Office of the Secretary February 28, 2020 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Arms Sales Notification
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of an arms sales notification.
Arms Sales Notification
The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification.
Regional Infrastructure Accelerator Program
The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST),\1\ enacted in December 2015, authorized the establishment of a Regional Infrastructure Accelerator Demonstration Program (the Program) to assist entities in developing improved infrastructure priorities and financing strategies for the accelerated development of a project that is eligible for funding under the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Program under Chapter 6 of Title 23, United States Code. The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 enacted on December 20, 2019 appropriated $5 million for this Program.\2\
Health Promotion
This final rule removes an unnecessary and outdated Department of Defense (DoD) rule relating to a health promotion program. The majority of the content of this part includes internal DoD policy, which does not require rulemaking. Additionally, since this rule was codified, the General Services Administration (GSA) issued a rule that superseded the public-facing content of this part. Therefore, this part can be removed from the CFR.
Military Lending Act Limitations on Terms of Consumer Credit Extended to Service Members and Dependents
The Department of Defense (Department) is amending its interpretive rule for the Military Lending Act (the MLA). The MLA, as implemented by the Department, limits the military annual percentage rate (MAPR) that a creditor may charge to a maximum of 36 percent, requires certain disclosures, and provides other substantive consumer protections on ``consumer credit'' extended to Service members and their families. On July 22, 2015, the Department amended its regulation primarily for the purpose of extending the protections of the MLA to a broader range of closed-end and open-end credit products (the July 2015 Final Rule). On August 26, 2016, the Department issued the first set of interpretations of that regulation in the form of questions and answers. On December 14, 2017, the Department issued a second set of interpretations of that regulation in the form of amended questions and answers. The Department is now withdrawing the amended question and answer number 2 (Q&A #2), published in the December 14, 2017 Interpretive Rule, which discussed when credit is extended for the purpose of purchasing a motor vehicle or personal property and the creditor simultaneously extends credit in an amount greater than the purchase price of the motor vehicle or personal property. In withdrawing this amended question and answer, the Department is reverting back to the original Q&A #2 published in the August 26, 2016 Interpretive Rule. This will allow the Department to conduct additional analysis on this matter. The Department is also adding a new question and answer to address questions about the use of Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers to identify covered borrowers in the Department's database.
Defining Unfair or Deceptive Practices
The U.S. Department of Transportation (Department or DOT) is seeking comment in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on a proposal that would codify definitions for the terms ``unfair'' and ``deceptive'' in the Department's regulations implementing its aviation consumer protection statute. While codifying these definitions into the Department's regulations would be new, the proposed definitions of ``unfair'' and ``deceptive'' reflect the Department's longstanding interpretation of the terms. This proposal would also require the Department to articulate in future enforcement orders the basis for concluding that a practice is unfair or deceptive where no existing regulation governs the practice in question, state the basis for its conclusion that a practice is unfair or deceptive when it issues discretionary aviation consumer protection regulations, and apply formal hearing procedures for discretionary aviation consumer protection rulemakings. In addition, this proposal would codify the longstanding practice of the Department's Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings to offer airlines and ticket agents the opportunity to be heard and present relevant evidence before any determination is made on how to resolve a matter involving a potential unfair or deceptive practice. The proposal is intended to provide regulated entities and other stakeholders with greater clarity and certainty about the Department's interpretation of unfair or deceptive practice in the context of aviation consumer protection rulemaking and enforcement actions.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
