1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |OPM Publishes FAQ on FEHBP Medical Loss Ratio

OPM Publishes FAQ on FEHBP Medical Loss Ratio

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.30.12

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) published a letter and FAQ for federal employees regarding the ACA-mandated Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) for Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) plans in an August 22, 2012 Benefits Administration Letter. The FAQ explains the basic framework of the MLR standard and clarifies that:

  • whether an FEHBP plan owes a rebate is determined based on all of a carrier’s line of business (e.g., large group) within a given state;
  • any rebated owed by an FEHBP plan shall be paid directly to OPM, the policyholder for all FEHBP plans, as required by FAR §31.201;
  • any rebate paid by an FEHBP plan shall be deposited into the contingency reserve of that health plan and shall be used to directly reduce the cost of the next year’s premiums for that plan; and
  • FEHBP enrollees will receive a notice from their plan indicating whether the plan did or did not meet the MLR standard.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.28.26

PFAS Regulatory Alert: EPA Rolls Back RCRA Proposed Rule on “Hazardous Waste” but Does Not Disturb Proposed RCRA Rule on PFAS

Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program....

View All Insights