Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Jul 23, 2026National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association (NARFE)Analysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 23, 2026CareFirst BlueCross BlueShieldAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 23, 2026National Conference of Bankruptcy JudgesAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 23, 2026Healthcare Trust InstituteAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 22, 2026Federal Magistrate Judges AssociationAnalysis pending📎 AttachmentRead comment →
- Jul 21, 2026Association of Federal Health OrganizationsOpposeTrade association📎 Attachment
The Association of Federal Health Organizations (AFHO), representing health benefit plan carriers, opposes the proposed system of records modification that would allow OPM to receive claims data from the OIG. They express concerns regarding data re-identification and HIPAA compliance, recommending alternative methods like OPM-run queries or an "EDGE server" approach to maintain data security.
Read comment → - Jul 16, 2026Federal Judges Association (FJA)OpposeTrade association📎 Attachment
The Federal Judges Association opposes the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) proposed modification to its system of records regarding health benefits. They argue that the proposal creates significant security risks for federal judges and their families by creating a centralized repository of sensitive medical information without adequate safeguards or de-identification.
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment from AnonymousOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed pseudonymizing protocol, arguing that it is insufficient to protect the sensitive medical information of federal judges and their dependents. They request that OPM reconsider the proposal to include advanced notice and more robust protections for released information.
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment from AnonymousOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed pseudonymizing protocol, arguing that it is insufficient to protect the sensitive medical information of federal judges and their dependents. They specifically highlight the lack of advanced notice and the absence of protections for information once it has been released.
Read comment → - Jul 23, 2026Comment from AnonymousOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed modification of OPM/Central-15, arguing that it converts a program-administration claims warehouse into a broadly shareable government-wide data resource without adequate legal justification or safeguards. They specifically argue that the new routine uses fail the Privacy Act's compatibility requirement, include sensitive clinical data in payment-screening systems, and lack sufficient pseudonymization and oversight.
Read comment →
