Database Search Results

While 10 U.S.C. § 3016 defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” it doesn’t specifically instruct the agency (presumably the Department of Defense, given the title of 10 U.S.C.) on any particular regulatory task related to environment, sustainable acquisition, and material safety. The statute is used as one of the authorities for regulations concerning environment, sustainable acquisition and material safety, but the link is broad. Therefore, it falls under the category of general authority.

The regulation (48 CFR Part 23) explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. § 3016 as one of its authorities. This indicates that the statute authorizes the regulation, but does not necessarily mandate it.

10 U.S.C. § 3016 merely defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions” by listing a series of sections. It does not specify any particular regulatory action the agency must take regarding protection of privacy or freedom of information. The statute provides general authority by broadly referencing a set of pre-existing provisions, without tasking the agency to regulate in particular areas.

The regulation, 48 CFR Part 24, explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 (and the “chapter 137 legacy provisions” it defines) as part of its authority. This indicates the regulation is authorized by the statute, but the statute itself does not directly mandate the regulation’s creation.

10 U.S.C. 3016 defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions.” By citing this statute as authority, 48 CFR Part 25 is implementing regulations related to those specific provisions, and thus acts under specific authority.

The regulation, 48 CFR Part 25, explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as one of its authorities, indicating that the regulation is directly mandated by the statute.

The statute, 10 U.S.C. § 3016, broadly defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions” by listing numerous sections of Title 10. While it identifies a specific set of topics, it doesn’t instruct the agency on how to regulate patents, data, and copyrights related to those topics. The agency is left to determine the specific regulatory tasks, indicating a general authority delegation.

The regulation, 48 CFR Part 27, explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as part of its authority. This indicates that the regulation is authorized by the statute, but the statute itself does not mandate the specific content of the regulation, only that the agency deals with “chapter 137 legacy provisions.”

10 U.S.C. 3016 defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions”. While the statute itself doesn’t directly delegate rulemaking authority, its definition provides a scope within which the agency can operate, giving it a broad authority to make rules concerning “chapter 137 legacy provisions” related to taxes. This aligns with the definition of “General Authority.”

The regulation, 48 CFR Part 29, cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as one of its authorities. This implies that the regulation is authorized, but not necessarily mandated, by the statute. The statute defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions”, which is used in the authority section of the regulation.

While the statute identifies what constitutes “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” it does not specifically instruct the agency (in this case, likely the Department of Defense, given the U.S. Code title) on any particular regulatory task related to acquisition. Instead, it’s up to the agency to determine how these legacy provisions impact the acquisition of commercial products and services, indicating a broad rulemaking authority.

The regulation, 48 CFR Part 12, explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as one of its authorities. This demonstrates the statute authorizes the regulation, but does not necessarily mandate it. The regulation concerns the acquisition of commercial products and services, and the statute defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” which could relate to acquisition.

10 U.S.C. § 3016 defines what “chapter 137 legacy provisions” means by listing out several sections of Title 10. It does not directly instruct the agency (here, presumably the Department of Defense or related entities) on a specific regulatory task. Instead, it provides the basis for broader rulemaking authority related to those legacy provisions, making it a general delegation.

10 U.S.C. § 3016 is explicitly listed in the ‘Authority’ section of 48 CFR Part 13, meaning the regulation is authorized, but not directly mandated by the statute. The regulation implements simplified acquisition procedures, which are generally related to the statutes referenced, but not compelled by them.

While 10 U.S.C. § 3016 is definitional, it references multiple specific sections of Title 10 related to military procurement and other functions. Therefore, it connects to a more specific set of tasks within the agency’s domain. The regulations in 48 CFR Part 14 are about sealed bidding, which relates to how the Department of Defense acquires goods and services. 10 U.S.C. Chapter 137 provisions touches upon the same topic.

The regulation explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as one of its authorities. While the statute itself defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” it doesn’t directly mandate any specific regulations. Rather, it authorizes the agency to act within the bounds of those provisions.

The statute (10 U.S.C. 3016) defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions” by enumerating sections of Title 10. The regulation, 48 CFR Part 15, then references these provisions (through referencing 10 U.S.C. 3016). Since the statute has identified a specific task, it falls under Specific Authority according to Hickman’s framework.

The regulation explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as providing authority for the regulation. Thus, the relationship is directly mandated.

While 10 U.S.C. § 3016 itself is definitional, the reference to “chapter 137 legacy provisions” points to a specific regulatory area: government contracting rules, which is specific enough to be labeled “Specific Authority” given that these provisions pertain to the Department of Defense and related agencies.

The regulation explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as part of its legal authority, indicating a direct mandate or authorization stemming from the statute. The statute defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” and the regulation addresses contract types, implying the legacy provisions relate to contracting and thus mandate or authorize regulation in this area.

10 U.S.C. § 3013 provides a definition of “technical data,” but doesn’t explicitly instruct the agency (likely the Army Corps of Engineers, given the Everglades context and 10 USC context) to issue regulations concerning the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). The CERP is a large-scale ecosystem restoration project. The relationship between the statutory definition of “technical data” and the programmatic regulations for CERP is indirect. A definition of technical data would be a very broad and general authority. The statute does not lay out specific tasks or fill specific regulatory gaps concerning CERP implementation processes, natural system protection, or water availability that the regulation aims to address.

10 U.S.C. § 3013(g)(3) is explicitly listed as an authority for 33 CFR Part 385, indicating authorization. However, the statute itself defines “technical data.” It does not directly mandate any specific regulation. The regulation implements a Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan and uses the definition of technical data.

While 10 U.S.C. § 3014 is cited as authority for 32 CFR Part 581, it merely defines a term. It doesn’t specify or instruct the agency (Army) on any particular regulatory action. The regulation’s actual creation and implementation would derive from broader, more general delegations of authority regarding personnel management and military boards. The statute itself provides no specific direction for rulemaking on personnel review boards.

The statute defines “nontraditional defense contractor.” While the regulation 32 CFR Part 581 pertains to personnel review boards within the Army, the statute relating to nontraditional defense contractors can be considered related to overall procurement and contracting policies which can affect personnel decisions, but the statute does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize this specific regulation. It’s a tangential relationship through the broader area of defense administration.

10 U.S.C. § 3016 is a definitional statute. It defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions” by listing various sections of Title 10. The regulation concerns personnel review boards for disability, discharge, and correction of military records. While some of the provisions that are defined by 3016 might provide more specific authority, 3016 itself provides broad authority.

The regulation cites 10 U.S.C. § 3016 as authority, indicating authorization. However, the statute itself does not explicitly mandate the creation of personnel review boards or the specific regulations outlined in 32 CFR Part 581. Instead, the statute defines legacy provisions.

While 10 U.S.C. 3016 defines what constitutes “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” it doesn’t specify how the agency should regulate acquisitions related to those provisions. It provides the basis for federal acquisition regulations but does not address a specific regulatory task or gap. Therefore, it falls under the General Authority category.

The regulation explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as a source of authority, meaning it is authorized. The statute defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions” but does not mandate specific acquisition regulations. Therefore, it’s authorized but not mandated.

The statute, while definitional, provides the foundation for understanding and applying procurement regulations related to “chapter 137 legacy provisions.” This falls under the “Specific Authority” category as it instructs the agency on a specific task by defining a key term needed for that task.

The regulation explicitly cites 10 U.S.C. 3016 as an authority, meaning the statute directly mandates or at least authorizes the regulation. As 3016 defines “chapter 137 legacy provisions,” which are relevant to describing agency needs in procurement, this suggests a direct mandate.

While 10 U.S.C. 3012 defines “competitive procedures,” it does so with enough specificity regarding the types of procurements and selection processes to qualify as a Specific Authority delegation, even though it uses potentially open-ended terms like “full and open competition” and includes examples of processes.

The regulation cites 10 U.S.C. 3012 in its authority section. The statute defines “competitive procedures” and while it doesn’t directly mandate specific regulations, it authorizes the agency to use such procedures when entering into contracts.

The statute explicitly defines “competitive procedures” which is related to government procurement. It provides guidance and limitations on how agencies should conduct procurement, meaning it’s a delegation for a specific regulatory task.

10 U.S.C. § 3012 is listed in the “Authority” section for 33 CFR Part 209. This means the regulation is authorized by the statute. However, the statute defines “competitive procedures,” it does not explicitly mandate the specific administrative procedures detailed in Part 209. Therefore, it’s authorized but not mandated.

10 U.S.C. § 3012 defines “competitive procedures.” While this is a fairly precise definition, it doesn’t directly instruct the Corps of Engineers to create specific regulations regarding wreck removal. Rather, it provides a framework that the agency can use when implementing its broader authority related to navigation and waterway safety. It is “general authority” because it broadly sets out a definition related to competitive procedures, but does not specify what regulations the Corps must create surrounding wreck removal, an important piece in the procurement process.

The statute (10 U.S. Code § 3012) defines “competitive procedures.” The regulation (33 CFR Part 245) cites this statute in its authority section. While the statute doesn’t explicitly mandate the regulation, it provides a definition of “competitive procedures” that the agency may use and is therefore authorized, but not mandated.

10 U.S.C. § 3013 defines “technical data” for chapter 137 legacy provisions regarding supplies procured by an agency. While it provides a definition, it doesn’t specifically instruct the agency (Army) to regulate any particular aspect related to Army cemeteries or how technical data should be managed in that context. It’s a broad definition that could potentially be relevant to various areas of Army operations, including cemeteries, but doesn’t specifically direct action concerning cemeteries. Thus, it falls under the General Authority category.

10 U.S.C. § 3013 is listed in the authority section of 32 CFR Part 553. This indicates that the regulation is authorized by the statute, but the statute itself does not directly mandate the regulation. The statute defines “technical data,” which can be relevant to procurement related to Army cemeteries, but it doesn’t explicitly require the Army to create regulations regarding cemeteries based on this definition. Thus, it’s authorized but not mandated.

Although § 3013 is listed as authority for this regulation, the statute delegates to the agency (in this case, indirectly as part of the authorities for this regulation) broad authority to create procedures regarding personnel review boards without identifying any specific regulatory tasks or gaps. The statute defines technical data, which the board would consider during review.

10 U.S. Code § 3013 defines “technical data.” 32 CFR Part 581 establishes the Personnel Review Board, including the Army Disability Review Board, Army Discharge Review Board, and Army Board for Correction of Military Records. While § 3013 is listed as an authority for Part 581, the statute itself does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize the creation or operation of these boards, but the definition is used in procurement which could come under review of the boards.

The statute, specifically section (c)(1), clearly instructs the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General to prescribe regulations regarding specific aspects, i.e., “the types of assistance that may be provided” and “the actions that Department of Defense personnel may take.” This is a clear instruction for a specific regulatory task, fulfilling the criteria for Specific Authority Delegation.

10 U.S. Code § 283(c)(1) explicitly states that “The Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General shall jointly prescribe regulations concerning the types of assistance that may be provided under this section.” This directly mandates the creation of regulations. The provided regulation, 48 CFR Part 7, seems to concern acquisition planning generally. While 10 U.S.C 3016 is cited as authority for the regulation and 10 U.S. Code § 283 falls within Title 10, acquisition planning is only tangentially related to the specifics of 10 U.S. Code § 283.

The statute explicitly directs the Secretary of Defense to provide support for counterdrug activities to other agencies and details the types of support authorized (e.g., maintenance, transportation, training). It outlines what the agency can do. The reference to acquisition by contract also implies a specific task. It also uses terms such as “appropriate official” to define the parameters.

10 U.S. Code § 284 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to provide support for counterdrug activities. 48 CFR Part 7, which addresses acquisition planning, is authorized but not mandated. The statute allows the Secretary of Defense to acquire services or equipment by contract, and the regulation outlines the planning processes for such acquisitions. While the statute creates a permissible action, this particular CFR part flows naturally from this action, and allows the entity in question to create acquisition plans, it is not required.

While 10 U.S.C. § 301 does grant authority to the Secretary of Defense, it’s a broad, general grant of power to “prescribe regulations for the government of his department.” It doesn’t identify a specific regulatory task or gap to be filled. The statute addresses many different areas of governance and does not clearly delineate or limit the scope of regulatory action related to criminal jurisdiction. Thus it is considered a General Authority delegation.

The regulation cites 10 U.S.C. § 301 as its authority. While the statute does not directly mandate the regulation concerning criminal jurisdiction, it authorizes the Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations for the government of the Department of Defense, which could include rules regarding criminal jurisdiction.

While the statute defines specific terms, including ones related to activities that are the target of regulations, it gives the Secretary of Defense broad authority to conduct security cooperation activities, without delineating specific regulatory tasks that are the domain of agency regulations. The statute sets high level definitions but does not mention acquisition or rulemaking tasks.

The statute, 10 U.S.C. § 301, defines terms used within Chapter 16 of Title 10. While it does not directly mandate the creation of acquisition regulations (48 CFR Part 7), it authorizes activities and programs that would necessitate them, especially regarding “security cooperation programs and activities” and “small-scale construction”. Without defining those programs and activities regulations governing the planning and acquisition of associated goods and services would be impended.

10 U.S.C. § 3012 defines “competitive procedures,” but the agency relies on the general authority of the code section (Sec. 3012, 70A Stat. 157; 10 U.S.C. 3012) to create rules for Military Court Fees. The statute does not specifically instruct the agency to regulate military court fees, so a broader rulemaking authority is implied.

While 10 U.S.C. § 3012 defines “competitive procedures,” it does not explicitly mandate regulations regarding military court fees. However, the statute grants the “head of an agency” authority related to entering into contracts, which could arguably authorize regulations that define and manage costs, including fees related to court proceedings. Thus, the relationship is authorized but not mandated.