16 C.F.R. § 1.101

OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Purpose. This part collects and displays control numbers assigned by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to information collection requirements in rules issued or enforced by the Commission. A response to an information collection is not required unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. This part fulfills the mandate (44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(3), 44 U.S.C. 3512) that agencies display the current control number assigned by the OMB Director to agency information collection requirements and inform affected persons that they need not respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number.

(b) Display.

Current OMB control number
(all numbers begin with 3084-)
16 CFR part where the information collection requirement is located (or alternate part(s) if issued by another agency, co-enforced by the Federal Trade Commission)
0005801-803.
0025453.
0068306.
0069305.
008512 CFR part 205; 12 CFR part 1005.
008612 CFR part 213; 12 CFR part 1013.
008712 CFR part 202; 12 CFR part 1002.
008812 CFR part 226; 12 CFR part 1026.
0094309.
0097310.
0099301.
0100300.
0101303.
0102308.
0103423.
0104425.
0105432.
0106435.
0107436.
0108455.
0109460.
0110500-503.
0111701.
0112702.
0113703.
0117312.
0121313.
0127315.
012812 CFR 1022.136; 12 CFR 1022.137.
0131680; 12 CFR 1022.20.
0132642; 12 CFR 1022.54.
0137641; 681.
0142437.
0144660; 12 CFR 1022.42; 12 CFR 1022.43.
0145640; 12 CFR 1022.70.
0150318.
015612 CFR part 1014.
015712 CFR part 1015.
[78 FR 65558, Nov. 1, 2013]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Doctors for Am. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (D.D.C. 2025).
Doctors for Am. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (D.D.C. 2025). “§§ 3507 (a)(3), 3512; 16 C.F.R. § 1.101 (2025). 12 Because the plaintiffs have provided numerous bases on which to set aside the OPM Memo and HHS Guidance, the Court will not focus on the claim that the defendants failed to consider the EBPA except to say that the plaintiffs’…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.