We have updated our review of the comments submitted to OPM regarding their proposed CFC regulations. Generally, the concerns revealed in our preliminary review have continued to surface as we have read more of the submissions.
The topic receiving the greatest interest was the non-refundable application fee: 80 percent of the 110 comments we reviewed addressed this topic. Most of the comments criticized the proposal.
Almost as many of the commenters expressed concerns about the elimination of the print directory and requirement that donors pledge on-line. Rounding out the topics of greatest concern was the proposal to replace the LFCC/PCFO system with a new RCC/CCA system.
Click the thumbnail image on the left to see how many comments in our sample touched on each of OPM’s 13 main regulatory changes.
We release this update on the comments on the eve of the rescheduled House subcommittee hearing on the CFC regs. The session is now set for Wednesday, July 10. We shall attend and report what we learn.
Almost as many of the commenters expressed concerns about the elimination of the print directory and requirement that donors pledge on-line. Rounding out the topics of greatest concern was the proposal to replace the LFCC/PCFO system with a new RCC/CCA system.
Click the thumbnail image on the left to see how many comments in our sample touched on each of OPM’s 13 main regulatory changes.
We release this update on the comments on the eve of the rescheduled House subcommittee hearing on the CFC regs. The session is now set for Wednesday, July 10. We shall attend and report what we learn.
RSS Feed