from facilities manufacturing PFAS.
Statement of Need: PFAS are a class of chemicals that are difficult
to destroy and extremely persistent in the environment. Due to their
mobility, they are detected in humans, animals, water, air, and soil
across the globe. Exposure to certain PFAS is documented to result in
harmful health effects in people and animals. PFAS manufacturer
wastewater discharges contain measurable levels of PFAS and there
currently are no national limitations on wastewater discharges of PFAS
from these facilities. This rulemaking looks to limit the amount of
PFAS discharged from PFAS manufacturing facilities, both directly into
surface water and indirectly via Publicly Owned Treatment Works.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 33 U.S.C.
1311, 1314, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1342, and 1361).
Alternatives: The EPA is evaluating alternatives for this action.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is evaluating the
anticipated costs and benefits of this action.
Risks: The EPA is evaluating the risks associated with this action.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANPRM............................... 03/17/21 86 FR 14560
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
-----------------------------------
Final Rule.......................... To Be Determined
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Agency Contact: Morgan Teachey, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, MC 4303T, Washington, DC
20460
Phone: 202 566-2735
Email: [email protected]
Erica Mason, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: 202 564-4700
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2040-AG10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
123. STEAM ELECTRIC EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINE RECONSIDERATION RULE
Priority: Other Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: secs. 301, 304(b), (c), (e), (g), and (i)(A) and
(B), 306(b) and (c), 307(c), 308, 402, 501, Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended; 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314(b), (c), (e), (g), and
(i)(A) and (B), 1316(b) and (c), 1317(c), 1318, 1342, and 1361.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14154; 14156; 14261; 14241
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 423
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: To stave off unwarranted power plant retirement decisions
and maintain abundant and affordable electricity supply in a time of
rising demand, the EPA is considering revising some of the existing
requirements in the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for
the Steam Electric Generating Point Source Category promulgated in
2024. The EPA intends that this rulemaking would potentially revise the
limitations in the subcategory for discharges of unmanaged combustion
residual leachate. The rulemaking may also seek to revise the
technology bases for the 2024 rules zero-discharge limitations and
standards, as well as re-evaluate existing compliance pathways.
Statement of Need: Deadline extensions for industry-wide
installation of zero-discharge limitations are needed to account for
longer-than-expected timelines and delays in procuring necessary
technology and completing installation. Deadline extensions are also
warranted to ensure plants can continue operating to support grid
reliability.
Summary of Legal Basis: Secs. 301, 304(b), (c), (e), (g), and
(i)(A) and (B), 306(b) and (c), 307(c), 308, 402, 501, Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314(b), (c), (e),
(g), and (i)(A) and (B), 1316(b) and (c), 1317(c), 1318, 1342, and
1361.
Alternatives: The EPA is evaluating alternatives for this action.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is evaluating the
anticipated costs and benefits of this action.
Risks: The EPA is evaluating the risks associated with this action.
Timetable:
[[Page 52915]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 03/00/27 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Paul Shriner, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4303T, Washington, DC
20460
Phone: 202 566-1076
Email: [email protected]
Michal Beczek, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, MC 4303T, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-0864
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2040-AG23,
RIN: 2040-AG41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
124. RESCISSION OF REGULATORY DETERMINATIONS AND REMOVAL OF RELATED
PROVISIONS FOR FOUR PFAS SUBSTANCES (PFHXS, PFNA, HFPO-DA (GENX), AND
THE MIXTURE OF THESE THREE PFAS PLUS PFBS)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq Safe Drinking Water Act
Relevant Executive Orders: 14212; 14313; 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR part 469 Subpart C
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EPA intends to propose to rescind its regulatory
determinations to regulate four per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
(PFAS) perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid
(PFNA), hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid and its ammonium salt
(HFPO-DA, commonly known as GenX), and the mixture of these three PFAS
plus perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) under the Safe Drinking Water
Act. The EPA also intends to propose to rescind all associated
regulatory provisions associated with the Final PFAS NPDWR (89 FR
32532) currently codified in 40 CFR part 141 and 142 exclusive to these
PFAS that were promulgated pursuant to the regulatory determinations
that EPA is now proposing to rescind.
Statement of Need: The agency is committed to addressing Per- and
Polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water while following the
law and ensuring that regulatory compliance is achievable for drinking
water systems.
Summary of Legal Basis: This rulemaking will ensure that the
determinations and any resulting drinking water regulation follow the
legal process laid out in the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Alternatives: This deregulatory action is focused on ensuring that
the determinations and any resulting drinking water regulation follow
the legal process laid out in the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is currently examining costs
and benefits which will be included in the proposed rule for public
comment.
Risks: The EPA is still evaluating the scope and risks associated
with the proposed rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Alexis Lan, Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 4601M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-0841
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2040-AG53
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
125. CARBON POLLUTION STANDARDS REPEAL
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq, CAA
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14156; 14318; 14219; 14261
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 60
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: In April 2024, the EPA issued the Carbon Pollution
Standards (CPS), which limited greenhouse gas emissions from new and
existing fossil fuel-fired power plants. The CPS directed states to set
standards of performance for existing fossil fuel-fired steam
generating power plants and further tightened New Source Performance
Standards first issued in 2015. In June of 2025, the EPA proposed to
repeal all GHG emissions standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants.
With that action, EPA proposed to make a finding that GHG emissions
from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to
dangerous air pollution. The EPA also proposed, as an alternative, to
repeal a narrower set of requirements that includes the emission
guidelines for existing fossil fuel-fired steam generating units, the
carbon capture and sequestration/storage (CCS)-based standards for
coal-fired steam generating units undertaking a large modification, and
the CCS-based standards for new base load stationary combustion
turbines.
Statement of Need: In April 2024, EPA issued the Carbon Pollution
Standards (CPS), which limited greenhouse gas emissions from new and
existing fossil fuel-fired power plants. The CPS directed States to set
standards of performance for existing fossil fuel-fired steam
generating power plants, and further tightened new source performance
standards first issued in 2015. Consistent with Executive Order 14154,
Unleashing American Energy, Executive Order 14241, Ensuring Lawful
Governance and Implementing the President's `Department of Government
Efficiency' Deregulatory Initiative, and Executive Order 14261,
Reinvigorating America's Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending
Executive Order 14241, the EPA is revisiting these standards. On June
11, 2025, the EPA proposed to repeal greenhouse gas emissions standards
for fossil fuel-fired power plants promulgated under Section 111 of the
Clean Air Act.
Summary of Legal Basis: Clean Air Act section 111.
Alternatives: The EPA also proposed, as an alternative, to repeal a
narrower set of requirements that includes the emission guidelines for
existing fossil fuel-fired steam generating units, the carbon capture
and sequestration/storage (CCS)-based standards for coal-fired steam
generating units undertaking a large modification, and the CCS-based
standards for new base load stationary combustion turbines.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA is still evaluating the scope
and associated costs and benefits for the final rule.
Risks: EPA is still evaluating the scope and risks with a
prospective rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 06/17/25 90 FR 25752
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52916]]
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State, Tribal
Agency Contact: Lisa Thompson, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Mail Code D243-
01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-9775
Email: [email protected]
Nick Hutson, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and
Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Mail Code D243-01, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-2968
Fax: 919 541-4991
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2060-AV09
RIN: 2060-AW55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OAR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
126. RECONSIDERATION OF THE GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING PROGRAM
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 to 7671q.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14156; 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR part 98
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP, 40 CFR part
98) requires reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) data and other relevant
information from certain large GHG emission sources, fuel and
industrial gas suppliers, and CO2 injection sites in the U.S. A total
of 47 industrial sectors are required to report under the GHGRP,
including more than 8,000 facilities. On September 12, 2025, the EPA
proposed a rule to remove the obligations of the GHGRP for most source
categories, including the distribution segment of the petroleum and
natural gas systems source category (Subpart W). The EPA also proposed
to suspend reporting obligations for the remaining subpart W segments
until 2034. This action will finalize the EPA's reconsideration of the
GHGRP.
Statement of Need: The EPA is reconsidering the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Program (GHGRP) in response to Executive Order (E.O.) 14154
Unleashing American Energy, and E.O. 14192 Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation. Reconsideration of the GHGRP was part of the
Administrator's historic deregulatory effort announced on March 12,
2025.
Summary of Legal Basis: The legal basis for this action is Clean
Air Action section 114 and 136.
Alternatives: As discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule,
EPA considered the alternative of transitioning the GHGRP from
mandatory to voluntary reporting, but EPA determined that maintaining
continuous or intermittent reporting under any of these source
categories, including voluntary reporting, is inconsistent with CAA
section 114 or appropriately could be addressed through collection from
other sources.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA estimated that the proposed
rule would save $303 million per year from 2025 to 2033. The EPA is
still evaluating the scope and associated costs and benefits associated
with the forthcoming final rule.
Risks: The EPA did not identify risks in developing the proposed
rule. The EPA is still evaluating any risks associated with the
forthcoming final rule.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 09/16/25 90 FR 44591
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Sectors Affected: 327910 Abrasive Product Manufacturing; 325199 All
Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing; 331313 Alumina Refining and
Primary Aluminum Production; 212112 Bituminous Coal Underground Mining;
327310 Cement Manufacturing; 325 Chemical Manufacturing; 334113
Computer Terminal Manufacturing; 211111 Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas
Extraction; 221121 Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control; 22111
Electric Power Generation; 423610 Electrical Apparatus and Equipment,
Wiring Supplies, and Related Equipment Merchant Wholesalers; 33531
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing; 334111 Electronic Computer
Manufacturing; 33361 Engine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment
Manufacturing; 327211 Flat Glass Manufacturing; 221112 Fossil Fuel
Electric Power Generation; 327213 Glass Container Manufacturing; 423620
Household Appliances, Electric Housewares, and Consumer Electronics
Merchant Wholesalers; 325120 Industrial Gas Manufacturing; 331110 Iron
and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing; 327410 Lime
Manufacturing; 221210 Natural Gas Distribution; 325311 Nitrogenous
Fertilizer Manufacturing; 331410 Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum)
Smelting and Refining; 211 Oil and Gas Extraction; 325180 Other Basic
Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing; 334119 Other Computer Peripheral
Equipment Manufacturing; 327212 Other Pressed and Blown Glass and
Glassware Manufacturing; 322 Paper Manufacturing; 32212 Paper Mills;
322130 Paperboard Mills; 324110 Petroleum Refineries; 325312 Phosphatic
Fertilizer Manufacturing; 486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural
Gas; 327110 Pottery, Ceramics, and Plumbing Fixture Manufacturing; 331
Primary Metal Manufacturing; 322110 Pulp Mills; 221320 Sewage Treatment
Facilities; 562212 Solid Waste Landfill; 335313 Switchgear and
Switchboard Apparatus Manufacturing; 326150 Urethane and Other Foam
Product (except Polystyrene) Manufacturing; 221310 Water Supply and
Irrigation Systems; 321 Wood Product Manufacturing
Agency Contact: Gregory Honda, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air and Radiation, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20460
Phone: 919 541-2034
Email: [email protected]
Nick Hutson, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and
Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Mail Code D243-01, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919 541-2968
Fax: 919 541-4991
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2060-AW76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
127. PROCEDURES FOR CHEMICAL RISK EVALUATION UNDER THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES
CONTROL ACT (TSCA)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14303
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 702
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: On September 23, 2025, EPA proposed to amend the
procedural framework rule for conducting existing chemical risk
evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). When
conducting an existing chemical risk evaluation under TSCA, EPA must
determine whether a chemical
[[Page 52917]]
substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment, without consideration of costs or non-risk factors,
including unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible
subpopulation identified as relevant to the risk evaluation, under the
conditions of use. In this action, EPA proposed to rescind or revise
certain 2024 amendments to the procedural framework rule to effectuate
the best reading of the statute and ensure that the procedural
framework rule does not impede the timely completion of risk
evaluations or impair the effective and efficient protection of health
and the environment. After considering public comments, EPA intends to
promulgate a final rule in 2026.
Statement of Need: EPA reviewed the May 3, 2024, final rule
entitled Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (``2024 final rule''), which amended the July
20, 2017, final rule entitled Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation
Under the Amended Toxic Substances Control Act (``2017 final rule'')
that established procedures and requirements for chemical risk
evaluation under TSCA, in consideration of: the statutory text and
structure and congressional intent;
Executive Order 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and
Implementing the President's 'Department of Government Efficiency'
Deregulatory Initiative,'' which directs agencies to initiate a process
to review existing rules for consistency with law and Administration
policy and to identify certain regulations for potential rescission or
modification (90 FR 10583, February 19, 2025); and Executive Order
14303, ``Restoring Gold Standard Science'' (90 FR 22601, May 23, 2025).
As a result of this review, the Agency proposed targeted amendments to
the 2024 final rule and associated regulatory text.
Summary of Legal Basis: TSCA section 6(b)(4) directed EPA to
establish the process for conducting risk evaluations on chemical
substances under TSCA to identify any unreasonable risk of injury to
health or the environment. Unless provided otherwise by law, agencies
may reconsider, revise, or rescind prior rules by acknowledging the
change, offering a reasonable basis for the change, and taking any
significant reliance interests into account. See FDA v. Wages & White
Lion Invs., L.L.C., 145 S. Ct. 898, 917 (2025); FCC v. Fox Television
Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v.
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 42 (1983). EPA is proposed
to rescind or revise many of the changes made through the 2024
amendments to effectuate the best reading of the statute and address
serious concerns arising from Agency and stakeholder experience in
application of the amended procedural framework rule. EPA is not
currently aware of any significant reliance interests in the 2024
amendments to the procedural framework rule at issue in this proposal,
which remain fairly recent and apply almost exclusively to internal
Agency process.
Alternatives: Alternatives will not be developed as part of the
rulemaking.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The incremental impacts of the
proposed rule are associated with revisions to procedural requirements
that apply to manufacturers when manufacturers (including importers)
voluntarily request that EPA perform a risk evaluation on a particular
chemical substance. The total estimated annual burden is 166 hours and
$91,831 (per year), which is based on an estimated per request burden
of 166 hours. Because this proposed action focuses on the activities
that a manufacturer must perform in voluntarily requesting a risk
evaluation, the estimated incremental costs to the public are expected
to be negligible. However, there are Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
related burden and costs if industry chooses to submit a manufacturer
requested risk evaluation to the Agency. This rulemaking is expected to
reduce the regulatory burden associated with these submissions
resulting in an estimated PRA activity cost savings of $23,880 per year
(assuming one submission per year) as compared to the 2024 final rule.
Risks: This is a procedural rule related to risk evaluations and is
not intended to directly address any particular risk. However, the rule
would establish procedures by which EPA will evaluate whether a
chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or
the environment under its conditions of use, including unreasonable
risks to potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation. Rigorous
procedures that support accurate identification of unreasonable risks
are necessary to inform subsequent risk management action.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 09/23/25 90 FR 45690
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: Docket #: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2025-0260.
Sectors Affected: 326199 All Other Plastics Product Manufacturing;
326299 All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing; 327310 Cement
Manufacturing; 325 Chemical Manufacturing; 327120 Clay Building
Material and Refractories Manufacturing; 327331 Concrete Block and
Brick Manufacturing; 327332 Concrete Pipe Manufacturing; 327211 Flat
Glass Manufacturing; 327213 Glass Container Manufacturing; 327215 Glass
Product Manufacturing Made of Purchased Glass; 326130 Laminated
Plastics Plate, Sheet (except Packaging), and Shape Manufacturing;
327390 Other Concrete Product Manufacturing; 327212 Other Pressed and
Blown Glass and Glassware Manufacturing; 324110 Petroleum Refineries;
326160 Plastics Bottle Manufacturing; 326122 Plastics Pipe and Pipe
Fitting Manufacturing; 326191 Plastics Plumbing Fixture Manufacturing;
326140 Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing; 327110 Pottery,
Ceramics, and Plumbing Fixture Manufacturing; 327320 Ready-Mix Concrete
Manufacturing; 326291 Rubber Product Manufacturing for Mechanical Use;
326220 Rubber and Plastics Hoses and Belting Manufacturing; 326211 Tire
Manufacturing (except Retreading); 326212 Tire Retreading; 326113
Unlaminated Plastics Film and Sheet (except Packaging) Manufacturing;
326121 Unlaminated Plastics Profile Shape Manufacturing; 326150
Urethane and Other Foam Product (except Polystyrene) Manufacturing
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluations-existing-chemicals-under-tsca
Agency Contact: Kelly Summers, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Mail Code 7405M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-2201
Email: [email protected]
Joel Wolf, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code
7404M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-0432
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2070-AK90
RIN: 2070-AL27
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OCSPP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52918]]
128. PERFLUOROALKYL AND POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES (PFAS) DATA
REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING UNDER THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT
(TSCA); REVISION TO REGULATION
Priority: Economically Significant. Major under 5 U.S.C. 801.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 705
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EPA is considering a proposed rule to amendments to
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulation for reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS). As promulgated in October 2023, the regulation
requires manufacturers (including importers) of PFAS in any year
between 2011-2022 to report certain data to EPA related to exposure and
environmental and health effects. EPA plans to propose the
incorporation of certain exemptions and other modifications to the
scope of the reporting rule.
Statement of Need: This rulemaking is needed to address the data
gaps related to PFAS exposure and environmental effects. The Agency
would request information from manufacturers between the years 2011-
2022 for information on PFAS.
Summary of Legal Basis: EPA is proposing this rule pursuant to its
authority in TSCA section 8(a)(7) (15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7)). The National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 116-92,
section 7351) amended TSCA section 8(a) in December 2019, adding TSCA
section 8(a)(7), titled ``PFAS Data.'' TSCA section 8(a)(7) requires
EPA to promulgate a rule ``requiring each person who has manufactured a
chemical substance that is a [PFAS] in any year since January 1, 2011''
to report information described in TSCA section 8(a)(2)(A) through (G).
TSCA section 8(a)(2)(A) through (G) includes a broad range of
information, such as information related to chemical identity and
structure, production, use, byproducts, exposure, disposal, and health
and environmental effects.
Alternatives: EPA is proposing an alternative approach to the data
collection rule it finalized on October 11, 2023 (88 FR 70516 (FRL-
7902-02-OCSPP). EPA is proposing to amend the one-time PFAS reporting
and recordkeeping regulation) to incorporate the following exemptions
to the scope of reportable manufacturing activities: a de minimis
exemption of 0.1%; imported articles; byproducts; impurities; research
and development (R&D); and non-isolated intermediates. These exemptions
would maintain important reporting on PFAS, consistent with statutory
requirements, while exempting reporting on activities about which
manufacturers are least likely to know or reasonably ascertain.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Under the proposed rule, EPA
estimates a total industry burden reduction of 10-11 million fewer
total hours, or a cost savings of $786-843 million compared to the
October 11, 2023, TSCA section 8(a)(7) final rule (88 FR 70516) (FRL-
7902-02-OCSPP) requirements. Affected small businesses are expected to
be relieved of 9.3-9.9 million total hours, or $703-761 million in
costs. The Agency is not expected to incur incremental costs. The total
incremental social cost savings of the proposed rule compared to the
October 11, 2023, TSCA section 8(a)(7) final rule (88 FR 70516) (FRL-
7902-02-OCSPP) is therefore estimated to be approximately $786-843
million.
Risks: This is a data collection rule and the EPA will use the
information collected on PFAS to determine future risk management
efforts. In the future, EPA may issue risk management requirements so
that this chemical substance no longer presents an unreasonable risk.
For more information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-
managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-management-existing-chemicals-under-
tsca.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/13/25 90 FR 50923
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Additional Information: Docket #: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0549.
Sectors Affected: 23 Construction; 31-33 Manufacturing; 44-45
Retail Trade; 42 Wholesale Trade
URL For More Information: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/tsca-section-8a7-reporting-and-recordkeeping
Agency Contact: Stephanie Griffin, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, MC 7406M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-1463
Email: [email protected]
David Turk, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code
7406M, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 566-1527
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2070-AK67
RIN: 2070-AL29
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--Office of Water (OW) Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
129. UPDATED DEFINITION OF ``WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES''
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14318; 14154; 14303
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 120.2
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EPA and the Department of the Army are undertaking a
rulemaking to revise key topics of the waters of the United States
definition considering the Supreme Court's decision in Sackett v.
Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), including
continuous surface connection, relatively permanent, and jurisdictional
versus non-jurisdictional ditches. These revisions focus on clarity,
simplicity, and improvements that will stand the test of time.
Statement of Need: The Environmental Protection Agency and the
Department of the Army are undertaking a rulemaking to revise key
topics of the waters of the United States definition considering the
Supreme Courts decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency,
598 U.S. 651 (2023), including continuous surface connection,
relatively permanent, and jurisdictional versus non-jurisdictional
ditches. These revisions focus on clarity, simplicity, and improvements
that will stand the test of time. This action will streamline
implementation of Clean Water Act programs by aligning the definition
of waters of the United States with Sackett, which significantly
narrowed the definition under the Clean Water Act.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.).
Alternatives: The EPA is evaluating alternatives for this action.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is evaluating the
anticipated costs and benefits of this action.
Risks: The EPA is evaluating the risks associated with this action.
Timetable:
[[Page 52919]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/20/25 90 FR 52498
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State, Tribal
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Rose Kwok, Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 4504T, Washington, DC
20460
Phone: 202 566-0657
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2040-AG32
RIN: 2040-AG44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA--OW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
130. UPDATING THE WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION RULE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219; 14318; 14154
CFR Citation: 40 CFR 121
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Under Clean Water Act section 401, a federal agency may
not issue a license or permit to conduct any activity that may result
in a discharge into a water of the United States unless a section 401
water quality certification is issued, or certification is waived by a
state or authorized Tribe. The EPA last promulgated regulations on CWA
section 401 in 2023, including regulatory text addressing the scope of
certification. This action will address implementation challenges and
clarify regulatory uncertainty associated with the 2023 Rule, including
the scope of certification. This action will increase transparency,
efficiency, and predictability for co-regulators and the regulated
community.
Statement of Need: The EPA is proposing revisions to the 2023 Rule
to reflect the best reading of the CWA's statutory text and the
legislative history regarding section 401, to support an efficient and
transparent certification process, and to address stakeholder feedback
gathered in its preliminary engagement and outreach.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.).
Alternatives: The EPA is evaluating alternatives for this action.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The EPA is evaluating the
anticipated costs and benefits of this action.
Risks: The EPA is evaluating the risks associated with this action.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 01/15/26 91 FR 2008
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/17/26 .......................
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, State, Tribal
Federalism: This action may have federalism implications as defined
in E.O. 13132.
Agency Contact: Lauren Kasparek, Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202 564-3351
Email: [email protected]
Related RIN: Related to 2040-AG12
RIN: 2040-AG47
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (EEOC)
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC, Commission,
or Agency) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it
illegal to commit employment discrimination under: title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, sex (including
pregnancy, childbirth or related conditions, transgender status, and
sexual orientation), and national origin); the Equal Pay Act of 1963,
as amended (makes it illegal to pay unequal wages to persons of
different sexes performing substantially equal work under similar
working conditions at the same establishment); the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act of 1967, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination based on age of 40 or older); titles I and V of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, and sections 501 and 505
of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination based on disability); title II of the Genetic
Information Nondiscrimination Act (prohibits employment discrimination
based on genetic information and limits acquisition and disclosure of
genetic information); section 304 of the Government Employee Rights Act
of 1991 (protects certain previously exempt state and local government
employees from employment discrimination on the bases of race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability); and the Pregnant
Workers Fairness Act of 2022 (requires covered entities to provide
reasonable accommodation to qualified workers' known limitations
related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth or
related conditions, unless doing so would cause an undue hardship).
The EEOC has authority to issue legislative regulations under the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), title I of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), title II of the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
(PWFA). Under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEOC's
authority to issue legislative regulations is limited to procedural,
recordkeeping, and reporting matters.
Ten pending items are identified in the EEOC's 2026 Regulatory
Agenda -four at the proposed rule stage and six at the final rule
stage. Of those items, one ``economically significant'' item is singled
out as a key priority in this Regulatory Plan: the proposed rulemaking
to rescind EEO data reporting requirements.
Rescission of EEO-1 Reporting Requirements
The EEOC requires in its regulations under Title VII, the ADA, GINA
and the PWFA that covered entities file, as applicable, an ``Employer
Information Report (EEO-1),'' ``Apprenticeship Information Report (EEO-
2),'' ``Local Union Equal Employment Opportunity Report (EEO-3),''
``State and Local Government Information Report (EEO-4),'' ``Elementary
and Secondary Staff Information Report (EEO-5),'' or ``Higher Education
Staff Information Report (EEO-6)'' depending on the category of covered
entity. Since 1966, the EEOC has mandated that employers with at least
100 employees submit workforce demographic data via an EEO-1 form on an
annual basis, pursuant to its authority to gather information under
Title VII, as amended. The other collections were instituted at
different, later points in EEOC's history.
These EEO data collections were not mandated by statute; they were
an agency-created requirement, which imposed a significant financial
and administrative burden on the EEOC with limited practical utility
for enforcing antidiscrimination laws. It additionally imposed
unjustified costs on America's employers, including thousands of small
businesses; apprenticeship program providers; unions; state and local
employers;
[[Page 52920]]
public elementary and secondary school systems; and higher education
institutions.
The Commission will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
rescind the regulations at 29 CFR 1602 that impose these data-
collection requirements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EEOC Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. RESCISSION OF EEO-1, EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4. EEO-5, AND EEO-6
REPORTING REQUIREMENT UNDER TITLE VII, THE ADA, GINA, AND THE PWFA
[3046-AB37]
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000e-8, 2000e-12; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.; 42 U.S.C. 12117; 42 U.S.C. 2000ff-6; 42 U.S.C. 2000gg-2.
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1602. 7-1602.9
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EEOC intends to issue a NPRM to rescind all portions
of 29 CFR 1602 which require covered entities to file an Employer
Information Report EEO-1,'' Apprenticeship Information Report EEO-2,''
Local Union Equal Employment Opportunity Report EEO-3,'' State and
Local Government Recordkeeping ReportEEO-4,'' Elementary-Secondary
Staff Information Report EEO-5,'' or Higher Education Staff Information
Report EEO-6,'' depending on the category of covered entity. Neither
the EEO-2 nor EEO-6 reports have been collected by the EEOC for
decades, and their rescission is simply a matter of conforming the
regulation to this reality. The remaining reports impose significant
financial and administrative burdens on the agency and those reporting.
For example, in the EEO-1, since 1966, the EEOC has required employers
with at least 100 employees to submit workforce demographic data on an
annual basis, pursuant to its authority to gather information under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. This agency-
created requirement imposes a significant financial and administrative
burden on America's employers, including thousands of small businesses.
For example, in its most recent Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Notice
published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2023, the EEOC estimated a
total of 5,238,467 reporting hours per year by employers to comply with
the agency's EEO-1 regulation. The EEOC further estimated these
reporting hours cost the nation's employers a total of $273,137,678.30
per year.
Statement of Need:
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC, Commission,
or Agency) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it
illegal to commit employment discrimination under: title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, sex (including
pregnancy, childbirth or related conditions, transgender status, and
sexual orientation), and national origin); the Equal Pay Act of 1963,
as amended (makes it illegal to pay unequal wages to persons of
different sexes performing substantially equal work under similar
working conditions at the same establishment); the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act of 1967, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination based on age of 40 or older); titles I and V of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, and sections 501 and 505
of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination based on disability); title II of the Genetic
Information Nondiscrimination Act (prohibits employment discrimination
based on genetic information and limits acquisition and disclosure of
genetic information); section 304 of the Government Employee Rights Act
of 1991 (protects certain previously exempt state and local government
employees from employment discrimination on the bases of race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability); and the Pregnant
Workers Fairness Act of 2022 (requires covered entities to provide
reasonable accommodation to qualified workers' known limitations
related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth or
related conditions, unless doing so would cause an undue hardship).
The EEOC has authority to issue legislative regulations under the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), title I of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), title II of the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
(PWFA). Under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEOC's
authority to issue legislative regulations is limited to procedural,
recordkeeping, and reporting matters.
Ten pending items are identified in the EEOC's 2026 Regulatory
Agenda four at the proposed rule stage and six at the final rule stage.
Two of those items are singled out as key priorities in this Regulatory
Plan: the proposed rulemaking to revise the regulations implementing
the PWFA and the proposed rulemaking to rescind EEO data reporting
requirements. There is one completed item.
Rescission of Reporting Requirements
The EEOC requires in its regulations under Title VII, the ADA, GINA
and the PWFA that covered entities file, as applicable, an Employer
Information Report (EEO-1), Apprenticeship Information Report (EEO-2),
Local Union Equal Employment Opportunity Report (EEO-3), State and
Local Government Information Report (EEO-4), Elementary-Secondary Staff
Information Report (EEO-5), or Higher Education Staff Information
Report (EEO-6), depending on the category of covered entity. Title VII
gave the EEOC authority to make regulations for the collection of data,
but it does not require its collection. These specific data collections
were agency-created requirements and not statutory mandates.
Additionally, these requirements impose significant financial and
administrative burdens on the EEOC, as well as the nation's employers,
including thousands of small businesses. They impose similar costs on
state and local governments, labor organizations, educational
institutions, and entities that administer apprenticeship programs.
The Commission will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
rescind its regulations at 29 CFR 1602, which impose these data-
collection requirements.
Summary of Legal Basis: This EEO data collection was not mandated
by statute, but was an agency-created requirement, which imposed a
significant financial and administrative burden on the EEOC with
limited practical utility for enforcing antidiscrimination laws. It
additionally imposed unjustified costs on America's employers,
including thousands of small businesses; apprenticeship program
providers; unions; state and local employers; public elementary and
secondary school systems; and higher education institutions.
The Commission will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
rescind its regulations at 29 CFR 1602, which impose these data-
collection requirements. With its rescission, the EEOC no longer has
authority to collect contractor data on behalf of DOL.
BILLING CODE 6570-01-P
[[Page 52921]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EEOC Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
131. RESCISSION OF EEO-1, EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4. EEO-5, AND
REPORTING REQUIREMENT UNDER TITLE VII, THE ADA, GINA, AND THE PWFA
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000e-8, 2000e-12; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.; 42 U.S.C. 12117; 42 U.S.C. 2000ff-6; 42 U.S.C. 2000gg-2.
CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1602. 7-1602.9
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The EEOC intends to issue a NPRM to rescind all portions
of 29 CFR 1602 which require covered entities to file an Employer
Information Report EEO-1,'' Apprenticeship Information Report EEO-2,''
Local Union Equal Employment Opportunity Report EEO-3,'' State and
Local Government Recordkeeping ReportEEO-4,'' Elementary-Secondary
Staff Information Report EEO-5,'' or Higher Education Staff Information
Report EEO-6,'' depending on the category of covered entity. Neither
the EEO-2 nor EEO-6 reports have been collected by the EEOC for
decades, and their rescission is simply a matter of conforming the
regulation to this reality. The remaining reports impose financial and
administrative burdens on those reporting. For example, in the EEO-1,
since 1966, the EEOC has required employers with at least 100 employees
to submit workforce demographic data on an annual basis, pursuant to
its authority to gather information under Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, as amended. This agency-created requirement imposes a
significant financial and administrative burden on America's employers,
including thousands of small businesses. For example, in its most
recent Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Notice published in the Federal
Register on May 2, 2023, the EEOC estimated a total of 5,238,467
reporting hours per year by employers to comply with the agency's EEO-1
regulation. The EEOC further estimated these reporting hours cost the
nation's employers a total of $273,137,678.30 per year.
As part of the EEO-1 collection, the EEOC also has long gathered
information on government contractors with at least 50 employees on
behalf of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs at the
Department of Labor (DOL), and then shared the contractor data with
DOL. The collection of contractor data was made pursuant to DOL's
authority under the now-rescinded Executive Order 11246. With its
rescission, the EEOC no longer has authority to collect this data on
behalf of DOL.
Statement of Need:
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC, Commission,
or Agency) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it
illegal to commit employment discrimination under: title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, sex (including
pregnancy, childbirth or related conditions, transgender status, and
sexual orientation), and national origin); the Equal Pay Act of 1963,
as amended (makes it illegal to pay unequal wages to persons of
different sexes performing substantially equal work under similar
working conditions at the same establishment); the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act of 1967, as amended (prohibits employment
discrimination based on age of 40 or older); titles I and V of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, and sections 501 and 505
of the Rehabilitation Act, as amended (prohibit employment
discrimination based on disability); title II of the Genetic
Information Nondiscrimination Act (prohibits employment discrimination
based on genetic information and limits acquisition and disclosure of
genetic information); section 304 of the Government Employee Rights Act
of 1991 (protects certain previously exempt state and local government
employees from employment discrimination on the bases of race, color,
religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability); and the Pregnant
Workers Fairness Act of 2022 (requires covered entities to provide
reasonable accommodation to qualified workers' known limitations
related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth or
related conditions, unless doing so would cause an undue hardship).
The EEOC has authority to issue legislative regulations under the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), title I of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), title II of the Genetic Information
Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
(PWFA). Under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEOC's
authority to issue legislative regulations is limited to procedural,
recordkeeping, and reporting matters.
Ten pending items are identified in the EEOC's Fall 2025 Regulatory
Agenda four at the proposed rule stage and six at the final rule stage.
Two of those items are singled out as key priorities in this Regulatory
Plan: the proposed rulemaking to revise the regulations implementing
the PWFA and the proposed rulemaking to rescind EEO data reporting
requirements. There is one completed item.
Rescission of Reporting Requirements
The EEOC requires in its regulations under Title VII, the ADA, GINA
and the PWFA that covered entities file either an Employer Information
Report (EEO-1), Apprenticeship Information Report (EEO-2), Local Union
Equal Employment Opportunity Report (EEO-3), State and Local Government
Information Report (EEO-4), or Elementary-Secondary Staff Information
Report (EEO-5), depending on the category of covered entity. Title VII
gave the EEOC authority to make regulations for the collection of data,
but it does not require its collection. These specific data collections
were agency-created requirements and not statutory mandates.
Additionally, these requirements impose significant financial and
administrative burdens on the nation's employers, including thousands
of small businesses. They impose similar costs on state and local
governments, labor organizations, and entities that administer
apprenticeship programs.
The Commission will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
rescind its regulations at 29 CFR 1602, which impose these data-
collection requirements.
Summary of Legal Basis: This EEO data collection was not mandated
by statute, but was an agency-created requirement, which imposed a
significant financial and administrative burden on America's employers,
including thousands of small businesses. Likewise, the EEO-2, EEO-3,
EEO-4, and EEO-5 imposed similar significant financial and
administrative burdens respectively on apprenticeship programs; unions;
state and local employers; and public elementary and secondary school
systems and district employers.
The Commission will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to
rescind its regulations at 29 CFR 1602, which impose these data-
collection requirements. With its rescission, the EEOC no longer has
authority to collect contractor data on behalf of DOL.
Alternatives: None
[[Page 52922]]
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Undetermined
Risks: Undetermined
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal, Local, State
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Kimberly Essary, Associate Legal Counsel, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, 131 M St. NE, Washington, DC 20507
Phone: 202 921-3240
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3046-AB37
BILLING CODE 6570-01-P
Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council Statement of Regulatory Priorities
Introduction
The Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (Appraisal Subcommittee) \8\ has several key
statutory responsibilities under Title XI of the Financial Institutions
Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, among other
responsibilities.\9\ The Appraisal Subcommittee monitors the appraisal
regulations adopted by the Federal financial institutions regulatory
agencies, ensuring appraisals for federally related transactions follow
the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP),
established by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal
Foundation (the Foundation).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Appraisal Subcommittee is composed of seven members,
each designated by the head of a Federal agency (the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB), the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
(OCC), the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Federal
Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)). See 12 U.S.C. 3310 and 12 U.S.C.
1708(g)(2).
\9\ 12 U.S.C. Chapter 34A.
\10\ 12 U.S.C. 3332(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Appraisal Subcommittee monitors and reviews the practices,
procedures, activities, and organizational structure of the
Foundation.\11\ The Appraisal Subcommittee also monitors the
requirements established by each State for the certification and
licensing of individuals who are qualified to perform appraisals in
connection with federally related transactions, including a code of
professional responsibility.\12\ Since 2010, the Appraisal Subcommittee
has also been responsible for monitoring the requirements established
by each State for the registration and supervision of the operations
and activities of an appraisal management company (AMC).\13\ The
Appraisal Subcommittee is authorized to take action against a State for
non-compliance.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 12 U.S.C. 3332(b).
\12\ 12 U.S.C. 3332(a)(1)(A).
\13\ 12 U.S.C. 3332(a)(1)(B).
\14\ 12 U.S.C. 3347.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Appraisal Subcommittee maintains a national
registry of State certified and licensed real estate appraisers
eligible to perform appraisals for federally related transactions,\15\
as well as a separate national registry of AMCs that are either
registered with and subject to supervision of a State appraiser
certifying and licensing agency or operating subsidiaries of federally
regulated financial institutions.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 12 U.S.C. 3332(a)(3).
\16\ 12 U.S.C. 3332(a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Appraisal Subcommittee operates a national hotline to
address complaints related to non-compliance with appraisal
independence standards and USPAP, which are referred by the Appraisal
Subcommittee to other appropriate governmental authorities for
investigation.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 12 U.S.C. 3351(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Priorities
Executive Order 14219 (Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing
the President's ``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory
Initiative) was issued on February 19, 2025.\18\ This Executive Order
directed Federal agencies to review their regulations in order to
identify those that do not comply with the law or align with the
Administration's policy. This Executive Order also mandates the repeal
of any regulations deemed unlawful or that impose undue burdens, among
other considerations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 90 FR 10583 (Feb. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with Executive Order 14219, the Appraisal
Subcommittee conducted a review of its appraiser regulations found in
part 1102 of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Although this regulatory review did not identify any of the classes of
regulations specified in Executive Order 14219, the Appraisal
Subcommittee has identified the opportunity to streamline its existing
regulations in support of this deregulatory initiative by reducing
administrative burdens, eliminating unnecessary paperwork, removing
outdated or obsolete requirements, and ensuring compliance with
applicable laws and policies, such as the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016.
The revisions to these existing regulations aim to streamline
implementation by enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the
agency's practices, ensuring the regulations are simple and easy to
understand, promoting transparency for accountability, and decreasing
the overall number of requirements. As part of this effort, the
Appraisal Subcommittee plans to reduce the overall word count of its
appraiser regulations found in part 1102 of title 12 of the CFR.
The following five Regulatory Identifier Numbers (RINs) have been
identified as associated with the review:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIN Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3139-AA02.......................... Definitions for Appraiser
Regulation
3139-AA03.......................... Temporary Waiver Requests
3139-AA04.......................... Appraisal Subcommittee's Rules of
Practice for Proceedings
3139-AA05.......................... Appraisal Subcommittee's Privacy
Act and Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) Regulations
3139-AA06.......................... Appraisal Subcommittee's Appraisal
Management Company Registry Fee
Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Appraisal Subcommittee is considering the
following regulatory actions listed in the above chart: (1)
consolidating all defined terms into a new centralized definitions
section, (2) streamlining the regulations governing the practice and
procedures of temporary waiver proceedings, (3) revising its rules of
practice for proceedings to lessen administrative burdens, eliminate
unnecessary paperwork, and streamline
[[Page 52923]]
the efficiency and effectiveness of the agency's practices, (4)
ensuring the agency's regulations implementing the Privacy Act and the
Freedom of Information Act are current and consistent with applicable
laws and policies, and (5) proposing to clarify the calculation of the
national registry fee for AMCs that have not been in operation for over
a year as set forth in 12 U.S.C. 3338(a)(4)(B)(ii).
Additionally, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is
currently leading an effort to update title 2 of the CFR, which
includes a proposal to incorporate OMB guidance regarding Federal
awards into regulation. As part of this government-wide initiative, OMB
has proposed a new chapter for the Appraisal Subcommittee to adopt 2
CFR 200 in subtitle B of title 2 of the CFR.
Significant Regulatory Priorities
The Appraisal Subcommittee is not planning to pursue any regulatory
actions within the next 12 months, which would constitute a
``significant regulatory action'' under the definition of that term in
Executive Order 12866.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repeal of Sub-Regulatory Guidance
On March 25, 2025, the Appraisal Subcommittee rescinded 43 outdated
sub-regulatory guidance documents from its website in accordance with
Executive Order 14219.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See, supra note 11.
BILLING CODE 6700-01
General Services Administration (GSA)--Regulatory Plan--October 2025
The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) delivers value and
savings in real estate, acquisition, technology, and other mission-
support services across the Federal Government. GSA's acquisition
solutions supply Federal purchasers with cost-effective, high-quality
products and services from commercial vendors. GSA provides workplaces
for Federal employees and oversees the preservation of historic Federal
properties. GSA helps keep the nation safe and efficient by providing
tools, equipment, and non-tactical vehicles to the U.S. military and by
providing State and local governments with law enforcement equipment,
firefighting and rescue equipment, and disaster recovery products and
services.
As GSA is developing its regulations, it seeks to increase
participation and engagement of members of the public affected by its
regulations, including in the development of its regulatory priorities.
In its Regulatory Plan, it details engagement efforts that have helped
to inform its priorities to date, as well as future engagement it has
planned. GSA serves the public by delivering products and services
directly to its Federal customers through the Office of Governmentwide
Policy (OGP), the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS), and the Public
Buildings Service (PBS). GSA has a continuing commitment to its Federal
customers and the U.S. taxpayers by providing those products and
services in the most cost-effective manner possible.
Office of Government-Wide Policy
OGP sets Governmentwide policy in the areas of personal and real
property, mail, travel, aviation, motor vehicles, relocation,
transportation, information technology, regulatory information, and the
management and operation of Federal advisory committees. OGP also helps
direct how all Federal supplies and services are acquired, as well as
GSA's own acquisition programs. Pursuant to Executive Orders 12866,
``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (September 30, 1993), 13563,
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' (January 18, 2011),
14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation'' (January 31,
2025) and 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's ``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory
Initiative'' (February 25, 2025), the Regulatory Plan and Unified
Agenda provides notice regarding OGP's regulatory and deregulatory
actions within the Executive Branch.
Office of Acquisition Policy
GSA's rules and practices on how it buys goods and services from
its business partners are covered by the General Services
Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR), which implements and
supplements the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). The GSAR
establishes agency acquisition regulations that affect GSA's business
partners (e.g., prospective offerors and contractors) and acquisition
of leasehold interests in real property. The latter are established
under the authority of 40 U.S.C. 121(c) and 585. The GSAR implements
contract clauses, solicitation provisions, and standard forms that
control the relationship between GSA and its contractors and
prospective contractors.
GSA has begun reviewing its agency supplement and is preparing
necessary changes in support of Executive Order (E.O.) 14275, Restoring
Common Sense to Federal Procurement, and Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) memorandum M-25-26, Overhauling the Federal Acquisition
Regulation. Executive Order 14275 mandates the first comprehensive,
end-to-end overhaul of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its
agency supplements in 40 years. The core goal of this Executive order
is to stop the inefficient use of taxpayer dollars by eliminating
excessive acquisition regulations. OMB memo M-25-26 directs agencies to
streamline their FAR supplements by minimizing regulations that are not
explicitly required by statute or the Executive Order, and by aligning
with the FAR Council's deviation guidance.
GSA plans on making concurrent changes to the GSAR to adopt
language moved from the FAR in Federal Supply Schedules contracting and
utilities. GSA plans to wait to make conforming changes to other GSAR
parts after finalization of FAR rulemaking.
Office of Asset and Transportation Management
The Office of Asset and Transportation Management (MA) delivers
evidence-based government-wide policies, guidance, and innovative
solutions to promote performance improvement, efficient asset
management and responsible spending to drive government-wide
improvement and efficiency. All nine (9) policy areas managed by MA are
established and governed by 163 United States Codes, Statutes,
Presidential Directives, Executive Orders, Office of Management &
Budget Circulars and Management Policy Memorandums.
The FTR enumerates the travel and relocation policy for all title 5
Executive Agency civilian employees. The Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) is available at https://ecfr.federalregister.gov. The FTR is
contained in chapters 300 through 304 of title 41 of the CFR, which
implements statutory requirements and Executive branch policies for
travel by Federal civilian employees and others authorized to travel at
Government expense. The FMR is contained in chapter 102 of title 41 of
the CFR, and establishes policy for Federal aircraft management, mail
management, transportation management, personal property management,
real property management, motor vehicle management, and committee
management.
Executive Order 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation'' (January 31, 2025) and Executive Order 14219, ``Ensuring
Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's ``Department of
Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory Initiative'' (February 25, 2025),
are both deregulatory initiatives
[[Page 52924]]
set by the current Administration focused on the legal justification
for regulations and setting goals for reducing regulation.
In response to these directives, the Office of Asset and
Transportation Management conducted a review of the Federal Management
Regulation (FMR) and Federal Transportation Regulation (FTR) Part for
consistency with law and Administration policy. As Executive Order
14192 states, agencies must work to alleviate the burden on those
impacted by regulations, and to that end, GSA has streamlined and
simplified regulations with an underlying statutory requirement.
The review focused on minimizing non-statutory regulations. The
rescinded regulations were either not legally required, were
duplicative of other agencies' rules, or were not essential for the
Administrator's functions under Subtitle I of Title 40, United States
Code.
Federal Acquisition Service
FAS is the lead organization for procurement of products and
services (other than real property) for the Federal Government. The FAS
organization leverages the buying power of the Government by
consolidating Federal agencies' requirements for common goods and
services. FAS provides a range of high-quality and flexible acquisition
services to increase overall Government effectiveness and efficiency by
aligning resources around key functions. For these acquisitions, FAS
follows the regulations established by the Office of Government-wide
Policy.
Public Buildings Service
PBS is the largest public real estate organization in the United
States. As the landlord for the civilian Federal Government, PBS
acquires space on behalf of the Federal Government through new
construction and leasing and acts as a manager for Federal properties
across the country. PBS is responsible for over 370 million rentable
square feet of workspace for Federal employees; has jurisdiction,
custody, and control over more than 1,600 federally owned assets
totaling over 180 million rentable square feet; and contracts for more
than 7,000 leased assets, totaling over 180 million rentable square
feet. For these acquisitions, PBS follows the regulations established
by the Office of Government-wide Policy.
Dated:
Name: Larry Allen
Associate Administrator, Office of Government-wide Policy.
BILLING CODE 6820-14
BILLING CODE 6820-34-P
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) aim is
to increase human understanding of the solar system and the universe
that contains it and to improve American aeronautics ability. NASA's
basic organization consists of the Headquarters, nine field Centers,
the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (a Federally funded research and
development center), and several component installations which report
to Center Directors. Responsibility for overall planning, coordination,
and control of NASA programs is vested in NASA Headquarters, located in
Washington, DC.
NASA is updating its Strategic Plan in preparation for publication
in 2026. The Agency's mission is to ``explore the unknown in air and
space, innovate for the benefit of humanity, and inspire the world
through discovery.'' The 2026 Strategic Plan will be available at
nasa.gov/performance and will guide NASA's program activities through a
framework of strategic goals and objectives oriented toward mission
success.
NASA's Regulatory Philosophy and Principles
The Agency's rulemaking program strives to be responsive,
efficient, and transparent. NASA adheres to the general principles set
forth in Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review.
NASA is a signatory to the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR
Council) along with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy,
Department of War, the General Services Administration, and signatory
to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). In accordance with the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. Chapter 13), the
FAR Council assists in the direction and coordination of Government-
wide procurement policy and Government-wide procurement regulatory
activities in the Federal Government. The FAR at 48 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Chapter 1, contains procurement regulations that
apply to NASA and other Federal agencies. Pursuant to 41 United States
Code (U.S.C.), section 1302, and FAR 1.103(b), the FAR is jointly
prepared, issued, and maintained by the Secretary of Defense, the
Administrator of General Services, and the Administrator of NASA, under
several of their statutory authorities.
NASA Priority Regulatory Actions
NASA is highlighting the priorities summarized below in this
Agenda.
Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of NASA--Effectuation
of Title VI of the Civils Rights Act of 1964
NASA is amending 14 CFR part 1250, Nondiscrimination in Federally-
Assisted Programs, to align with the Department of Justice's Title VI
regulations implementing Executive Order 14281, Restoring Equality of
Opportunity and Meritocracy. These revisions would eliminate disparate-
impact liability under NASA's Title VI rule, clarifying that
enforcement is limited to instances of intentional discrimination. The
amendments also streamline compliance procedures, modernize
definitions, and harmonize NASA's requirements with Government-wide
nondiscrimination policies, thereby ensuring consistent application
across Federal agencies.
Because these amendments narrow the scope of liability for
recipients of NASA financial assistance, they are considered
deregulatory in nature. By removing disparate-impact liability, the
revisions reduce potential compliance costs, investigative burdens, and
litigation risks for grant recipients, including universities,
nonprofit research organizations, and small entities, while maintaining
strong protection against intentional discrimination. This action
reflects NASA's commitment to promoting fairness and transparency in
Federally assisted programs while aligning with the Administration's
priorities to eliminate unjustified regulatory burdens.
NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Supplement (NFS)
NASA is amending its regulations in the NASA FAR Supplement (NFS)
at 48 CFR, Chapter 18, to align with the requirements of E.O. 14275,
Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement, and Executive Order
14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.
Executive Order 14192 establishes that the policy of the executive
branch is to exercise prudence and financial responsibility in the
expenditure of Federal funds, while alleviating unnecessary regulatory
burdens on the American people. Executive Order 14275 directs the FAR
Council to reform the FAR by streamlining and simplifying the Federal
procurement system--removing outdated or burdensome requirements and
ensuring greater agility, effectiveness, and efficiency in Federal
acquisition. In
[[Page 52925]]
accordance with these directives, Federal agencies are required to
review and revise their respective FAR supplements, including agency-
specific policies and guidance, to ensure consistency with the reformed
FAR. To comply with these directives, NASA will reform the NFS to align
with this broader FAR modernization goal and is intended to support a
more streamlined, efficient, and accessible procurement framework. As
part of this initiative, NASA plans to amend each subchapter of the NFS
and will issue seven proposed rules to revise Title 48 CFR, Chapter 18
(Parts 1801 through 1853).
This regulatory effort also supports the Administration's
deregulatory priorities by: incorporating recent executive order
requirements (e.g., removal of DEIA requirements) as well as public
feedback received on the deviations and any comments received through
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs desk officer,
including input from the Deregulatory Request for Information;
advancing streamlining activities not reflected in the Unified Agenda,
such as the repeal of outdated guidance documents (e.g. based on old
Inspector General findings) and the reduction of unnecessary paperwork
burdens; promoting fiscal responsibility by enhancing acquisition
oversight; enhancing Executive order compliance (e.g., Made-In-America
waiver requirements); and streamlining policy implementation.
Additionally, NASA's proposed rulemakings are expected to improve
acquisition efficiency and compliance and enhance small business access
to contracting opportunities by lowering administrative barriers.
Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act
NASA is amending its existing regulations related to environmental
quality at 14 CFR 1216 as directed by the Council on Environmental
Quality per the Memorandum from Executive Office of the President for
Heads of Federal Departments and Agencies to meet Executive Order
requirements. These amendments include making conforming amendments 14
CFR subpart 1216.1 to accurately reflect the current positional
structure and management authority for environmental program policy at
NASA and amending 14 CFR 1216.3, which sets forth NASA's procedures for
implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
Amendments will also be made to implement procedures consistent with
E.O. 14154, Unleashing American Energy, including meeting deadlines
laid out in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
NASA is also amending its regulations to advance its deregulatory
priorities and streamline existing processes, aligning with broader
Government-wide initiatives. These rulemakings are expected to result
in net benefits by reducing burdens and promoting principles of fiscal
responsibility. The amendments will formally integrate these
efficiencies into the Agency's NEPA procedures, allowing NASA to
clarify levels of review, streamline public notices, and to adopt
categorical exclusions from other agencies, which avoids redundant
environmental reviews for common activities. Furthermore, NASA will be
able to take on the role of a lead agency, or work with others in a
joint lead capacity, to streamline projects involving multiple
entities, ensuring a single, coordinated environmental review. These
anticipated actions reflect a commitment to open government by focusing
on streamlined implementation and enhanced oversight, thereby making
the review process more efficient for NASA's missions and improving
interagency collaboration.
Implementation of the Administrative False Claims Act
NASA is amending its regulations at 14 CFR 1264 to implement the
Administrative Fraud Claims Act (AFCA) included in the 2025 National
Defense Authorization Act. The AFCA requires NASA to amend its
regulations originally issued under the Program Fraud Remedies Act of
1986 to update procedures for investigating, adjudicating, and imposing
penalties and assessments for false claims and false statements
submitted to the Agency.
In addition to being required by statute, the implementing
regulations advance the Administration's deregulatory agenda and policy
priorities. The proposed regulations promote both integrity in
Government operations and fiscal responsibility by providing a
mechanism for recovery of inappropriate payments of Government funds to
contractors, grantees, and other funding recipients. The regulations
also support efficiency by providing a streamlined process for recovery
of Government funds while resolving potential concerns about the
authority of officials empowered to adjudicate administrative fraud
claims.
Streamlining of Paperwork Burdens
NASA continues to advance its regulatory efficiency by reducing
paperwork burdens on the public and improving the quality and
timeliness of information collection. In alignment with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, OMB Circular A-11, Section 280, and E.O. 14192, NASA is
implementing a multi-pronged strategy to streamline data collection and
enhance customer experience.
Specifically, this includes working with program offices that need
input by encouraging fewer, more targeted questions and aligning
collections with mission-critical outcomes. Another method involves
conducting voluntary feedback, which reduces unnecessary burden.
NASA continues to focus its collection requests on methods that
allow selected members of the public to rapidly provide input on issues
that support the Agency's key mission areas. One example uses OMB
Control # 2700-0159, Generic Clearance for the NASA Office of Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math (OSTEM) Engagement Performance
Measurement and Evaluation (Testing). This generic clearance allows
NASA OSTEM to continue to test new and existing information collection
forms and assessment instruments with members of the public to rapidly
assess how and in what ways NASA Internships contribute to students
planned educational pursuits and career placements/trajectories,
leading to a larger talent pool ready to help NASA meet challenging
missions in the future.
Similarly, using OMB Control #2700-0181, Generic Clearance for
Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, section 280
Implementation), NASA is working to gain feedback using easy-to-
complete methods that will improve its ability to engage small
businesses with innovative technologies. One method has led to
providing clearer guidance and sample templates for Small Business
Innovative Research (SBIR) proposals to reduce the burden on these
businesses by making it easier to submit SBIR proposals that NASA can
rapidly and effectively evaluate. This will allow more businesses with
effective ideas and technologies to do business with NASA without
having to start with the more burdensome traditional contracting
processes.
These efforts support the Administration's goals of reducing
regulatory burden, improving transparency, and enhancing service
delivery. NASA's approach ensures that information collections are
efficient, purposeful, and respectful of public time and resources.
[[Page 52926]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FALSE CLAIMS ACT [2700-AE79]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: Public Law 118-159, sec 5203; Public Law 99-509,
sec. 6101-6104
Relevant Executive Orders: 14192
CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1264
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, June 21, 2025, The new statute
became effective on December 23, 2024, and requires NASA to amend its
regulations at 14 CFR 1264 by June 21, 2025, within 180 days of
enactment.
Abstract: NASA is proposing amendments to implement section 5203 of
the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (P.L. 118-159)
This Section modifies Administrative False Claims Act of 2023 (AFCA),
previously known as the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986. It
offers a streamlined administrative remedy for addressing false claims
and statements that the Department of Justice (DOJ) opts not to
prosecute.
The AFCA complements the more widely known and widely used civil
False Claims Act by providing an administrative process by which
federal executive branch agencies can address relatively small dollar
value false claims that might not warrant the attention of the
Department of Justice. The liability provisions of the AFCA remain
closely modeled on those in the False Claims Act. The principal
differences between the False Claims Act and the AFCA are that the AFCA
does not include a qui tam enforcement mechanism, covers false written
statements even in the absence of a claim, and provides for
administrative rather than judicial resolution.
Statement of Need: NASA requires updated regulations to comply with
the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, which revitalized the
Administrative False Claims Act (AFCA). The revised rule is needed to
establish clear administrative procedures for addressing false claims
and misrepresentations made to NASA, particularly smaller-dollar cases
not pursued by the Department of Justice. This ensures the Agency has a
streamlined mechanism to protect federal funds, deter fraudulent
conduct, and strengthen accountability in contracts and grants.
Summary of Legal Basis: The rule is based on:
6. 31 U.S.C. 3801-3812, the Administrative False Claims Act, as
amended by Public Law 118-159 (FY 2025 NDAA, 5203).
7. 31 U.S.C. 3809, requiring each agency head to promulgate
implementing regulations.
8. 51 U.S.C. 20113(a), NASA's general authority. The AFCA
supplements the False Claims Act by authorizing agencies to impose
civil penalties administratively for false claims and false written
statements submitted to NASA.
Alternatives: The primary alternative to this rule would be to
continue relying solely on the Department of Justice under the civil
False Claims Act. However, that approach is inefficient for lower-value
fraud cases and risks leaving misconduct unaddressed. Another
alternative is maintaining NASA's prior, outdated regulations that
would fail to implement statutory requirements and would not provide
the clear procedural framework mandated by Congress. Thus, amending
Part 1264 is the most effective and legally compliant approach.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs: Minimal additional
administrative costs associated with investigations, hearings, and
enforcement. No significant federalism, tribal, or private sector
compliance burdens. No Paperwork Reduction Act implications.
Benefits: Stronger deterrence against fraud, faster resolution of
cases, recovery of misused federal funds, and better stewardship of
taxpayer resources. By focusing on smaller-dollar fraud cases, the rule
maximizes efficiency and prevents resource-draining referrals to DOJ.
Risks: The key risk of not implementing the rule is leaving NASA
unable to effectively enforce against smaller fraudulent claims,
leading to loss of federal funds, weakened deterrence, and diminished
program integrity. Another risk is statutory noncompliance failure to
implement amendments within the required 180 days could expose NASA to
legal or oversight challenges. Risks of implementation are low; the
framework is modeled on existing federal fraud enforcement standards
and provides due process protection.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/30/25 90 FR 61109
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/13/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Public Compliance Cost: Base Year for Dollar Estimates: $2,026
Agency Contact: Bryan Diederich, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, NASA Headquarters, Office of the General Counsel, 300 E
Street SW, Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 202 358-0216
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2700-AE79
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
[2700-AE80]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14192
CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1216
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
is amending its existing regulations related to environmental quality
at 14 CFR 1216 as directed by the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) per Memorandum from Executive Office of the President for Heads
of Federal Departments and Agencies to meet Executive Orders
requirements.
These amendments include making conforming amendments in 14 CFR
subpart 1216.1 to accurately reflect the current positional structure
and management authority for environmental program policy at NASA. As a
result of Executive Order 14154, CEQ has removed its NEPA implementing
regulations from the CFR, which became effective April 11, 2025.
Statement of Need: The need for this amendment is to ensure NASA's
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations align with current
federal mandates, specifically those from the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) and recent Executive Orders (EOs). The current
regulations at 14 CFR 1216 are outdated. This rulemaking will update
NASA's procedures for implementing NEPA, ensuring the agency's NEPA
program operates efficiently and in full accordance with the law.
Summary of Legal Basis: Directed by the Council on Environmental
Quality per Memorandum from Executive Office of the President for Heads
of Federal Departments and Agencies to meet Executive Orders
requirements and
[[Page 52927]]
remove references to rescinded regulations.
Alternatives: Keeping the outdated regulations would result in
operational inefficiencies. This is not a viable option. A single
rulemaking is the most efficient and preferred method. It addresses all
necessary updates at once, providing a clear, consistent framework for
NASA's NEPA program.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Updating NEPA regulations may yield
cost savings for NASA. These savings may come from improved efficiency,
accelerating project approvals, and mitigating risk, which minimizes
the likelihood of legal challenges and project delays.
Risks: Benefits listed above will not be achieved.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule Effective........ 02/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Nick Murdock, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, NASA Headquarters, Office of Strategic Infrastructure,
300 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 321 338-6816
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2700-AE80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY-ASSISTED PROGRAMS OF NASA--
EFFECTUATION OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVILS RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 [2700-AE89]
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1
Relevant Executive Orders: 14281
CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1250
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: NASA is amending 14 CFR part 1250, Nondiscrimination in
Federally-Assisted Programs, to align with the Department of Justice's
Title VI regulations implementing Executive Order 14281, Restoring
Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy. The amendments clarify
nondiscrimination obligations and streamline compliance procedures for
recipients of federal financial assistance.
Statement of Need: NASA is amending its regulations to 14 CFR part
1250, Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs, to align with
the Department of Justice's Title VI regulations implementing Executive
Order 14281, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy. The
revisions clarify nondiscrimination obligations and streamline
compliance procedures for recipients of federal financial assistance.
Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is authorized under Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d1) and Executive Order
14281, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.
Alternatives: Regulatory amendment was determined to be the most
effective approach to meet E.O. 14281's directive and ensure alignment
with DOJ's Title VI regulation.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed changes are not
expected to impose significant new costs. Benefits include improved
clarity for recipients and consistency with other federal agencies'
civil rights regulations.
Risks: Inaction could result in continued inconsistency with DOJ's
Title VI regulation and confusion among recipients. Updating the NASA
regulation mitigates legal and operational risks.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 06/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Public Compliance Cost: Base Year for Dollar Estimates: $2,026
Agency Contact: Rob Grant, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, NASA Headquarters, Office of Equal Opportunity, 300 E
Street SW, Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 321 867-9169
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2700-AE89
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
132. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FALSE CLAIMS ACT
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 118-159, sec 5203; Pub. L. 99-509, sec.
6101-6104
Relevant Executive Orders: 14192
CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1264
Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, June 21, 2025, The new statute
became effective on December 23, 2024, and requires NASA to amend its
regulations at 14 CFR 1264 by June 21, 2025, within 180 days of
enactment.
Abstract: NASA is proposing amendments to implement Section 5203
of the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (P.L. 118-159)
This Section modifies Administrative False Claims Act of 2023 (AFCA),
previously known as the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986. It
offers a streamlined administrative remedy for addressing false claims
and statements that the Department of Justice (DOJ) opts not to
prosecute.
The AFCA complements the more widely known and widely used civil
False Claims Act by providing an administrative process by which
federal executive branch agencies can address relatively small dollar
value false claims that might not warrant the attention of the
Department of Justice. The liability provisions of the AFCA remain
closely modeled on those in the False Claims Act. The principal
differences between the False Claims Act and the AFCA are that the AFCA
does not include a qui tam enforcement mechanism, covers false written
statements even in the absence of a claim, and provides for
administrative rather than judicial resolution.
Statement of Need: NASA requires updated regulations to comply with
the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, which revitalized the
Administrative False Claims Act (AFCA). The revised rule is needed to
establish clear administrative procedures for addressing false claims
and misrepresentations made to NASA, particularly smaller-dollar cases
not pursued by the Department of Justice. This ensures the Agency has a
streamlined mechanism to protect federal funds, deter fraudulent
conduct, and strengthen accountability in contracts and grants.
Summary of Legal Basis: The rule is based on:
31 U.S.C. 3801-3812, the Administrative False Claims Act,
as amended by Public Law 118-159 (FY 2025 NDAA, 5203).
31 U.S.C. 3809, requiring each agency head to promulgate
implementing regulations.
51 U.S.C. 20113(a), NASA's general authority. The AFCA
supplements the False Claims Act by authorizing agencies to impose
civil penalties administratively for false claims and false written
statements submitted to NASA.
Alternatives: The primary alternative to this rule would be to
continue relying solely on the Department of Justice under the civil
False Claims Act. However, that approach is inefficient for lower-value
fraud cases and risks
[[Page 52928]]
leaving misconduct unaddressed. Another alternative is maintaining
NASA's prior, outdated regulations that would fail to implement
statutory requirements and would not provide the clear procedural
framework mandated by Congress. Thus, amending Part 1264 is the most
effective and legally compliant approach.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs: Minimal additional
administrative costs associated with investigations, hearings, and
enforcement. No significant federalism, tribal, or private sector
compliance burdens. No Paperwork Reduction Act implications.
Benefits: Stronger deterrence against fraud, faster resolution of
cases, recovery of misused federal funds, and better stewardship of
taxpayer resources. By focusing on smaller-dollar fraud cases, the rule
maximizes efficiency and prevents resource-draining referrals to DOJ.
Risks: The key risk of not implementing the rule is leaving NASA
unable to effectively enforce against smaller fraudulent claims,
leading to loss of federal funds, weakened deterrence, and diminished
program integrity. Another risk is statutory noncompliancefailure to
implement amendments within the required 180 days could expose NASA to
legal or oversight challenges. Risks of implementation are low; the
framework is modeled on existing federal fraud enforcement standards
and provides due process protections.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 12/30/25 90 FR 61109
NPRM Comment Period End............. 02/13/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: None
Public Compliance Cost: Base Year for Dollar Estimates: $2,026
Agency Contact: Bryan Diederich, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, NASA Headquarters, Office of the General Counsel, 300 E
Street SW, Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 202 358-0216
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2700-AE79
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
133. PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
Relevant Executive Orders: 14154; 14192
CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1216
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
is amending its existing regulations related to environmental quality
at 14 CFR 1216 as directed by the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) per Memorandum from Executive Office of the President for Heads
of Federal Departments and Agencies to meet Executive Orders
requirements.
These amendments include making conforming amendments in 14 CFR
subpart 1216.1 to accurately reflect the current positional structure
and management authority for environmental program policy at NASA. As a
result of Executive Order 14154, CEQ has removed its NEPA implementing
regulations from the CFR, which became effective April 11, 2025.
Statement of Need: The need for this amendment is to ensure NASA's
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations align with current
federal mandates, specifically those from the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) and recent Executive Orders (EOs). The current
regulations at 14 CFR 1216 are outdated. This rulemaking will update
NASA's procedures for implementing NEPA, ensuring the agency's NEPA
program operates efficiently and in full accordance with the law.
Summary of Legal Basis: Directed by the Council on Environmental
Quality per Memorandum from Executive Office of the President for Heads
of Federal Departments and Agencies to meet Executive Orders
requirements and remove references to rescinded regulations.
Alternatives: Keeping the outdated regulations would result in
operational inefficiencies. This is not a viable option. A single
rulemaking is the most efficient and preferred method. It addresses all
necessary updates at once, providing a clear, consistent framework for
NASA's NEPA program.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Updating NEPA regulations may yield
cost savings for NASA. These savings may come from improved efficiency,
accelerating project approvals, and mitigating risk, which minimizes
the likelihood of legal challenges and project delays.
Risks: Benefits listed above will not be achieved.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Nick Murdock, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, NASA Headquarters, Office of Strategic Infrastructure,
300 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 321 338-6816
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2700-AE80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
134. NONDISCRIMINATION IN FEDERALLY-ASSISTED PROGRAMS OF
NASA--EFFECTUATION OF TITLE VI OF THE CIVILS RIGHTS ACT OF 1964
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1
Relevant Executive Orders: 14281
CFR Citation: 14 CFR 1250
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: NASA is amending 14 CFR part 1250, Nondiscrimination in
Federally-Assisted Programs, to align with the Department of Justice's
Title VI regulations implementing Executive Order 14281, Restoring
Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy. The amendments clarify
nondiscrimination obligations and streamline compliance procedures for
recipients of federal financial assistance.
Statement of Need: NASA is amending its regulations to 14 CFR part
1250, Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs, to align with
the Department of Justice's Title VI regulations implementing Executive
Order 14281, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy. The
revisions clarify nondiscrimination obligations and streamline
compliance procedures for recipients of federal financial assistance.
Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is authorized under Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d1) and Executive Order
14281, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.
Alternatives: Regulatory amendment was determined to be the most
effective approach to meet E.O. 14281's directive and ensure alignment
with DOJ's Title VI regulation.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The proposed changes are not
expected to impose significant new costs. Benefits include improved
clarity for recipients and consistency with other federal agencies'
civil rights regulations.
[[Page 52929]]
Risks: Inaction could result in continued inconsistency with DOJ's
Title VI regulation and confusion among recipients. Updating the NASA
regulation mitigates legal and operational risks.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Public Compliance Cost: Base Year for Dollar Estimates: $2,026
Agency Contact: Rob Grant, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, NASA Headquarters, Office of Equal Opportunity, 300 E
Street SW, Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 321 867-9169
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 2700-AE89
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) issues
regulations for other federal agencies. These regulations include
records management, information services, and information security. For
example, records management regulations directed to federal agencies
concern the proper management and disposition of federal records.
Through the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), NARA also
issues Government-wide regulations concerning information security
classification, controlled unclassified information (CUI), and
declassification programs; through the Office of Government Information
Services, NARA issues Government-wide regulations concerning the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) dispute resolution services and FOIA
ombudsman functions; and through the Office of the Federal Register,
NARA issues regulations concerning publishing federal documents in the
Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, and other publications.
NARA regulations directed to the public primarily address access to
and use of our historically valuable holdings, including archives,
donated historical materials, Nixon Presidential materials, and other
Presidential records. NARA also issues regulations relating to the
National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC) grant
programs.
New Digitization Standards for Permanent Still Image Film Records
The next step for digitization standards in NARA's Regulations will
include technical standards for digitizing various permanent still
image film records, such as transparencies, negatives, radiographic,
microfiche, and microfilm. These standards will be added to subpart E
of 36 CFR part 1236.
Proposed Changes to Rescheduling Requirements
In the second quarter of FY 2026, NARA will issue a draft rule with
changes to 36 CFR 1225 regarding requirements for agencies to
reschedule their records. The changes explain when Federal records must
be scheduled, when agencies must reschedule their records, when
agencies can apply previously approved records schedules to digital
records, how to reschedule records, and how to manage General Records
Schedule deviations.
Improving Regulations for Electronic Message Preservation
On January 1, 2021, the Federal Records Act was amended. The
updated law now requires the Archivist of the United States to create
regulations for federal agencies on preserving electronic messages that
are considered records. In response, we are proposing changes to our
regulations by revising Sec. 1236.22, which covers the additional
requirements for managing electronic mail records. The aim is to
clearly outline the records management requirements for electronic
messages and systems.
Comprehensive Records Management Regulations Revision--Enhancing
Oversight Requirements for Records Management
We also propose to amend 36 CFR part 1239. We are removing Subpart
B--Program Assistance, as it is out-of-date and informational, and
provides no agency requirements. We propose updating the remaining
subparts to provide clarity and specificity to our agency oversight
requirements. We propose to move unauthorized disposition requirements
from 36 CFR part 1230 to 36 CFR part 1239 and strengthen them.
BILLING CODE 7515-01U
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NARA Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
135. INTERAGENCY SECURITY CLASSIFICATION APPEALS PANEL BYLAWS,
RULES, AND APPEALS PROCEDURES (RULEMAKING RESULTING FROM A SECTION 610
REVIEW)
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Not subject to, not significant
Legal Authority: E.O. 13526
Relevant Executive Orders: 13526
CFR Citation: 32 CFR 2003
Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, November 21, 2025.
Abstract: ISOO has received guidance from the White House National
Security Council regarding reforms that should be made to the
Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel (ISCAP) Bylaws,
Rules, and Appeals Procedures. The ISCAP hears appeals of mandatory
declassification reviews conducted by agencies, as well reviewing
agency declassification guides to ensure compliance with national
policies. In a way, it acts as a ``Supreme Court'' for classification
decisions that fall within the scope of its authorities, with its
decisions appealable only to the President. The policy reforms aim to
enable the ISCAP to operate more efficiently and effectively,
ultimately declassifying and releasing more information to the American
people that is in the public interest.
Statement of Need: The Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO)
of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is revising
the National Industrial Security Program (NISP) Directive. The NISP
safeguards classified information the Federal Government or foreign
governments release to contractors, licensees, grantees, and
certificate holders. This revision adds provisions that would result in
fewer federal regulations, as they would enable DoD to rescind its
regulation at 32 CFR 148 by incorporating some of its elements within
32 CFR 2004, eliminating unnecessary provisions, and recognizing many
provisions are already codified in DoD's NISPOM.
It also:
Incorporates existing authorities regarding the sharing of insider
threat information.
Clarifies conflicting guidance concerning private joint ventures
with respect to the NISP.
Removes the requirement in many instances for costly and time-
consuming national interest determinations (NIDs), which is an
assessment conducted by the government when an entity is under foreign
ownership, control, or influence, as such concerns are now accounted
for in other government processes.
[[Page 52930]]
Updates program provisions concerning international programs
security that were discussed during the 2018 revision process but not
yet ready for finalization.
Clarifies definitions and other minor administrative edits.
Summary of Legal Basis: Executive Order 12829, as amended,
``National Industrial Security Program'' requires ISOO to develop and
issue implementing directives as needed to implement the program. 32
CFR 2004 is the primary mechanism by which ISOO does so.
Alternatives: None.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review) directs agencies to assess the costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary,
to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects,
distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review) emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing
Regulatory Review) amends section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Risks: The provisions seeking to be updated are woefully out of
date, and until revised are contributing to unnecessary and duplicative
costs both to the government and private industry for the
implementation of the program.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Bryan Oklin, Information Security Oversight Office,
Senior Legal Advisor, National Archives and Records Administration, 700
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Room 500, Washington, DC 20408
Phone: 202 357-6868
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3095-AC30
BILLING CODE 7515-01-P
National Science Foundation
Regulatory Plan, Fall 2025
Overview
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal
agency that supports science and engineering in all 50 states and U.S.
territories. Established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950
(Public Law 81-507), NSF promotes the progress of science; advances the
national health, prosperity, and welfare; and secures the national
defense.
To support these missions, NSF funds basic research conducted at
U.S. colleges and universities, in fields such as mathematics, computer
science, engineering, and biotechnology, and STEM workforce
development. NSF also funds research infrastructure, ranging from
individual instruments to major research facilities and equipment
(i.e., computing facilities, U.S. Antarctic stations, and multi-
billion-dollar telescopes). The funding is chiefly via grants and
represents approximately 25% of federal support overall.
NSF utilizes a rigorous merit-review system to ensure that the
funding proposals submitted to NSF are evaluated in a fair,
competitive, transparent, and in-depth manner. This system incorporates
two criteria, each of which must be given full consideration during the
review and decision-making processes. The intellectual merit criterion
analyzes the proposal's potential to advance knowledge and
understanding within its own field or across different fields; the
broader impacts criterion analyzes the proposal's potential to benefit
society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal
outcomes. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, NSF funded over 8,000 competitive
awards that had been evaluated through this system.
Regulatory Plan Rules
NSF's Fall 2025 Regulatory Plan reflects NSF's regulatory
priorities specifically as they relate to (1) promoting transparency,
disclosure, and open government, and (2) streamlining NSF's current
regulations. Each of these priorities are necessary and vital to
minimizing the regulatory burden on NSF's stakeholder community. Of the
seven regulatory actions in its Fall Unified Agenda, NSF estimates that
at least 25% would, once finalized, mitigate, reduce, or eliminate
regulatory burden.
Deregulatory; Final Rule
Title: Conservation of Antarctic Animals and Plants (RIN 3145-AA69)
Pursuant to the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, as amended, NSF
will amend its regulations to reflect changes to the lists of specially
managed areas, specially protected areas and historic sites or
monuments (HSM) in Antarctica. These changes reflect decisions adopted
by the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties at Antarctic Treaty
Consultative Meetings, the most recent of which took place June 23 to
July 3, 2025.
Title: Revision of NSF Supplemental Regulations, Compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act (RIN 3145-AA73)
NSF is revising its National Environmental Policy Act regulations
in the Code of Federal Regulations. The NSF is taking this action in
light of Executive Order 14154, Unleashing American Energy, and the
Council on Environmental Quality Interim Final Rule to Remove CEQ's
Implementing NEPA Regulations.
Other; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Title: Procedures for Disclosure of Records Under the Freedom of
Information Act (RIN 3145-AA67)
NSF is proposing to amend its regulations to meet the requirements
of the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Public Law 114-185, 130 Stat. 538
(the Act). The Act requires all agencies to review and update their
FOIA regulations and addresses a range of procedural issues, including
establishing a minimum of 90 days for requesters to file an
administrative appeal and providing dispute resolution services at
various times throughout the FOIA process.
Title: Implementation of the Administrative False Claims Act (RIN
3145-AA72)
NSF will amend its regulations to implement provisions of section
5203 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year
2025 (Pub. L. 118-159). Under section 5203, the NDAA revises the
Administrative False Claims Act of 2023 (AFCA) (previously known as the
Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986) and offers a streamlined
administrative remedy for addressing false claims and statements the
Department of Justice opts not to prosecute. The liability provisions
of the AFCA remain closely modeled on those in the False Claims Act
with the principal differences being the AFCA does not include a qui
tam enforcement mechanism, covers false written statements even in the
absence of a claim, and provides for administrative rather than
judicial resolution.
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
2026 Unified Agenda
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) serves as the chief human
resources agency and personnel policy manager for the Federal
Government.
[[Page 52931]]
We are champions of talent for the Federal Government, leading Federal
agencies in workforce policies, programs, and benefits in service to
the American people. We seek to position the Federal Government as a
model employer through innovation and leadership as we build a
rewarding culture that empowers the Federal workforce to tackle some of
our nation's toughest challenges. Additionally, OPM manages a number of
programs on behalf of the Federal workforce, including retirement
services and health benefits. In these areas, OPM strives to serve as a
model not only for other Federal agencies, but for other employers as
well.
OPM's regulatory agenda is aligned with these core mission areas
and advances multiple Trump Administration priorities. Indeed, each of
OPM's regulations is focused on improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of Government--a key Administration priority. In
addition, several of OPM's regulations are:
Actions that focus on regulatory reform and deregulation;
Actions that enhance program oversight;
Actions that strengthen eligibility standards; or
Actions that streamline implementation.
I. Actions That Focus on Regulatory Reform and Deregulation
OPM is committed to recruiting, retaining, and supporting a world-
class Federal workforce. This requires developing incentives for
identifying and rewarding high-performing employees, providing useful
feedback on employee performance, and addressing poor performance.
OPM's regulatory agenda is intended to advance these goals and
reposition the Federal workforce as a place where talented and
motivated workers feel that their contributions to public service are
valued and rewarded. OPM's regulatory agenda is directed toward
advancing each of these goals, thereby enhancing the Federal
Government's capacity to serve both Administration priorities and the
needs of the American people.
Reduction in Force (3206-AO86)
OPM is overhauling the regulations for reductions in force (RIF) to
reduce the amount of agency resources needed to execute reduction in
force actions. Key elements of the proposal are amending the retention
factors to prioritize performance over length of service when
determining which employees will be retained in a RIF, providing
greater flexibility to agencies in structuring a RIF, and narrowing the
scope of employees subject to the onerous documentation requirements.
OPM anticipates this proposal would result in a more streamlined and
efficient RIF process.
Elimination of Time in Grade (3206-AP05)
OPM proposes eliminating the time-in-grade (TIG) restriction on
advancement to competitive service positions in the General Schedule.
Currently, employees in competitive service General Schedule positions
in grades 5 and above must serve 52 weeks in grade before becoming
eligible for promotion to the next grade level. Abolishing the
restriction would eliminate the 52-week service requirement. TIG is an
administrative burden which unduly restricts agencies' ability to make
selections based on job-related criteria and may be a disincentive to
recruiting or retaining employees with needed skills sets. OPM
anticipates that eliminating TIG-related approvals and reviews may lead
to efficiency gains by enabling agencies to fill positions with
qualified candidates more quickly than is currently the case. An
employee must continue to meet occupational qualification standard
requirements and any additional job-related qualification requirements
established for the position.
Attorney Fees and Personnel Action Coverage under the Back
Pay Act (3206-AO87)
OPM is proposing regulations governing the coverage of, and
attorney fee awards under, the Back Pay Act to reduce administrative
burdens and better comport with Congressional intent. OPM anticipates
that the overall costs to Federal agencies would decrease because of
the reduction in the types of actions covered by the back pay
regulations and a decrease in the amount of attorney fees agencies are
required to pay. As part of OPM's regulatory review pursuant to
Executive Order 14219 (90 FR 10583), OPM identified the back pay
regulations as not being based on the best reading of the underlying
statutory authority. OPM proposes narrowing the definition of
``personnel action'' consistent with the underlying statutory
authority. In addition, OPM proposes to limit the payment of attorney
fees to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and effectively.
Suitability and Fitness (3206-AO84)
OPM plans to finalize its rulemaking to amend the Federal
Government personnel vetting adjudicative criteria for determining
suitability or fitness. The purpose of the rule is to improve the rigor
and timeliness by which OPM and agencies vet individuals for risk to
the integrity and efficiency of the service and to make clear that
individuals who engage in serious misconduct while employed in Federal
service are subject to the same suitability procedures and actions as
applicants for employment. The proposed would revise the standards and
processes by which OPM and agencies efficiently and appropriately vet
individuals. More expeditious removal and debarment of individuals
found to negatively impact the integrity or efficiency of the service
will reduce risks posed by such individuals and will reduce costs to
agencies, allowing them to spend resources on mission services rather
than administrative processes.
Reduction in Force Appeals (3206-AO99)
OPM is proposing to modify the regulations for reduction in force
(RIF) to streamline the RIF appeals process. The proposed rule would
streamline the appeals process, which will save agencies and appellants
money and allow prompt resolution of disputes.
Suitability Action Appeals (3206-AO97)
OPM is proposing amendments to the review processes for suitability
actions. The purpose of the proposed rule is to streamline the appeals
process, saving agencies and appellants money and allowing all parties
to reach final resolution more promptly.
II. Actions That Enhance Program Oversight
Through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Congress and the President
required OPM to strengthen mechanisms for ensuring the validity of
outlays from the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program,
including ensuring that enrolled individuals and claims paid are valid
under program criteria. OPM is undertaking a range of regulatory
actions to effectuate its statutory requirements and harmonize with
Administration priorities to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse within
the FEHB program.
Federal Employees Benefits: Enrollment Integrity (3206-
AO93)
OPM is proposing new standards to improve enrollment integrity and
accuracy in Federal employee benefits programs, including the Federal
Employees Health Benefits and Federal Employee Group Life Insurance
Programs. This would include amendments to 5 CFR parts 870 and 890 to
establish a new eligibility determination process for children who are
age 26 and over and who are incapable of self-support. In addition,
[[Page 52932]]
OPM is proposing to: (1) allow employing offices to adjust enrollment
type from Self and Family or Self plus one to Self Only if there is
only one person covered by the enrollment and (2) prohibit ineligible
family members from receiving a 31-day extension of coverage when their
coverage is terminated due to a reduction in the enrollee's enrollment
type.
Federal Employees Health Benefits Protection Act
Implementing Regulations (3206-AP08)
OPM is proposing a process to verify a qualifying life event
through which an FEHB or PSHB enrollee seeks to add a member of family
to their enrollment. The regulations will also provide a process to
confirm that any added individual is a covered family member, including
in any Open Season. The regulations will implement requirements of the
One Big Beautiful Bill Act to reduce fraud in the Government health
insurance programs.
III. Actions That Streamline Implementation
The Trump Administration has placed an emphasis on enhancing the
efficiency of the Federal Government. OPM continues to undertake
regulatory actions to make Federal programs and personnel more
effective. Through its regulatory agenda, OPM intends to continue the
work of promoting a dedicated and efficient civil service. Several
regulatory actions this year will modernize hiring and performance
management for the Federal workforce to improve efficiency and provide
agencies with additional flexibilities in the hiring process. Through
these changes, OPM intends to streamline Federal hiring and to
accurately measure the performance of incumbent federal employees.
Recruitment and Selection Through Competitive Examination
(3206-AO24)
The Competitive Service Act of 2015 was intended to facilitate
faster hiring through the sharing of talent across the Government by
permitting agencies to share resumes and select from among candidates
who have competed for similar positions at another hiring agency, were
assessed, and were referred by that agency. OPM is proposing regulatory
changes to allow the head of a Federal agency to share a competitive
certificate of eligibles with one or more other agencies for the
purpose of making selections of qualified candidates. OPM is also
proposing changes to clarify the use of examinations and require
Federal agencies to use technical assessments to fill most positions in
the competitive service. This rule will facilitate the hiring of top
talent across Federal agencies. Although the use of shared certificates
is discretionary, OPM anticipates that agencies that take advantage of
the new provisions will experience cost savings as a result of
expedited time-to-hire and other efficiencies across Government.
Superior Qualifications and Special Needs Pay-setting
Authority (3206-AO95)
OPM is issuing proposed regulations to clarify the applicability of
the superior qualifications and special needs pay-setting authority for
certain categories of General Schedule employees in the excepted
service. OPM believes it is necessary to clarify whether the superior
qualifications and special needs pay-setting authority applies to
certain categories of General Schedule positions in the excepted
service, especially as new categories of excepted service positions are
created, such as positions in the new Schedule G. OPM also proposes
revising the regulations to allow agencies to use their authority under
5 CFR 6.3 to set pay for General Schedule employees in the excepted
service instead of using the superior qualifications and special needs
pay-setting authority.
Personnel Management in Agencies: Strategic Human Capital
Management (3206-AO77)
OPM is issuing a proposed rule to redefine, clarify, and update the
agency reporting requirements for agencies related to strategic human
capital management. This rulemaking will address the Federal Workforce
Priorities Report, HRStat Data-driven Reviews, Human Capital Operating
Plan, Human Capital Reviews, and employee surveys. These amendments
will better align human capital management practices to broader agency
strategic human capital planning. The rule will emphasize that plans
are non-final, deliberative documents that should not be disclosed as
they are crucial for robust workforce planning.
Performance Management Systems for General Schedule,
Prevailing Rate, and Certain Other Employees (3206-AP06)
OPM is proposing amendments to the current performance management
regulations covering General Schedule (GS), Prevailing Rate, and
certain other employees. The proposed rule would increase efficiency
and accountability in performance management by reducing available
summary level patterns, removing the prohibition of a forced
distribution of performance rating levels, and incorporating additional
evaluation of GS appraisal system(s) by OPM. These proposals are
consistent with the changes OPM has proposed for other segments of the
Federal workforce such as senior professionals and the Senior Executive
Service.
Managing Senior Professional Performance (3206-AO88)
OPM is proposing to separate the performance management regulations
for senior level (SL) and scientific/professional (ST) employees
(senior professionals) from general schedule employees. This rule will
enhance agency oversight over senior professional (SP) performance
ratings. The proposed amendments would largely align the SP performance
management regulations with those for the Senior Executive Service. The
new regulations would remove the prohibition of forced distribution of
performance rating levels. Currently, agencies are prohibited from
establishing quotas or limits on the number or proportion of the
various rating levels assigned, meaning that each senior professional
can potentially receive any rating based on their performance,
irrespective of how other senior professionals perform within the
agency. However, governmentwide SP ratings data have consistently shown
that virtually all SP employees receive the highest rating levels
(i.e., levels 4 and 5) despite documented reports of failings. Removing
the prohibition on forced distribution would allow agencies to
establish and enforce limits on the highest SP rating levels, thereby
increasing rigor in the SP appraisal process and leading to a more
normalized distribution of SP ratings across the Federal Government.
BILLING CODE 3280-F
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
136. RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION THROUGH COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: Pub. L. 114-137; Pub. L. 118-188
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 330; 5 CFR 332; 5 CFR 337
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management is proposing
additional revisions to implement the Competitive Service Act of 2015,
Public Law 114-137, to allow an appointing authority (i.e., the head of
a Federal agency or department) to share a competitive certificate of
eligibles with one or more appointing authorities for the purpose of
making selections of qualified candidates and the Chance to Compete
[[Page 52933]]
Act, Public Law 118-188, that clarifies the use of examinations and
requires federal agencies to use technical assessments to fill most
positions in the competitive service.
Statement of Need: The intended effect of this rule is to
facilitate the hiring of top talent across Federal agencies.
Summary of Legal Basis: The Competitive Service Act of 2015,
enacted as Public Law 114-137, on March 18, 2016, allows an appointing
authority (i.e., the head of a Federal agency or department) to share a
competitive certificate issued under delegated examining procedures
with one or more other appointing authorities.
Alternatives: None
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This rule will facilitate the hiring
of top talent across Federal agencies. Although the use of shared
certificates is discretionary, OPM anticipates that agencies that take
advantage of the new provisions will experience cost savings as a
result of expedited time-to-hire and other efficiencies across
Government.
Risks: Undetermined
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Final Rule.................. 01/18/17 82 FR 5335
Interim Final Rule Comment Period 03/20/17
End.
Supplemental NPRM................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Mr Michael Mahoney, Workforce Policy and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415
Phone: 202 936-3265
Fax: 202 606-2329
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
137. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT IN AGENCIES: STRATEGIC HUMAN CAPITAL
MANAGEMENT
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 306; 5 U.S.C. 1103; 5 U.S.C. 1401; 5
U.S.C. 1402; 31 U.S.C. 901; 31 U.S.C. 1115; 31 U.S.C. 1116
Relevant Executive Orders: 14170; 14356
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 250
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a
proposed rule to redefine, clarify, and update the reporting
requirements in Subpart B and C of 5 CFR 250. This rulemaking will
address the Federal Workforce Priorities Report, HRStat Data-driven
Reviews, Human Capital Operating Plan, Human Capital Reviews, and
employee surveys. These amendments will better align human capital
management practices to broader agency strategic human capital
planning. Plans are non-final, deliberative documents that should not
be disclosed under FOIA exception 5. They are crucial for robust
workforce planning and are not final agency actions per the
Administrative Procedure Act 5 U.S.C. 704.
Statement of Need: On January 20,2025, President Trump issued
Executive Order 14170 titled, Reforming the Federal Hiring Process and
Restoring Merit to Government Service. The Merit Hiring Plan explicitly
calls for reduced time-to-hire, talent teams, pooled hiring and skills
assessments. Implementing the OPM developed Merit Hiring Plan would
allow opportunities for OPM to manage hiring efficiency, skills based
assessing, and standardize recruitment practices across government.
Additionally, this proposed rule underscores the significance of
aligning human capital management practices with broader agency
strategic human capital planning. Ensuring that the Federal Workforce
Priorities Report, HRStat Data-driven Reviews, Human Capital Operating
Plan, Human Capital Reviews, and employee surveys are integrated into
the strategic framework is essential for improving organizational
performance and accountability. These elements are critical for a
robust workforce planning strategy that enhances overall performance
accountability and ensures the workforce is equipped to meet evolving
demands.
Employee surveys play a vital role in this process by providing
insights into employee engagement, satisfaction and areas that require
improvement. The feedback gathered through these surveys informs the
continuous improvement of human capital practices and helps in creating
a more responsive and dynamic workforce. This comprehensive approach
not only strengthens the effectiveness and efficiency of human capital
management but also fosters a culture of accountability and continuous
performance enhancement across federal agencies.
Summary of Legal Basis: OPM is issuing this proposed rule pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 1103(c) which states OPM sets strategic Human Capital
standards.
Alternatives: An alternative to changing the regulation would be to
update current HRStat and Human Capital Operating Plan guidance to
incorporate implementation of new talent management standards and
requirements.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Cost savings could come from filling
vacancies faster, lower costs per hire, reduced advertising, and lower
reliance on expensive contractors.
Risks: Undetermined
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Ms Makisha Brown, Workforce Policy and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415
Phone: 202 606-2796
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO77
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
138. ATTORNEY FEES AND PERSONNEL ACTION COVERAGE UNDER THE BACK PAY ACT
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5596
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 550, subpart H
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management is issuing regulations
governing the coverage of, and attorney fee awards under, the Back Pay
Act to reduce administrative burdens and better comport with
Congressional intent.
Statement of Need: On February 25, 2025, President Trump issued
Executive Order 14219 titled Ensuring Lawful Governance and
Implementing the President's `Department of Government Efficiency'
Deregulatory Initiative (90 FR 10583). The Executive order directed
agencies to review all regulations subject to their jurisdiction for
consistency with law and Administration policy. In this review, OPM
found that the back pay regulations did not align with the best
[[Page 52934]]
interpretation of the relevant laws or restrictions. While the Civil
Service Retirement Act of 1978 broadened the meaning of personnel
action to include the omission or failure to take an action or confer a
benefit, the focus of the Back Pay Act is on unjustified or unwarranted
personnel actions, not every action. OPM used its regulatory authority
to define unjustified or unwarranted personnel actions as including pay
actions alone (without a corresponding personnel action). However, this
is not consistent with legislative history. OPM proposes narrowing the
definition consistent with the underlying statutory authority.
While the law allowed for the payment of attorney fees, it
specified that the attorney fees were to be reasonable. It is
appropriate for OPM to limit the payment of attorney fees to ensure
that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and effectively. OPM proposes
reforms to ensure attorney fee awards do not exceed prevailing market
rates for legal work of similar complexity. OPM also proposes
clarifying who may request attorney fees.
Summary of Legal Basis: OPM is issuing this proposed rule pursuant
to its authority to issue regulations governing back pay under 5 U.S.C.
5596(c).
Alternatives: An alternative to this proposed rule would be to
leave the current rules for personnel actions and attorney fees in
place. However, OPM believes sensible changes are needed.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This proposed rule would affect the
operations of more than 90 Federal agencies ranging from cabinet-level
departments to small independent agencies that have employees covered
by the Back Pay Act. We estimate that this rule would require
individuals employed by these agencies to spend time updating agency
back pay policies and procedures to implement the changes. However,
over the long term, we anticipate that the overall costs to federal
agencies will decrease because of the reduction in the types of actions
covered by the back pay regulations and a decrease in the amount of
attorney fees agencies are required to pay.
Risks: While some may be concerned that these revisions could
diminish employees' ability to seek compensation under the back pay
law, it is important to note that supervisors and human resources staff
will be held accountable for achieving all expectations for their
positions under OPM's guidance on performance management for Federal
employees. This would include correctly approving and processing
personnel actinons that impact an employee's pay for supervisors and
human resources staff with the authority to do so.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 10/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Ms. Carey Jones, Workforce Policy and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415-8200
Phone: 202 606-2858
Fax: 202 606-0824
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO87
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
139. FEDERAL EMPLOYEES BENEFITS: ENROLLMENT INTEGRITY
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 8913
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 870; 5 CFR 890
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: OPM is proposing new standards to improve enrollment
integrity and accuracy in Federal employee benefits programs, including
the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) and Federal Employee Group
Life Insurance Programs. This would include amendments to 5 CFR parts
870 and 890 to establish a new eligibility determination process for
children who are age 26 and over and who are incapable of self-support
(ISS). In addition, OPM will (1) allow employing offices to adjust
enrollment type from Self and Family or Self plus one to Self Only if
there is only one person covered by the enrollment and (2) prohibit
ineligible family members from receiving a 31-day extension of coverage
when their coverage is terminated due to a reduction in the enrollee's
enrollment type.
Statement of Need: This rule improves program integrity and saves
money for the Federal Government by (1) updating an outdated process
for certifying FEHB eligibility for adult children who are incapable of
self-support; and (2) allowing agencies to appropriately match the FEHB
enrollment type to the individuals enrolled.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: While OPM and other agencies would
likely incur additional costs to effectuate this regulation, OPM
estimates the new ISS determination process would produce cost savings
for the FEHB Program. OPM has determined that reducing enrollment type
would not result in cost savings to the Federal Government; it may save
enrollees costs in enrollee contribution.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Ms Sophia Iwanaga, Healthcare & Insurance, Office
of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20415
Phone: 202 936-2782
Email: [email protected]
Ms Louise Yinug, Healthcare and Insurance (HI), Office of Personnel
Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20415-8200
Phone: 202 972-0913
Fax: 202 606-4640
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
140. DETERMINING RATE OF BASIC PAY FOR CERTAIN GENERAL SCHEDULE
POSITIONS
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C 5333
Relevant Executive Orders: 14317
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 531 Subpart B
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing
proposed regulations to clarify the applicability of the superior
qualifications and special needs pay-setting authority for certain
categories of General Schedule employees in the excepted service.
Statement of Need: OPM believes it is necessary to clarify whether
the superior qualifications and special needs pay-setting authority
apply to certain categories of General Schedule positions in the
excepted service, especially as new categories of excepted service
positions are created. On July 23, 2025, President Trump issued
Executive Order 14317 titled Creating Schedule G in the Excepted
Service (90 FR 34753). OPM also issued guidance to agencies on April
10, 2025, on Schedule C terms of employment flexibilities.
[[Page 52935]]
OPM proposes revising the regulations to reference that agencies may
use their authority under 5 CFR 6.3 to set pay for General Schedule
employees in the excepted service instead of using the superior
qualifications and special needs pay-setting authority.
Summary of Legal Basis: OPM is issuing this proposed rule pursuant
to its authority to issue regulations under 5 U.S.C. 5333.
Alternatives: An alternative to this proposed rule would be to
leave the current rules in place. However, OPM believes sensible
changes are needed.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This proposed rule would affect the
operations of more than 90 Federal agencies ranging from cabinet-level
departments to small independent agencies that have General Schedule
employees. We estimate that this rule would require individuals
employed by these agencies to spend time updating agency pay policies
and procedures to implement the changes. To comply with the regulatory
changes in the proposed rule, affected agencies would need to review
the rule and update their policies and procedures.
Risks: Employees who believe that their pay has been set
incorrectly may file a claim with their agency. If the agency denies
the claim, the employee may file a claim with OPM under 5 CFR part 178.
Employees may also file a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission if they believe an agency has discriminated against them
when setting pay.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 10/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Ms. Carey Jones, Workforce Policy and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415-8200
Phone: 202 606-2858
Fax: 202 606-0824
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO95
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
141. REDUCTION IN FORCE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3502
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 351, subpart I
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management is proposing to modify
the regulations for reduction in force (RIF) to amend the retention
factors to prioritize performance over length of service when
determining which employees will be retained in a RIF and streamline
the RIF process.
Statement of Need: The proposed changes are needed because current
reduction in force rules are outdated and no longer address the needs
of agencies in the twenty first century. The current rules have become
cumbersome and inefficient. The proposed changes offer a more
streamlined RIF structure that emphasizes performance over other
factors in the downsizing process. These changes promote the general
principle that employees should be retained on the basis of merit,
which will assist Federal agencies in retaining their best performing
employees when conducting RIF actions. The rulemaking would also allow
agencies to undertake more strategic downsizing efforts with respect to
competitive areas and would provide more flexibility in moving
functions internally without also reassigning employees, and in
furloughing employees.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OPM anticipates this rulemaking will
result in a more streamlined and efficient reduction in force process.
OPM expects this rulemaking will result in cost savings for an agency
running a reduction in force under part 351. The modernized rules will
be less cumbersome and more flexible than current rules in their
application. Agencies will benefit by having an increased ability to
retain their better-performing employees in a RIF, which will help
agencies more effectively and efficiently meet their mission-critical
responsibilities in the aftermath of a RIF and provide a higher level
of service to the public than would otherwise be the case.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 03/05/26 91 FR 10904
Final Action........................ 09/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Mr Michael Mahoney, Workforce Policy and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415
Phone: 202 936-3265
Fax: 202 606-2329
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO86
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
142. MANAGING SENIOR PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 4305
Relevant Executive Orders: 14210; 14171; 14284
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 430, Subpart B
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management proposed to create a
new subpart in Part 430. Coverage of senior-level (SL) and scientific
or professional (ST) employees (senior professionals) would be
separated from regulations that cover General Schedule employees and
align with recently finalized amendments made to Senior Executive
Service performance appraisal regulations. The new subpart would remove
the prohibition of a forced distribution of performance rating levels
and would include other amendments to increase the quality and
efficiency of senior professional performance appraisal. Currently,
agencies are prohibited from establishing quotas or limits on the
number or proportion of the various rating levels assigned, meaning
that each senior professional can potentially receive any rating
irrespective of how other senior professionals perform within the
agency. However, governmentwide SL and ST ratings data have
consistently shown that virtually all SL and ST employees receive the
highest rating levels (i.e., levels 4 and 5) despite documented reports
of failings. Removing the prohibition on forced distribution would
allow OPM to establish and enforce limits on the highest SL and ST
rating levels, thereby increasing rigor in the SL and ST appraisal
process and leading to a more normalized distribution of SL and ST
ratings across the Federal Government.
Statement of Need: While many provisions applicable to senior
professionals such as pay, aggregate limit on compensation, leave
accrual, and leave carryover limit have evolved over the years to match
what the SES receive, senior professionals have remained subject to the
same general performance appraisal regulations that apply to most non-
SES federal employees, including rank-and-file GS and prevailing rate
employees. The lack of appraisal rules specifically tailored to senior
professionals' important roles and high level of compensation hinders
agencies' ability to fully leverage the strategic potential of these
positions. OPM found that, despite its previous efforts to promote
rigor in senior
[[Page 52936]]
professional performance appraisal by encouraging agencies to develop
more stringent performance requirements, senior professional ratings
distributions come nowhere close to resembling a normal bell curve. The
distribution of these ratings suggests there is inflation of senior
professional ratings and poor performing employees are likely not being
identified or held accountable through a rigorous appraisal process. As
such, action must be taken to re-set and infuse rigor into the senior
professional performance appraisal process.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OPM expects senior professionals to
benefit from increased feedback and oversight under the proposed
provisions, which require more frequent progress reviews and provide
the opportunity for a higher-level review of any proposed ratings
instead of a mandatory review of an Unacceptable (Level 1) rating of
record; agency-level Professional Review Board oversight over
recommended ratings of record, pay adjustments, and performance awards;
and increased governmentwide consistency for senior professional
performance appraisal.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/24/26 91 FR 8763
Final Action........................ 08/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Danielle Opalka, Workforce Policy and Innovation,
Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20415
Phone: 202 606-8046
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO88
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
143. SUITABILITY ACTION APPEALS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1302; 5 U.S.C. 3301; 5 U.S.C. 7301
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 731
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposed
amendments to the review processes for suitability actions. The purpose
of the rule is to improve the efficiency, rigor and timeliness by which
OPM and agencies address risk to the integrity and efficiency of the
service.
Statement of Need: This rule is needed to improve the efficiency,
rigor, and timeliness by which OPM and agencies vet individuals for
risk to the integrity and efficiency of the service. The rule fosters
greater process efficiency by eliminating appeals to the MSPB for
suitability actions while bolstering the procedures by which an
individual against whom a suitability action is being taken can appeal.
These changes are expected to reduce time and costs while promoting an
impartial and effective suitability process that produces sound
decisions. This rule also brings the suitability appeals procedures
into compliance with congressional intent, where suitability actions
are excluded from standard Chapter 75 procedures, which include appeal
rights to the MSPB.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OPM anticipates one-time
implementation costs of approximately $1 million for finalizing this
rule as proposed. The expected benefits of the proposed rule are to
foster greater process efficiency by eliminating appeals to the MSPB
for suitability actions while bolstering the procedures by which an
individual against whom a suitability action is being taken can appeal
that action and unfavorable suitability determination. These changes
are expected to reduce time and costs while promoting an impartial and
effective suitability process that produces sound decisions and removes
unsuitable individuals from the Federal service.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule....................... 02/06/26 91 FR 5352
Final Action........................ 08/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Mr Joseph Knouff, Suitability Director, Suitability
Executive Agent Programs, Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street
NW, Washington, DC 20415
Phone: 202 599-0090
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO97
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
144. REDUCTION IN FORCE APPEALS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 3502
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 351
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management proposed to modify the
regulations for reduction in force (RIF) to streamline the RIF appeals
process.
Statement of Need: The rule seeks to modernize the current RIF
appeals process. The current process has become cumbersome and less
efficient than it needs to be. The changes are needed to streamline
this process to improve both the efficiency and consistency of this
process. OPM believes this change can be achieved by leveraging its
accumulated knowledge and expertise through its unique role as
developer, administrator, and end-user of RIF provisions. This
perspective and insight are essential to streamlining the appeals
process and the Government's ability to achieve consistent outcomes in
the RIF appeals process.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OPM predicts considerable savings to
the American taxpayer resulting from returning the venue to hear
appeals of RIF actions from MSPB to OPM. In addition to the direct cost
savings this proposed rule would generate, OPM expects that the faster
adjudication of appeals will result in additional benefits. Receiving a
timely decision on an appeal will provide the individual with a clear
determination and provide much-needed certainty, quickly. Agencies will
similarly benefit as the streamlined appeal procedures would reduce the
costly and protracted legal process and would help limit backpay and
attorney's fees should an individual be improperly terminated as part
of a RIF. OPM also expects greater consistency with respect to the
outcomes of employees' appeals due to OPM's unique position as the
agency authorized by Congress to promulgate these rules, OPM's decades-
long administration of RIF rules on a governmentwide basis, and OPM's
own experiences as an employing agency that has applied RIF rules
numerous times over the decades in its own downsizing actions.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/10/26 91 FR 5861
Final Action........................ 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Ms Carol Matheis, Workforce, Policy, and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415
Phone: 202 606-2930
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AO99
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52937]]
145. ELIMINATION OF TIME IN GRADE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 5 U.S.C. 3301; 5 U.S.C. 3302
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 300, subpart F
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposes
eliminating the time-in-grade (TIG) restriction on advancement to
competitive service positions in the General Schedule. Currently,
employees in competitive service General Schedule positions in grades 5
and above must serve 52 weeks in grade before becoming eligible for
promotion to the next grade level. Abolishing the restriction would
eliminate the 52-week service requirement. If the requirement is
eliminated, an employee must continue to meet occupational
qualification standard requirements, and any additional job-related
qualification requirements, established for the position.
Statement of Need: The intended effect of this proposed rulemaking
is to remove an unnecessary barrier which may hinder recruitment and
retention of needed skill sets; provide agencies greater flexibility
and efficiency in the management of their workforces, and avoid
conflicts with a skills-based hiring approach.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OPM does not anticipate significant
budgetary effects government-wide. Time in Grade is an administrative
burden which unduly restricts agencies' ability to make selections
based on job-related criteria. The TIG restriction may be a
disincentive to recruiting or retaining employees with needed skills
sets. OPM anticipates administrative cost reductions from eliminating
TIG-related approvals and reviews which may lead to efficiency gains by
enabling agencies to fill positions with qualified candidates more
quickly than is currently the case.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 05/28/26 91 FR 31669
Final Rule.......................... 12/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Mr Michael Mahoney, Workforce Policy and Innovation
(WPI), Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415
Phone: 202 936-3265
Fax: 202 606-2329
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AP05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
146. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FOR GENERAL SCHEDULE,
PREVAILING RATE, AND CERTAIN OTHER EMPLOYEES
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 4305
Relevant Executive Orders: 14210; 14171; 14284; 14148
CFR Citation: 5 CFR 430, Subpart B
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposed
amendments to the current performance management regulations covering
General Schedule (GS), Prevailing Rate, and certain other employees.
The rule would increase efficiency and accountability in performance
management by reducing available summary level patterns and
incorporating additional evaluation of GS appraisal system(s) by OPM,
among other changes.
Statement of Need: The current regulatory structure governing
performance appraisals for non-SES employees has remained largely
unchanged for decades and no longer reflects the operational realities
or accountability standards necessary for today's Federal workforce.
Persistent issues, including inflated performance ratings, limited
differentiation between successful and unsuccessful performance, and
uneven agency compliance with statutory performance appraisal
requirements demonstrate the need for comprehensive reform.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: OPM does not believe this rulemaking
will substantially increase the ongoing administrative costs to
agencies. OPM anticipates that this rulemaking would foster greater
accountability, transparency, and uniformity in the administration of
performance appraisal systems, thereby improving public confidence in
Federal workforce management.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 02/24/26 91 FR 8780
Final Action........................ 09/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: Federal
Agency Contact: Danielle Opalka, Workforce Policy and Innovation,
Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20415
Phone: 202 606-8046
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 3206-AP06
BILLING CODE 3280-F5-P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION (PBGC)
Statement of Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC or Corporation) is a
federal corporation created under title IV of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to protect the retirement security
of about 31 million American workers, retirees, and beneficiaries in
both single-employer and multiemployer private-sector pension plans.
PBGC administers two insurance programs--one for single-employer
defined benefit pension plans and a second for multiemployer defined
benefit pension plans. In addition, PBGC administers a special
financial assistance (SFA) program for eligible financially troubled
multiemployer plans.
Single-Employer Program. Under the single-employer
program, when a plan terminates with insufficient assets to cover all
plan benefits (distress and involuntary terminations), PBGC pays plan
benefits that are guaranteed under title IV. PBGC also pays
nonguaranteed plan benefits to the extent funded by plan assets or
recoveries from employers. In fiscal year (FY) 2024, PBGC paid over
$5.8 billion in benefits to more than 912,000 participants. Operations
under the single-employer program are financed by insurance premiums,
investment income, assets from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, and
recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the trusteed
plans.
Multiemployer Program. The multiemployer program covers
collectively bargained plans involving two or more unrelated employers.
PBGC provides traditional financial assistance (technically in the form
of a loan) to a plan if the plan is insolvent and thus unable to pay
benefits at the guaranteed level. The guarantee is structured
differently from, and is generally significantly lower than, the
single-employer guarantee. In FY 2024, PBGC provided $163 million in
traditional financial assistance to 98 insolvent multiemployer plans
covering 62,881 participants receiving guaranteed benefits. Those plans
also cover an
[[Page 52938]]
additional 26,245 participants entitled to receive benefits in the
future. Operations under the multiemployer program generally are
financed by insurance premiums and investment income.
Special Financial Assistance Program. The American Rescue
Plan (ARP) Act of 2021 added section 4262 of ERISA, which requires PBGC
to provide SFA to certain financially troubled multiemployer plans upon
application for assistance. PBGC's SFA Program requires plans to
demonstrate eligibility for SFA and to calculate the amount of
assistance pursuant to ARP and PBGC's regulations. This program is
funded by general tax revenues.
For the fourth year in a row, both PBGC's multiemployer program and
single-employer program have a positive net position at fiscal year-
end. The financial status of the single-employer program improved from
a positive net financial position of $44.6 billion at the end of FY
2023 to $54.2 billion at the end of FY 2024. The net financial position
of the multiemployer program improved from a positive net position of
$1.5 billion at the end of FY 2023 to $2.1 billion at the end of FY
2024.
To carry out its statutory functions, PBGC issues regulations on
such matters as how to pay premiums, when reports are due, what
benefits are covered by the insurance programs, how to terminate a
plan, the liability for underfunding, and how withdrawal liability
works for multiemployer plans. PBGC follows a regulatory approach that,
consistent with its statutory mission, seeks to encourage the
continuation and maintenance of securely-funded defined benefit plans
for the benefit of their participants. In developing new regulations
and reviewing existing regulations, PBGC seeks to reduce burdens on
plans, employers, and participants, and to ease and simplify employer
compliance wherever possible.
Regulatory/Deregulatory Objectives and Priorities
PBGC's regulatory/deregulatory objectives and priorities are
developed in the context of the Corporation's statutory purposes,
priorities, and strategic goals.
Pension plans and the statutory framework in which they are
maintained and terminated are complex. Despite this complexity, PBGC is
committed to issuing simple, understandable, flexible, and timely
regulations to help affected parties. PBGC's regulatory/deregulatory
objectives and priorities are:
To enhance the retirement security of workers and
retirees;
To implement regulatory actions that ease compliance
burdens and achieve maximum net benefits while protecting retirement
security; and
To simplify existing regulations and reduce burden.
PBGC endeavors in all its regulatory and deregulatory actions to
promote clarity and reduce burden on the public. As determined under
E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, PBGC's
regulatory agenda has zero regulatory actions and three anticipated
deregulatory actions (RIN 1212-AB47, RIN 1212-AB54, RIN 1212-AB61).
Small Businesses
PBGC considers very seriously the impact of its regulations and
policies on small entities. PBGC attempts to minimize administrative
burdens on plans and participants, improve transparency, simplify
filing, and assist plans to comply with applicable requirements. PBGC
particularly strives to meet the needs of small businesses that sponsor
defined benefit plans. In all such efforts, PBGC's mission is to
protect the retirement incomes of plan participants.
Open Government and Public Engagement
PBGC encourages public participation in the regulatory process. For
example, PBGC's ``Federal Register Notices Open for Comment'' web page
highlights when there are opportunities to comment on proposed rules,
information collections, and other Federal Register notices. PBGC
encourages comments on an ongoing basis as it continues to look for
ways to further improve the agency's regulations. Efforts to reduce
regulatory burden in the projects discussed below are in substantial
part a response to public comments and engagement.
Multiemployer Plans
PBGC published a proposed rule on October 14, 2022, that would
prescribe actuarial assumptions which may be used by a multiemployer
plan actuary in determining an employer's withdrawal liability (RIN
1212-AB54). Section 4213(a) of ERISA permits PBGC to prescribe by
regulation such assumptions.
Benefit levels in a multiemployer plan are typically set by
trustees representing contributing employers and unions. Withdrawal
liability generally represents an employer's share of the plan's
unfunded vested benefits (UVBs) that the plan may have at the end of
the plan year immediately preceding the plan year in which the employer
withdraws. Withdrawal liability is the portion of the UVBs allocable to
the withdrawing employer and represents a plan's primary opportunity to
require a withdrawing employer to pay its allocated share of the
unfunded liabilities.
When a plan does not collect an adequate amount of withdrawal
liability from a withdrawing employer or collects an amount that is
less than a withdrawing employer's allocated share of the plan's UVBs,
that burden is shifted to the remaining contributing employers in the
plan leading to a higher likelihood that the plan will become insolvent
and will not be able to pay full accrued benefits. Ultimately, there is
an increased likelihood that the plan would not have resources to pay
promised benefits. In that case, a plan may have to cut benefits to the
PBGC guarantee level and apply to PBGC for financial assistance, which
shifts costs to plan participants through benefit reductions and to
others in the multiemployer insurance system who fund PBGC via annual
premiums.
The rulemaking is needed to clarify that a plan actuary's use of
4044 rates represents a valid approach to selecting an interest rate
assumption to determine withdrawal liability. The rulemaking would
typically reduce or eliminate the cost-shifting effects due to
impediments to the actuary's use of 4044 rates. PBGC plans to publish a
final rule that responds to the public comments received on the
proposed rule.
Rethinking Existing Regulations
Most of PBGC's regulatory/deregulatory actions are the result of
its ongoing retrospective review to identify and correct unintended
effects, inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and requirements made
irrelevant over time. For example, PBGC is proposing miscellaneous
updates, clarifications, and improvements (RIN 1212-AB64) to its
regulations, including its regulations on filing rules and reportable
events, that are in part a response to comments received from
stakeholders. PBGC is also proposing to make technical corrections,
clarifications, and improvements to the restrictions and conditions
under PBGC's regulation on Special Financial Assistance by PBGC
(``Technical Amendments: Special Financial Assistance,'' RIN 1212-
AB61), which includes repealing a provision enabling plans that
received SFA to request reallocation of employer contributions to pay
for health benefit costs.
[[Page 52939]]
PBGC's regulatory review also identified a need to improve rules to
make them more transparent and to promote open government. For example,
PBGC is proposing improvements to recoupment of benefit overpayment
rules (``Improvements to Rules on Recoupment of Benefit Overpayments,''
RIN 1212-AB47). PBGC is also proposing to enhance program oversight by
providing increased transparency of PBGC's policies for assessing and
waiving monetary penalties for failure to timely provide certain
required notices or other material information (``Penalties for Failure
to Provide Certain Notices or Other Material Information,'' RIN 1212-
AB50).
BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
Overview
The mission of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is to
maintain and strengthen the Nation's economy by enabling the
establishment and viability of small businesses and by assisting in the
physical and economic recovery of communities after disasters. In
carrying out this mission, SBA strives to drive economic growth and
opportunity for all small businesses. SBA has several financial,
procurement, and technical assistance programs that provide a crucial
foundation for those starting or growing a small business. For example,
the Agency serves as a guarantor of loans made to small businesses by
lenders that participate in SBA's programs and licenses Small Business
Investment Companies that make equity and debt investments in
qualifying small businesses using a combination of privately raised
capital and SBA guaranteed leverage. SBA also funds various training
and mentoring programs to help small businesses gain access to Federal
government contracting opportunities. The Agency also provides
management and technical assistance to existing or potential small
business owners through various grants, cooperative agreements or
contracts. Finally, as a vital part of its purpose, SBA also provides
direct financial assistance to homeowners, renters, and businesses to
repair or replace their property in the aftermath of a disaster.
Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
SBA's regulatory policy reflects a commitment to developing
regulations that reduce or eliminate the burden on the public, in
particular the Agency's core constituents--small businesses. SBA's
regulatory process generally includes an assessment of the costs and
benefits of the regulations as required by Executive Order 12866,
``Regulatory Planning and Review;'' Executive Order 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review;'' and the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
SBA's program offices are particularly invested in finding ways to
reduce the burden imposed by the Agency's core activities in its loan,
grant, innovation, and procurement programs.
On January 31, 2025, President Trump issued E.O. 14192,
``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' 90 FR 9065, which
establishes principles to promote prudent financial management and
alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens. E.O. 14192 was followed by
E.O. 14219, ``Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's ``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory
Initiative,'' 90 FR 10583, and Presidential Memorandum ``Directing the
Repeal of Unlawful Regulations'', which identified processes and
criteria for agencies to follow in overseeing their deregulatory
initiatives. This Agenda was prepared in accordance with both E.O.
14192, E.O. 14219, and the aforementioned Presidential Memorandum. SBA
will continue to work internally, as well as with the Office of
Management and Budget, to fully integrate the executive orders and
implementing OMB principles into the SBA rulemaking processes. As part
of that effort, SBA undertook a comprehensive inventory and review of
SBA regulations to determine which regulations should be repealed,
replaced, or modified because they are obsolete, unnecessary,
ineffective, costly, or burdensome. In addition, SBA's Office of
Advocacy is hosting a series of small business roundtables in order to
hear firsthand from small businesses facing any federal regulatory
burden. Additionally, Advocacy has established a red tape hotline that
gives small business owners a direct way to report federal regulations
that hurt their ability to grow, compete, or innovate. For more
information on these roundtables and the red tape hotline, please visit
https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/.
Based on the requirements of E.O. 14192, E.O. 14219 and OMB
guidance, SBA currently anticipates that the majority of actions for
Fiscal Year 2026 will be deregulatory actions and none are regulatory
as defined in E.O. 14192. SBA estimates that this will result in a
significant reduction of sections within SBA's regulations. All other
rulemakings are either exempt from E.O. 14192 or will have no
additional regulatory effect once finalized. SBA continues to work on
assessing the incremental cost savings of these Agenda items, which do
not include non-rulemakings, such as guidance documents, or information
collections.
Eliminating Fraud, Waste, and Abuse
SBA has an obligation and legal responsibility to uphold the law
and protect taxpayer dollars by ensuring that SBA resources and
benefits go only to legitimate, eligible small businesses. To these
ends, SBA is initiating regulatory actions to tighten loopholes and
eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse in its contracting programs. SBA will
additionally focus on mitigating risk and eliminating such waste,
fraud, and abuse across other SBA programs.
Adherence to Presidential Actions
SBA is committed to ensuring the President Trump's agenda is
implemented fully and faithfully. The President has initiated a number
of Executive Orders and Presidential Actions that require broad changes
to industries, programs, and the economy as a whole. As such, SBA is
ensuring that its regulatory and deregulatory actions adhere to and
align with the provisions within Executive Orders, Presidential
memoranda, and other Presidential actions. SBA has already begun
issuing policy guidance and notices to ensure adherence to these
actions. SBA's regulatory plan also, where applicable, references
planned rulemakings, including interim and direct final rules, that
will ensure that SBA's regulations are aligned with the President's
Agenda. This includes deregulatory actions around designated industries
(manufacturing, food processing, critical minerals, AI, and others),
ending radical DEI programs and preferencing, and additional areas of
importance for the President.
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
SSA 2026 Regulatory Plan
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (SSA)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
We administer the Retirement, Survivors, and Disability Insurance
programs under title II of the Social Security Act (Act), the
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program under title XVI of the Act,
and the Special Veterans Benefits program under title VIII of the Act.
As directed by Congress, we also assist in administering portions of
the Medicare program under title XVIII of the Act. Our regulations
codify
[[Page 52940]]
the requirements for eligibility and entitlement to benefits and our
procedures for administering these programs. Generally, our regulations
do not impose burdens on State or local governments, except for the
States' Disability Determination Services. However, our regulations can
occasionally impose burdens on select parts of the private sector when
evaluating a claimant's initial or continued eligibility. We fully fund
the Disability Determination Services in advance or via reimbursement
for necessary costs in making disability determinations.
Our regulations reflect policy initiatives consistent with
Administrative priorities for regulatory reform, as well as specific
actions to support these initiatives. For example, we are pursuing
rules that support items below.
(1) Regulatory reform and deregulation.
(2) Fiscal responsibility and program integrity.
(3) The directives of Executive Orders 14219 \21\ and 14192.\22\
For example, we will continue to follow the ``10-for-1'' directive of
E.O. 14192 to ensure that we appropriately offset any items categorized
as ``regulatory.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's
``Department of Government Efficiency'' Deregulatory Initiative
(Feb. 19, 2025).
\22\ Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation (Jan.31, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, we aim to promote transparency and public notice by providing
meaningful information about our regulations to the public.
Specifically, through regulations on our Regulatory Plan and
Unified Agenda, we intend to:
Update Select Elements of our Disability Adjudication
Process.
[cir] We are updating the criteria in the Listing of Impairments
(listings) that we use to evaluate claims involving cardiovascular
disorders in adults and children. The revisions reflect our
adjudicative experience, advances in medical knowledge since the last
revision in 2006, and comments we received from the public in response
to a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). The revisions achieve
program simplification, improve customer service to the public, and
reduce waste. (RIN: 0960-AI43).
Increase and Enhance Electronic Services to Better Serve
the Public.
[cir] We propose to reduce processing time for cases and streamline
the hearing scheduling process. We would reduce hearing wait times and
provide efficient service and flexibility for scheduling to all
claimants. We would also seek to standardize the process of requesting
and scheduling a hearing by minimizing the number of forms required.
(RIN 0960-AJ01).
Deregulate in Accordance with E.O.s 14219 and 14192.
[cir] We propose to rescind changes to our definition of a Public
Assistance Household, thus adopting our former longstanding definition
of a public assistance household, according to which every household
member has to receive a public income maintenance payment for the
household to constitute a public assistance household. This would
promote program integrity and would meet the directives of E.O. 14219
(RIN: 0960-AI94).
We will pursue deregulatory direct-to-final rules that will: (1)
remove obsolete regulations addressing drug addiction and alcoholism
(RIN: 0960-AJ05); and (2) remove outdated regulations about making
referrals to vocational rehabilitation (RIN: 0960-AJ08).
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSA Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
147. STANDARDIZING REQUESTING AND SCHEDULING HEARINGS BEFORE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C 1383(c)(2)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14192
CFR Citation: 20 CFR 404.938 and 416.1438; 20 CFR 404.935 and
416.1435; 20 CFR 404.933 and 416.1433; 20 CFR 404.936 and 416.1436; 20
CFR 416.1453; 20 CFR 416.1411
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: Current regulations allow a claimant to request a hearing
before an administrative law judge (ALJ) by filing a written request
(20 CFR 404.933(a) and 416.1433(a)). Claimants overwhelmingly use form
HA-501 to request a hearing, but can also submit a letter or other
written document (HALLEX I-2-0-40). We propose to revise our
regulations to make form HA-501 (Request for Hearing by Administrative
Law Judge) mandatory to request a hearing before an ALJ. We also
propose to consolidate form HA-501 with form HA-55, Notice of Ways to
Attend a Hearing, and form HA-56, Agreement to Appearing by Online
Video form (HA-56). This proposal will reduce processing time for each
case, improve customer service, and streamline our process for
scheduling hearings.
Statement of Need: These changes would streamline our hearings
process, increase flexibility, and improve customer service.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Susan Swansiger, Director, Division of Field
Procedures, Social Security Administration, Disability Adjudication,
250 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20024
Phone: 703 605-8500
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0960-AJ01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSA Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
148. REVISED MEDICAL CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING CARDIOVASCULAR DISORDERS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Regulatory
Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 405(a)-(b),and (d)-(h) ; 42 U.S.C.
902(a)(5) ; 42 U.S.C. 402; 42 U.S.C. 416(i), 421(a) and (h)-(j),
422(c), 423, 425; 42 U.S.C. 1320
CFR Citation: 20 CFR 404, subpart P, app. 1
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: We are revising the criteria in the Listing of
Impairments (listings) that we use to evaluate claims involving
cardiovascular disorders in adults and children under Titles II and XVI
of the Social Security Act. The listings describe those disorders that
we consider severe enough to prevent an adult from engaging in any
gainful activity, or that cause marked and severe functional
limitations for a child claiming Supplemental Security Income payments
under Title XVI. The revisions reflect our adjudicative experience,
advances in medical knowledge since the last revision in 2006, and
comments we received from the public in response to a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM). The revisions achieve program
simplification, improve customer service to the public, and reduce
waste.
Statement of Need: This rule will simplify our program, improve
service to the public, and reduce waste.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To be determined.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 06/29/22 87 FR 38838
NPRM Comment Period End............. 09/30/22 .......................
[[Page 52941]]
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Michael J. Goldstein, Director, Social Security
Administration, Office of Disability Policy, 6401 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, MD 21235-6401
Phone: 410 965-1020
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0960-AI43
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
149. TICKET TO WORK: RESCISSION OF OBSOLETE REGULATORY
PROVISIONS
Priority: Other Significant
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined
Relevant Executive Orders: 14219
CFR Citation: 20 CFR 404.468; 20 CFR 404.2104 ; 20 CFR 416.1701 ;
20 CFR 416.1710 ; 20 CFR 416.2204 ; . . .
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: This rule eliminates outdated regulations that refer to
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR), as SSA's ability to make referrals to
VR was repealed with the implementation of the Ticket to Work Program.
These rules are now obsolete due to legislative changes following the
Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Act of 1999 which amended the Social
Security Act (Act).
Statement of Need: This rule would follow the directives of
Executive Order 14219, Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's Department of Government Efficiency This rule eliminates
outdated regulations that refer to VR, as SSA's ability to make
referrals to VR was repealed with the implementation of the Ticket to
Work Program.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We expect this rule to benefit the
public by removing unnecessary information from our regulations.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Action........................ 07/00/26 .......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: No
Small Entities Affected: No
Government Levels Affected: None
Agency Contact: Jeffery Hemmeter, Social Security Administration,
Office of Disability Policy, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD
21235
Phone: 410 597-1815
Email: [email protected]
RIN: 0960-AJ08
BILLING CODE 4191-02-P
FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (FAR)
The Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, the Secretary of
Defense, the Administrator of General Services, and the Administrator
of National Aeronautics and Space are members of the Federal
Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) and jointly issue and
maintain a single Government-wide procurement regulation known as the
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). The FAR is the primary set of
rules that governs how federal agencies purchase goods and services. It
ensures consistency, fairness, and transparency across government
contracts, helping agencies obtain the best value while complying with
Federal laws and policies. The FAR Council, which is chaired by the
Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, assists in the direction
and coordination of Government-wide procurement policies to be
implemented in the FAR.
Rulemaking Priorities
Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (September 30, 1993), as reaffirmed and amended in Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' (January
18, 2011), the Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda provide public notice
about the FAR Council's proposed regulatory and deregulatory actions
within the Executive Branch. The FAR Council agenda complies with
Executive Order 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.
The 2026 Unified Agenda consists of 21 active agenda items,
including 12 deregulatory actions.
Regulatory Reform
Executive Order (E.O.) 14275, Restoring Common Sense to Federal
Procurement, directs the elimination of excessive acquisition
regulations to stop the inefficient use of American taxpayer dollars.
The Executive order directs the first comprehensive end-to-end overhaul
of the FAR in its 40-year history. The Executive order establishes that
the FAR should ``contain only provisions that are required by statute
or that are otherwise necessary to support simplicity and usability,
strengthen the efficacy of the procurement system, or protect economic
or national security interests.''
In response to Executive Order 14275, the Office of Management and
Budget issued memorandum M-25-26, Overhauling the Federal Acquisition
Regulation. The Memo directed the FAR Council to complete a
``revolutionary overhaul'' of the FAR. The overhaul is meant to return
the FAR ``to its statutory roots'' and remove text that is not
``required by statute or essential to sound procurement.''
The Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) is not a routine incremental
update to the FAR. The rewrite of the FAR represents a paradigm shift
in federal acquisition. It emphasizes streamlining, clarity, and
accessibility, while ensuring that the regulation focuses only on
statutory mandates and foundational procurement principles. The RFO is
designed to increase competition, reduce costs, and improve acquisition
speed and agility.
Prior to formalizing the deregulatory RFO initiative through
rulemaking, the FAR Council kickstarted the streamlining efforts by
issuing a model ``plain language class deviation text'' for agencies to
adopt. These model deviations retained limited non-statutory coverage
when necessary to advance core stewardship principles and practices.
Feedback was sought from both industry and the acquisition workforce on
the model deviation text. Specifically, the FAR Council sought feedback
on the clarity, usability, and effectiveness of the model deviation
text, including what worked, what was confusing, and where additional
support may be needed. That feedback is being considered in the
drafting of the rules that pertain to the RFO initiative.
Streamline Regulation
The RFO will generally reorganize the FAR parts into phases of
acquisition and simplify the text into plain language, where possible.
The plain language efforts include changes to active voice, edits to
improve readability, and reorganization to present information more
logically. Based on the results of the RFO model text, the FAR Council
anticipates adopting through rulemaking many of the changes which
include the reduction of ``shall/must'' requirements aimed at
alleviating burden that was not essential to sound procurement, and
removal of hundreds of pages of unnecessary regulation.
The RFO rulemaking will optimize the use of existing contracts in
accordance with Executive Order 14240, Eliminating Waste and Saving
Taxpayer Dollars by Consolidating Procurement, and OMB Memo M-25-31,
Consolidating Federal Procurement Activities. Using existing
[[Page 52942]]
governmentwide contracts first to meet agencies' needs before
undertaking the time and expense of creating a new contract on the open
market will reduce inefficiencies, eliminate duplicative contracts, and
streamline federal acquisitions.
The RFO rulemaking will emphasize the procurement of commercially
available products and services to fulfill the Government's needs which
aligns with Executive Order 14271, Ensuring Commercial, Cost-Effective
Solutions in Federal Contracts, while also reducing requirements and
complexity to better align with commercial practices. Moreover, the FAR
Council will use its authority from section 839(a) of the John S.
McCain National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2019 to
review the applicability of certain clauses and provisions to contracts
and subcontracts for commercial products, including commercially
available off-the-shelf (COTS) items, and commercial services and
eliminate or exempt such requirements from commercial acquisitions,
unless there are specific reasons to retain particular requirements.
The FAR Council is approaching section 839 as an important action-
forcing opportunity to re-evaluate the regulatory underpinnings for
commercial acquisitions with a goal of making inapplicable requirements
within its discretion that do not directly further the efficiency and
effectiveness of acquisition processes.
Promote Open Government
The RFO opens the door for increased participation by innovative
small businesses, manufacturers, new entrants, and others who have not
traditionally worked with federal agencies. By removing policies that
are not essential to sound procurement or explicitly required by law or
Executive order, this initiative reduces the burden on industry. This
simplification translates to lower administrative costs, freeing up
resources for companies to focus on innovation and delivering high-
quality goods and services. The reduced complexity encourages
participation from those who may have previously been deterred by the
cumbersome nature of federal contracting, fostering a more competitive
and dynamic marketplace. This ultimately allows federal agencies to
access a broader range of solutions and achieve better value for
taxpayer dollars.
Exchanges between the government and offerors in Federal
acquisition are crucial for improving the understanding of government
requirements and industry capabilities, identifying weaknesses or
deficiencies in proposals, and ultimately allowing both parties to
achieve the Government's ``best value'' goal by strengthening proposals
and obtaining better deals through clarification or negotiation. These
communications ensure proposals are strengthened, ambiguities are
resolved, and the government secures the highest quality supplies or
services at the best possible price. The RFO rulemaking will redefine
meaningful exchanges between the government and offerors, providing
needed clarity to both terminology and processes for negotiated
procurements.
Support Small Business
As part of the RFO, the FAR Council will sharply reduce burdens on,
and create numerous new opportunities for, small business. Most small
business opportunities are in the acquisition of commercial products
and services. As part of the RFO process, the FAR is emphasizing a
preference for commercial products and services, which is expected to
create more opportunities for small businesses.
The FAR Council anticipates a 30% reduction in burden on small
businesses as a result of the FAR Part 12 revision. The streamlined and
simplified procedures will enable contracting officers to make
decisions faster, reducing carrying costs for small businesses.
Additionally, the overhauled FAR will emphasize that acquisition
planning should be a living, on-going process. It will highlight early
engagement, a step which is critical to ensuring that small businesses
are provided opportunities to compete. Numerous requirements necessary
for doing business with the Government will be reduced by as much as
50%. For example, unifying the documentation and notification
requirements for consolidation, bundling, and substantial bundling will
provide greater transparency for small businesses while reducing agency
burdens. Finally, the FAR Council maintains small business set-aside
rules for contracts and encourages set-asides on orders under multiple
award contracts.
Supporting Other Administration Initiatives
In addition to supporting the Administration's deregulatory
priorities, to include reducing the public compliance burden of onerous
Federal regulations, the RFO process will incorporate changes to the
regulation to implement other Administration initiatives. The proposed
rules will--
Remove the burdensome requirements of Executive Order
14057, Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal
Sustainability in accordance with Executive Order 14148, Initial
Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions.
Enforce our longstanding civil-rights laws by implementing
Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring
Merit-Based Opportunity, which removes the regulations related to the
implementation of Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity.
Remove terms in the FAR that are inconsistent with
Executive Order 14168, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism
and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.
Enhance the workforce mobility of America's cybersecurity
practitioners to improve America's national cybersecurity through the
implementation of Executive Order 13870, America's Cybersecurity
Workforce.
Strengthen national resilience through the implementation
of Executive Order 13905, Strengthening National Resilience Through
Responsible Use of Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Services.
Rules To Support National Security
To enhance and secure federal supply chains, protect and modernize
critical infrastructure, support domestic technology and manufacturing
and protect against foreign adversary threats, the FAR Council is
prioritizing rules that support national security.
FAR Case 2023-008, ``Prohibition on Certain Semiconductor Product
and Services,'' will implement paragraphs (a), (b), and (h) in section
5949 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023 that prohibits executive agencies from procuring or
obtaining certain products and services that include covered
semiconductor products or services effective December 23, 2027.
FAR Case 2021-017, ``Cyber Threat and Incident Reporting and
Information Sharing,'' will increase the sharing of information about
cyber threats and incident information and require certain contractors
to report cyber incidents to the Federal Government to facilitate
effective cyber incident response and remediation pursuant to sections
2(b), (c), (g)(i) and 8(b) of Executive Order 14028, ``Improving the
Nation's Cybersecurity.''
FAR Case 2021-019, ``Standardizing Cybersecurity Requirements for
Unclassified Information Systems,'' will standardize cybersecurity
contractual requirements across Federal agencies for unclassified
information systems
[[Page 52943]]
pursuant to sections 2(i) and 8(b) of Executive Order 14028, Improving
the Nation's Cybersecurity.
FAR Case 2023-002, ``Supply Chain Software Security,'' will require
suppliers of software available for purchase by Federal agencies to
comply with, and attest to complying with, applicable secure software
development practices pursuant to section 4(n) and 4(k) of Executive
Order 14028, Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity, and Office of
Management and Budget Memorandum 22-18 and 23-16.
Dated: William F. Clark, Director, Office of Government-wide
Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-
wide Policy.
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
STATEMENT OF REGULATORY PRIORITIES
Bureau Purposes and Functions
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) was established
in 2010 as an independent bureau of the Federal Reserve System by the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub. L. 111-
203, 124 Stat. 1376) (Dodd-Frank Act). Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act,
the Bureau has rulemaking, supervisory, enforcement, and other
authorities relating to consumer financial products and services. Among
these are the consumer financial protection authorities that
transferred to the Bureau from seven Federal agencies on the designated
transfer date, July 21, 2011. These authorities include the ability to
issue regulations under more than a dozen Federal consumer financial
laws.
As provided in section 1021 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the purpose of
the Bureau is to implement and enforce Federal consumer financial laws
consistently for the purpose of ensuring that all consumers have access
to markets for consumer financial products and services and that such
markets are fair, transparent, and competitive. The Bureau is
authorized to exercise its authorities for the purpose of ensuring
that, with respect to consumer financial products and services:
(1) Consumers are provided with timely and understandable
information to make responsible decisions about financial transactions;
(2) Consumers are protected from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts
and practices and from discrimination;
(3) Outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulations are
regularly identified and addressed in order to reduce unwarranted
regulatory burdens;
(4) Federal consumer financial law is enforced consistently,
without regard to status of a person as a depository institution, in
order to promote fair competition; and
(5) Markets for consumer financial products and services operate
transparently and efficiently to facilitate access and innovation.
Bureau Regulatory Priorities
The Bureau is under interim leadership pending the confirmation of
a permanent director, and is carefully considering various sources in
setting its future priorities. In the meantime, the Bureau has focused
on rulemaking projects that streamline existing regulations and reduce
unjustified burdens as well as rulemakings that would be of particular
interest to small businesses.
The Bureau's current regulatory priorities further these goals. For
example, the Bureau is currently reconsidering its small business
lending rule (Small Business Lending Data Collection Under the Equal
Credit Opportunity Act--3170-AB39). This rulemaking will reconsider
certain aspects of a final rule published in May 2023 that implemented
section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, the Bureau will
reconsider certain aspects of the Personal Financial Data Rights rule
(3170-AB39), which was published in November 2024 pursuant to section
1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Bureau also plans to pursue a
rulemaking under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Bureau's
Regulation B (3170-A54), which would facilitate compliance with ECOA by
clarifying the obligations imposed by the statute.
In addition to these priority rulemaking actions, the Bureau has a
robust agenda of other rulemakings that can be seen on its Unified
Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions available on reginfo.gov.
As an example, the Bureau is considering reducing the burden associated
with Bureau supervision by amending four rules that define nonbank
larger participants in the automobile financing market (3170-AB50),
consumer debt collection market (3170-AB51), consumer reporting market
(3170-AB52), and international money transfer market (3170-AB53). The
Bureau also maintains a long-term agenda listing areas of potential
rulemaking interest, as discussed below.
Bureau Deregulatory Priorities
Since January 20, 2025, the Bureau has taken a number of
deregulatory actions. On May 15, 2025, following a Bureau review of all
guidance material previously produced, the Bureau published a
withdrawal of 67 guidance, interpretive rules, policy statements, and
advisory opinions. See 90 FR 20084. The Bureau has also withdrawn
additional proposed or final guidance documents and rules, including
the proposed interpretive rule titled, ``Electronic Fund Transfers
Through Accounts Established Primarily for Personal, Family, or
Household Purposes Using Emerging Payment Mechanisms'' (90 FR 20568)
and the proposed rules ``Prohibited Terms and Conditions in Agreements
for Consumer Financial Products or Services (Regulation AA)'' (90 FR
20569) and ``Protecting Americans From Harmful Data Broker Practices
(Regulation V)'' (90 FR 20568). In addition to these deregulatory
projects, the Bureau has also reviewed its regulations for consistency
with law and Administration policy, as directed under Executive Order
14219, and considered the deregulatory ideas provided by the public in
response to a deregulatory request for information published by OMB
earlier this year. Certain results of those and other similar efforts
have been incorporated into the Bureau's Agenda and will continue to be
considered for potential inclusion in the Bureau's forthcoming Agenda.
Bureau Long-Term Planning Efforts
The Bureau also maintains a long-term agenda to reflect its
expectations beyond the current agenda cycle. While the Bureau
anticipates further defining its rulemaking agenda following the
confirmation of a permanent director, the Bureau intends to explore
potential new rulemakings to address concerns related to identity theft
and coerced debt, prepaid accounts, and loan originator compensation.
BILLING CODE: 4810-AM-P
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFPB Proposed Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
150. PERSONAL FINANCIAL DATA RIGHTS RECONSIDERATION
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 12 U.S.C. 5533
Relevant Executive Orders: 14267
CFR Citation: 12 CFR 1033
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: In November 2024, the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau (Bureau) published a final rule pursuant to section 1033 of the
Consumer Financial Protection Act. The final rule became effective on
January 17, 2025.
[[Page 52944]]
The Bureau plans to take the rulemaking steps necessary and appropriate
to reconsider the November 2024 final rule. Further information on the
procedural history of this rule is available under related RIN 3170-
AA78, which pertains to the final rule the Bureau issued in November
2024.
Statement of Need: In November 2024, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 5533,
the CFPB published a final rule that became effective on January 17,
2025. The CFPB plans to issue a proposed rule to reconsider the
November 2024 final rule.
Summary of Legal Basis: 12 U.S.C. 5533.
Alternatives: To be determined.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To be determined.
Risks: To be determined.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANPRM............................... 08/22/25 90 FR 40986
ANPRM Comment Period End............ 10/21/25
NPRM................................ 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Federalism: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Joseph Baressi, Office of Regulations, Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552
Phone: 202 435-7700
RIN: 3170-AB39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFPB Final Rule Stage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
151. SMALL BUSINESS LENDING DATA COLLECTION UNDER THE EQUAL CREDIT
OPPORTUNITY ACT RECONSIDERATION
Priority: Economically Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801
is undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Deregulatory
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1691c-2
Relevant Executive Orders: 14267; 14168
CFR Citation: 12 CFR 1002
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: In May 2023, the Bureau published a final rule
implementing section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act. The final rule, as modified by subsequent
extensions of compliance dates, became effective on August 29, 2023.
The Bureau issued a proposed rule to reconsider certain aspects of the
May 2023 final rule. The comment period for that proposed rule closed
on December 15, 2025. Further information on the procedural history of
this rule is available under related RIN 3170-AA09, which pertains to
the final rule the Bureau issued in May 2023.
Statement of Need: The amendments as proposed would streamline the
rule, reduce complexity for lenders, and improve data quality,
advancing the purposes of section 1071 and complying with recent
executive directives.
Summary of Legal Basis: 15 U.S.C. 1691c-2.
Alternatives: There are no appropriate alternatives as amendments
to the current regulatory text are necessary.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The Bureau estimates one-time costs
savings from these amendments as proposed across all impacted financial
institutions as well as total annual ongoing cost savings. Small
businesses would primarily benefit from these amendments in the form of
pass-through cost savings from financial institutions. Under the
existing rule, financial institutions could benefit from transparency
resulting from the collection of data; under these amendments as
proposed, the reduction in the amount of data collected could result in
the loss of these benefits to financial institutions. Some covered
financial institutions also would incur one-time adjustment costs, for
such entities that may have started implementing the existing rule.
Further, to the extent that small businesses may derive fair lending
and community development benefits from the data provided by the
existing rule, the amendments as proposed would impose some
unquantifiable cost on small businesses.
Risks: To be determined.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance Date IFR................. 06/18/25 90 FR 25874
Compliance Date IFR Finalization.... 10/02/25 90 FR 47514
Reconsideration NPRM................ 11/13/25 90 FR 50952
Comment Period Close Date........... 12/15/25
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Yes
Small Entities Affected: Businesses
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Lawrence Lee, Office of Regulations, Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552
Phone: 202 435-7700
RIN: 3170-AB40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFPB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
152. EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT (REGULATION B)
Priority: Other Significant. Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is
undetermined.
Regulatory Accounting: Other
Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1691b(a); 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)
Relevant Executive Orders: 14173; 14281
CFR Citation: 12 CFR 1002
Legal Deadline: None
Abstract: The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) directs the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) to prescribe regulations
to carry out the ECOA's purposes. See 15 U.S.C. 1691b(a). The Bureau
issued a proposed rule that would facilitate compliance with ECOA by
clarifying the obligations imposed by the statute. The comment period
for that proposed rule closed on December 15, 2025.
Statement of Need: The amendments are necessary and proper to
further the purposes of Equal Credit Opportunity Act, including
facilitating compliance by clarifying the obligations imposed by the
statute as to disparate impact, discouragement, and special purpose
credit programs.
Summary of Legal Basis: ECOA, 15 U.S.C. 1691b(a), and the Dodd-
Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act).
Alternatives: There are no appropriate alternatives as amendments
to the current regulatory text are necessary.
Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Given the uncertainty at this point
as to the impact of the modifications to Regulation B, the Bureau does
not have the information to precisely quantify or monetize the costs,
or to quantify or monetize the benefits associated with the final rule.
The Bureau believes that the amendments to the provisions related to
disparate impact and discouragement are largely deregulatory in nature
and therefore are expected to reduce burden for the covered persons.
Risks: To be determined.
Timetable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Date FR Cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPRM................................ 11/13/25 90 FR 50901
Comment Period End.................. 12/15/25
Final Rule.......................... 07/00/26
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined
Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Agency Contact: Ducie Le, Office of Regulations, Consumer Financial
[[Page 52945]]
Protection Bureau, 1700 G St NW, Washington, DC 20552
Phone: 202 435-7700
RIN: 3170-AB54
BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION (CPSC)
Statement of Regulatory Priorities
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is charged with
protecting the public from unreasonable risks of death and injury
associated with consumer products. To achieve this goal, CPSC, among
other things:
develop mandatory product safety standards or bans to
address safety hazards, including where required by statute.