C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER II—MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD › SUBCHAPTER A—ORGANIZATION AND PROCEDURES › PART 1203—PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW OF RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

5 C.F.R. § 1203.1

Scope; application of part 1201, subpart B

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

(a) General. This part applies to the Board's review, under 5 U.S.C. 1204(a)(4) and 1204(f), of any rules or regulations (“regulations”) issued by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). It applies to the Board's review of the way in which an agency implements regulations, as well as to its review of the validity of the regulations on their face.

(b) Application of 5 CFR part 1201, subparts B and C. (1) Where appropriate, and unless the Board's regulations provide otherwise, the Board may apply the provisions of 5 CFR part 1201, subpart B to proceedings conducted under this part. It may do so on its own motion or on the motion of a party to these proceedings.

(2) The following provisions of 5 CFR part 1201, subparts B and C do not apply to proceedings conducted under this part:

(i) Sections 1201.21 through 1201.27 which concern petitions for appeal of agency actions, and the pleadings that are filed in connection with those petitions; and

(ii) Sections 1201.111 through 1201.119 which concern final decisions of presiding officials, and petitions for Board review of those decisions.

[54 FR 23632, June 2, 1989, as amended at 54 FR 28658, July 6, 1989]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: George Dunbar Prewitt, Jr. v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 133 F.3d 885 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
George Dunbar Prewitt, Jr. v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 133 F.3d 885 (Fed. Cir. 1998). “5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 (a), 1203.11(b)(1). See Hill, 59 M.”
Adolat Nadjimova v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “See 5 C.F.R. § 1203.1 (b)(1) (stating that, where appropriate and unless the Board’s regulations provide otherwise, the Board may apply the provisions of 5 C.”
Matthew Sheridan v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “See 5 C.F.R. § 1203.1 (b)(1) (stating that, where appropriate and unless the Board’s regulations provide otherwise, the Board may apply the provisions of 5 C.”
USDA, Interested Terminated Probationary Employees v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in having the Board review the regulation or rule in question because it has some applicability to him or her.”
USAID, Interested Terminated Probationary Employees v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in having the Board review the regulation or rule in question because it has some applicability to him or her.”
Treasury, Interested Terminated Probationary Employees v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in having the Board review the regulation or rule in question because it has some applicability to him or her.”
Interior, Interested Terminated Probationary Employees v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain 5 The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) submitted an amicus brief recommending that the Board deny the petitioners’ request for review.”
HHS, Interested Terminated Probationary Emp. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in 5 The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) submitted an amicus brief recommending that the Board deny the…”
Energy, Interested Terminated Probationary Emp. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain 5 The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) submitted an amicus brief recommending that the Board deny the petitioner’s request for review.”
DVA, Interested Terminated Probationary Emp. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in having the Board review the regulation or rule in question because it has some applicability to him or her.”
DOT, Interested Terminated Probationary Emp. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “6 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in having the Board review the regulation or rule in question because it has some applicability to him or her.”
DHS, Interested Terminated Probationary Emp. v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026). “115 , ¶ 8 (2007); 5 C.F.R. §§ 1203.1 -.22. However, the Board has interpreted the plain meaning of that term to signify that the petitioning person must have an interest in having the Board review the regulation or rule in question because it has some applicability to him or her.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.