Rule2026-07245
Uniform Allowances
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 14, 2026
Effective
July 13, 2026
Issuing agencies
Personnel Management Office
Abstract
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a direct final rule to raise the maximum annual uniform allowance and the maximum allowable cost payable by the agency for furnishing uniforms from $800 to $1,500, amend the purpose of the subpart and the definition of "uniform," and ensure agencies maintain policies for administering uniform allowance programs. This document also provides guidance on appropriate and inappropriate uses of the allowance, distinguishes uniforms from personal protective equipment, and makes technical edits to improve transparency, accountability, and usability.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 71 (Tuesday, April 14, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 71 (Tuesday, April 14, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19057-19063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-07245]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 71 / Tuesday, April 14, 2026 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 19057]]
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
5 CFR Part 591
[Docket ID: OPM-2026-0068]
RIN 3206-AO73
Uniform Allowances
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a direct
final rule to raise the maximum annual uniform allowance and the
maximum allowable cost payable by the agency for furnishing uniforms
from $800 to $1,500, amend the purpose of the subpart and the
definition of ``uniform,'' and ensure agencies maintain policies for
administering uniform allowance programs. This document also provides
guidance on appropriate and inappropriate uses of the allowance,
distinguishes uniforms from personal protective equipment, and makes
technical edits to improve transparency, accountability, and usability.
DATES: This rule is effective July 13, 2026, unless significant adverse
comments are received by May 14, 2026. If significant adverse comments
are received, OPM will withdraw the relevant provisions of this direct
final rule.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments for this direct final rule within
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/">https://www.regulations.gov/</a>. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
All comments must be received by the end of the comment period for
them to be considered. All comments and other submissions received
generally will be posted on the internet at <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a> as they are
received, without change, including any personal information provided.
However, OPM retains discretion to redact personal or sensitive
information, including but not limited to personal or sensitive
information pertaining to third parties.
A summary of this rule may be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ed Ames, Office of Personnel
Management, Workforce Policy and Innovation, (202) 606-2858,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9feffee6eff0f3f6fce6dfa3febff7edfaf9a2" http: opm.gov">opm.gov</a>">paypolicy@<a href="http://opm.gov">opm.gov</a></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under 5 U.S.C. 5901 through 5903, OPM may adjust the maximum
allowance for uniforms and the maximum allowable cost payable by the
agency for furnishing uniforms and may prescribe such regulations as it
considers necessary for the administration of uniforms. Any uniform
allowance funds paid or uniforms furnished directly to employees are
not ``wages'' for Social Security or Federal employment tax/wage
withholding purposes--that is, not ``wages'' under the Social Security
Act's definition (42 U.S.C. 409), the Federal Insurance Contributions
Act (26 U.S.C. chapter 21), or the Federal wage withholding rules (26
U.S.C. chapter 24). (See 5 U.S.C. 5901(c).)
The uniform allowance authority, as set forth in 5 U.S.C. 5901
through 5903, along with related OPM regulations, apply exclusively to
civilian employees governed by title 5 of the United States Code.
However, it is important to recognize that some agencies possess
separate statutory authorities or appropriations that enable them to
pay uniform allowances or provide uniforms independently of the title 5
provisions. OPM is aware of several examples of such independent
authorities. For instance, civilian employees of the Department of War
(10 U.S.C. 1593) and police officers within the Department of Veterans
Affairs (38 U.S.C. 903) are subject to their own statutory provisions
which allow for uniform allowances or the furnishing of uniforms.
Additionally, certain components within the Department of Homeland
Security may operate under their own authorities or appropriations to
either provide a uniform allowance or furnish uniforms to employees. It
is important to note that agencies possessing independent statutory
authority or appropriations for uniform allowances might not be able to
utilize these independent authorities concurrently with the title 5
uniform allowance authority under 5 U.S.C. 5901 through 5903, depending
on the limitations of the specific authority. Agencies must ensure
compliance with the applicable statutory provisions governing the
payment of uniform allowances or the furnishing of uniforms.
OPM last increased the Governmentwide maximum from $400 to $800 via
final rule on April 26, 2007 (72 FR 20701). Nearly two decades have
passed since that adjustment, during which uniform costs have risen
significantly due to inflation and advancements in materials that
improve durability, comfort, and safety.
This direct final rule amends 5 CFR part 591, subpart A, and
includes several key changes: increasing the maximum annual uniform
allowance rate and the maximum allowable cost of furnishing uniforms to
$1,500; clarifying OPM's authority under 5 U.S.C. 5901 through 5903;
updating the purpose of the subpart (Sec. 591.101); clarifying the
definition of ``uniform'' (Sec. 591.102); and adding a new section
(Sec. 591.105) governing written agency policies when providing a
uniform allowance or furnishing uniforms to employees.
The rule also provides guidance on appropriate and inappropriate
uses of the uniform allowance. For example, uniform-allowance funds
must not be used for personal protective equipment (PPE), which is
governed separately under 5 U.S.C. 7903 and applicable agency safety
standards or U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) standards, or for items required solely
for job performance, for example a tool such as a hammer. These
clarifications distinguish uniforms from PPE and other non-uniform
costs to promote consistency and accountability while preserving agency
discretion to set allowance levels below the maximum. (See 5 U.S.C.
7903; 29 U.S.C. 668; 29 CFR part 1960; and 29 CFR part 1910, subpart
I.)
OPM plans to issue guidance to agencies on administering the
uniform allowance authority, including the changes made by this final
rule. All guidance will be available at <a href="http://opm.gov">opm.gov</a>.
II. Maximum Uniform Allowance Increase
OPM considered a variety of materials, which are listed in the
docket
[[Page 19058]]
at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/OPM-2026-0068-0001">https://www.regulations.gov/document/OPM-2026-0068-0001</a>. The
sections below discuss several of the sources of information in greater
detail.
1. Economic Context
Since the last adjustment to the maximum uniform allowance in 2007,
the cost of uniforms for Federal employees--particularly those in law
enforcement and public safety roles--has risen substantially. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased by over
57 percent between April 2007 and January 2026, meaning that the
purchasing power of the current $800 maximum allowance has been
significantly diminished. However, the CPI-U does not fully capture the
sharp increases in uniform and apparel costs experienced in recent
years, especially for specialized, durable garments required in law
enforcement. (BLS, 2026)
The Producer Price Index for Textile Products and Apparel (WPU03)
(<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU03">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU03</a>) reached 193 in January 2026,
and when applied to the 2007 cap, suggests a purchasing power
equivalent of approximately $1,230 to $1,240 before accounting for the
additional costs of technical fabrics and modern construction. (FRB St.
Louis, 2026)
2. Interagency Engagement
Because nearly two decades had passed since the last adjustment to
the maximum uniform allowance in 2007, OPM initiated an interagency
engagement process in 2024 to better understand current uniform costs,
agency practices, and employee needs. As a direct result, many of the
revisions and clarifications to part 591, as well as the supplementary
information provided in this rule, reflect input and findings from that
interagency process. On June 25, 2024, OPM sent an email to Chief Human
Capital Officers Council (CHCOC) members (CHCOs, Deputy CHCOs, and Key
Principals) totaling 77 recipients, and separately to 16 points of
contact at agencies that are not part of the CHCOC. The two emails
requested agencies designate a representative to participate in a
uniform allowance interagency workgroup (IAWG) meeting and presented a
data call consisting of an online survey regarding each agency's use of
the uniform allowance and a spreadsheet to document the costs of
various uniform garments, accessories, and related items. The IAWG
meeting was held on September 26, 2024, and survey and spreadsheet
submissions were requested by October 10, 2024.
The data call resulted in survey responses from twelve agencies and
consolidated cost spreadsheets from six agencies. A comprehensive
review of agency survey responses and uniform cost data revealed that
the majority of agencies reported the current $800 maximum uniform
allowance is insufficient for at least some occupations. Agencies
attribute this inadequacy to a combination of rising costs for
textiles, apparel, and labor, as well as the need for uniforms with
enhanced features such as comfort, stretch, durability, and stain
resistance. Some agencies specifically cited post-COVID market
volatility, supply chain disruptions, and the introduction of new
uniform materials as key drivers of increased costs. Only one agency
indicated that the $800 allowance remains adequate for their current
needs. The detailed cost data further supports these findings, with
many agencies reporting average annual uniform costs that exceed the
current maximum, particularly for firefighters and law enforcement
positions. Of those submitting cost data, all but one reported at least
one occupational group requiring uniforms. One agency submitted a
spreadsheet without any cost data and confirmed that it does not have
uniformed employees. Therefore, OPM excluded it from any cost analysis
of uniformed employees. Additionally, one agency that did not use the
uniform allowance authority indicated in its survey that it was
considering implementation for at least one occupation. Among agencies
with uniformed occupational groups, all but one department headquarters
supported an increase to the maximum uniform allowance. The exception
did not have complete component-level data to make an informed
recommendation but reported the cost of one occupation's uniforms at
approximately $900. One large department specifically recommended a
maximum rate of $1,500.
3. Analysis of Post-COVID Apparel Cost Trends
Since 2020, uniform and apparel costs have increased at a notably
sharper rate than in prior years, as reflected in the Producer Price
Index by Commodity: Textile Products and Apparel, the Producer Price
Index by Industry: Apparel Manufacturing, and the Consumer Price Index
for All Urban Consumers: Apparel (WPU03) (<a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU03">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU03</a>). This acceleration is consistent with agency survey
responses and supported by government and industry sources documenting
supply chain disruptions, labor cost increases, and innovations in
uniform fabrics and construction.
Global supply chain disruptions during the COVID pandemic
significantly contributed to U.S. producer price index inflation,
particularly in manufacturing, where bottlenecks and labor constraints
drove costs upward (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 2022).
Similarly, supply chain congestion and reduced labor supply were major
drivers of inflation during and after the pandemic (National Bureau of
Economic Research, 2024). Industry analysis indicates that apparel
brands are facing rising labor costs and are diversifying production
locations to manage these increases. (Just Style, 2024) Academic
research further shows that the apparel industry has experienced
accelerated trends in automation, digitalization, and market
concentration post-COVID, all of which have added to cost pressures.
(Cornell Chronicle, 2021) These factors further support OPM's
determination to raise the maximum rate allowed under Sec. 591.103 to
$1,500.
III. Regulatory Changes
1. Purpose (Sec. 591.101)
OPM is revising the purpose of the regulations to make clear that
this subpart applies to both agencies that provide payment of the
uniform allowance and those agencies that furnish uniforms to
employees. In addition, OPM is adding ``5 U.S.C. 5901 through 5903'' as
the prescribing authority--the current regulation only cites 5 U.S.C.
5903.
2. Definition of ``Uniform'' (Sec. 591.102)
OPM is revising the definition of ``uniform'' to eliminate
ambiguity and prevent misuse of uniform allowance funds. Based on
inconsistent practices across agencies, OPM concludes that the current
definition does not adequately distinguish between appearance-based
uniform items and PPE and other non-uniform items.
During the interagency engagement process, feedback showed that
some agencies have used uniform allowances to purchase items that are
clearly PPE, such as ballistic vests, face shields, motor helmets, and
footwear worn exclusively for safety purposes. Additional information
gleaned from OPM's engagement includes a comment from one agency
noting, ``Ballistic vests at $1,800 are considered an article of a
uniform to be purchased with the uniform allowance,'' and another
agency specifically requested clarification on whether certain items
are PPE or uniform components.
[[Page 19059]]
Multiple agencies also reported using the uniform allowance for
services like tailoring and cleaning, which are not uniform items and
are prohibited. (See, e.g., FLRA v. Air Force, No. 10-1299 (D.C. Cir.
May 27, 2011)). One agency reported using the uniform allowance to
procure toolkits for craft workers.
In addition, among agencies with uniformed employees, more than
half reported using 5 U.S.C. 7903 for PPE purchases, which is the
appropriate procurement authority for protective equipment and
clothing, but at least three said they do not, and one of the three was
unaware of the authority. These gaps underscore the importance of
defining boundaries between appropriate items for a uniform allowance
and other unauthorized items. (See 5 U.S.C. 7903; 29 U.S.C. 668; 29 CFR
part 1960; and 29 CFR part 1910, subpart I.)
The revised definition will specify that a ``uniform'' means
specified article(s) of clothing or other items required by an agency
to be worn ``to provide a distinctive and easily identifiable
appearance'' when performing the employee's job. OPM is also including
multiple examples in the definition and more clearly excluding PPE
required for safety and other non-uniform items. The changes related to
PPE will better align with applicable safety standards set by the
employing agency, DOL OSHA standards (see 29 U.S.C. 668; 29 CFR part
1960; and 29 CFR part 1910, subpart I), or other applicable standards.
OPM expects that the revised definition will ensure consistent
application governmentwide and support proper use of agency and
taxpayer funds.
These revisions do not alter the substantive meaning of the term;
rather, they provide additional clarity for agencies and employees of
existing requirements.
3. Four Percent Service Charge Limitation (Sec. 591.103(b))
We have added a new paragraph (b) to Sec. 591.103, based on 5
U.S.C. 5901(a), making clear that an agency that provides uniforms to
its employees can use appropriated uniform allowance funds to pay up to
4 percent of any service charges, but the sum of the cost of the
uniform(s) and the service charge cannot exceed the maximum allowance
amount.
4. Program Administration (Sec. 591.105)
We have added a new section to strengthen accountability and ensure
consistent administration of uniform allowance programs. Although the
previous regulations only addressed a written policy if a uniform
allowance was provided to employees, an agency furnishing uniforms
would have also needed written procedures governing the program. This
section makes clear that agencies need written policies if they provide
a uniform allowance and/or furnish uniforms under part 591.
IV. Expected Impact
1. Statement of Need
OPM has determined that this regulatory action is necessary to
update and clarify uniform allowance regulations under 5 U.S.C. 5901
through 5903. The maximum uniform allowance rate has not been revised
since April 26, 2007 (72 FR 20701). Over the past 19 years, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-
U) increased by 57.36 percent (BLS, 2026). Thus, purchasing $800 (the
current maximum uniform allowance rate) worth of goods in 2007 would
now cost approximately $1,260 as of January 2026. Through OPM's
interagency engagement process and based on our research, OPM
determined that uniform costs have risen beyond inflation due to
advancements in materials that improve durability, comfort, stain
resistance, stretchability, and safety. In addition, this regulatory
action is necessary to restore the effectiveness of the uniform
allowance program for Federal employees, particularly those in law
enforcement and related public safety occupations, which represent the
largest group in the reviewed data.
Without an increase, employees in these occupations are required to
bear a disproportionate share of uniform costs, which can negatively
affect recruitment, retention, and morale in occupations such as law
enforcement, firefighting, and other uniformed roles. The February 2026
GAO report (<a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108495">https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108495</a>) underscores the
importance of competitive benefits--including adequate uniform
allowances--in attracting and retaining qualified personnel in law
enforcement roles. (GAO, 2026) The adjustment to $1,500 is supported by
both agency-reported cost data and market analysis and is necessary to
ensure that the allowance fulfills its statutory purpose of defraying,
though not necessarily covering in full, the cost of required uniforms
as Congress intended. (See U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 100,
p.15037, August 18, 1954.)
Finally, OPM's data call showed that several agencies do not
maintain adequate records or uniform allowance policies, resulting in
inconsistent application of statutory and regulatory requirements and,
in some cases, unauthorized expenditures for items outside the
definition of ``uniform.'' These deficiencies undermine transparency,
accountability, and fiscal stewardship of taxpayer funds.
2. Impact
This rule will primarily affect Federal agencies that administer
uniform allowance programs and employees who are required to wear
uniforms in the performance of official duties. The rule will also
affect Congress and OPM in their oversight capacities. The public and
taxpayers are indirectly impacted through improved accountability and
stewardship of Federal funds.
Federal agencies with employees required to wear costly uniforms
will experience increased expenditures based on the increase of the
maximum allowance. However, although agencies are authorized to pay up
to the annual uniform allowance maximum rate, many employees will not
need the full $1,500 per year for uniforms. In fact, for many
employees, the needed allowance may be much less. OPM believes agencies
are in the best position to identify and manage the specific uniform
allowance needs of their employees.
In addition, by OPM providing greater clarity in regulation and
guidance on inappropriate purchases utilizing the uniform allowance,
for example PPE and items required in the performance of employees'
duties, multiple agencies will experience decreases in their uniform
allowance and furnishing of uniform costs. Agencies will also be able
to better plan for and track appropriate uniform costs, PPE, and other
items by providing employees with the allowance intended by statute for
employees' mandatory and appropriate uniform costs.
In addition to some agencies needing to allocate additional funding
for uniform allowances, some Federal agencies covered by 5 CFR part
591, subpart A, may experience operational impacts related to
compliance with policy requirements at Sec. 591.105 if the agency does
not have a formalized uniform allowance policy or does not maintain
documentation sufficient to administer and oversee programs. These
changes should improve consistency across agencies but may require
initial administrative adjustments, such as updating internal systems,
training staff on new procedures, and revising policies to ensure that
uniform standards and procurement practices align with clarified
definitions.
[[Page 19060]]
Agencies with independent statutory authorities or appropriations
for uniforms that allow or require an agency to provide an allowance
and/or furnish uniforms for its employees are not expected to be
affected by this final rule. However, any such agency is advised to
review the applicable authorities and/or appropriations to determine if
they reference 5 U.S.C. 5901 through 5903 and assess if any action may
be required based on this final rule.
Federal employees whose required uniform expenses exceed the $800
maximum annual uniform allowance will experience reduced out-of-pocket
costs. Employees whose uniform costs are $800 or less per year will not
see any change in what they have received in the past, but some
agencies report that they would like to update the uniform styles of
some occupations based on a new higher maximum rate. Notably, one
agency emphasized rising costs and wear-and-tear and argued a higher
maximum rate will ensure a professional appearance and safe
performance. Employees may be subject to updated agency policies
governing uniform standards within Sec. 591.105.
Congress will see an impact in its oversight role. Agency policy
requirements will support Congressional inquiries and audits by
ensuring agencies maintain standardized data on uniform allowance
expenditures and program administration. This facilitates reporting and
strengthens fiscal accountability.
Taxpayers and the public will be indirectly impacted through
improved fiscal stewardship. This rule reduces the risk of misuse of
funds and strengthens accountability for taxpayer dollars. These
changes promote confidence in government operations and ensure that
uniform allowance programs operate transparently and in accordance with
statutory intent.
3. Costs
Executive Order 12866 requires OPM to design regulations in the
most cost-effective manner that achieve the intended policy objectives
while minimizing burden on Federal agencies and their employees. To
meet this standard, OPM utilized a structured and transparent
methodology for evaluating uniform costs across the Federal workforce.
Agencies provided uniform cost data in October 2024, which reflected
unadjusted spending levels at the time of collection. Because these
submissions spanned multiple agencies, procurement methods, and
occupational requirements, OPM normalized these data using the Producer
Price Index (PPI) by Commodity: Textile Products and Apparel to present
all figures consistently in December 2025 dollars. The PPI rose from
185.18 in October 2024 to 193 in January 2026, producing an adjustment
factor of 1.040. (FRB St. Louis, 2026) Applying this factor allows for
consistent comparison across agencies and ensures that cost estimates
accurately reflect current market conditions for uniform components.
It is important to note that vendor prices were not adjusted using
the PPI factor. Because vendor prices were collected contemporaneously
as part of this rulemaking and already reflect current retail and
catalog market conditions, OPM treated them as December 2025 values.
The PPI adjustment applies only to agency reported costs submitted in
October 2024, consistent with the methodology documented in the cost
analysis.
Using this methodology, OPM converted all agency-reported uniform
costs from October 2024 to December 2025 values. In October 2024, the
highest annual uniform cost reported by agencies was $3,200, which
increases to approximately $3,333 after applying the PPI adjustment
factor. The lowest reported annual cost--$53--increases to just over
$55 under the same adjustment. The average annual cost reported by
agencies was $977 in October 2024 and rises to approximately $1,017 in
December 2025 dollars. This paired presentation of October 2024 values
and their PPI-adjusted equivalents provides a clear and consistent
basis for evaluating the sufficiency of both the current $800 allowance
and the $1,500 maximum.
The same methodology was applied to agency reported costs of weekly
uniform sets for positions requiring different types of full uniform
sets each week. Based on agency submissions, the average cost for all
weekly sets was approximately $3,760 in October 2024. When adjusted
using the PPI factor, this rises to $3,915 in January 2026 dollars.
Under the existing $800 maximum allowance, employees in such positions
face average out-of-pocket costs of $3,115. With an increased maximum
of $1,500, the average out-of-pocket cost decreases to $2,415,
demonstrating meaningful financial relief even though the increase does
not fully eliminate the gap for employees in the most uniform-intensive
occupations.
OPM's analysis of uniform components further shows that agency-
reported average costs for key items--such as long-sleeve shirts,
belts, uniform jackets, and duty footwear--often exceed the lowest
vendor prices available nationally. For example, agencies reported an
average October 2024 boot cost of $156.74, which rises to $163.26 after
PPI adjustment with vendor prices that ranged from approximately $70 to
$200. While vendor prices show a wide range, agency-reported averages
consistently reflect garments that meet specific durability, safety,
and compliance requirements rather than minimum-priced consumer
alternatives. This reinforces the extent to which uniformed employees
incur costs above the current $800 limit, even before accounting for
the number of required uniform sets per year.
In addition to agency-reported and vendor pricing, OPM conducted a
market analysis of non-PPE uniform components across national retailers
and catalog sources. Market prices for long-sleeve shirts appropriate
for uniform wear averaged $60 to $70, with uniform trousers averaging
$75 to $90 per pair. Uniform jackets and sweaters averaged $100 to
$130, while duty footwear ranged from $200 to $350 per pair. Because
these prices were collected contemporaneously, they reflect current
conditions and did not require PPI adjustment. These findings support
the conclusion that uniform programs relying on current retail
pricing--even for non-specialized garments--regularly generate costs
that exceed the current $800 maximum allowance, especially for
employees requiring multiple sets over the course of a uniform cycle.
Illustrative occupational scenarios highlight the cumulative effect
of uniform costs. A law enforcement employee requiring five shirts,
four pairs of trousers, one jacket, and one pair of duty footwear would
incur costs of between $1,265 and $1,465 annually using current market
averages. Under the current $800 cap, such employees may face out-of-
pocket costs of $465 to $665, whereas a $1,500 maximum reduces this
amount to $0 to $235. Similar cost burdens appear in fire department
daily wear (non-PPE), where individual garment prices accumulate to
significant totals when multiple sets and styles are required,
exceeding the current allowance ceiling.
As part of OPM's October 2024 uniform allowance survey, agencies
reported both their uniform cost concerns and estimated budgetary
impacts under a higher maximum allowance. Of the 12 respondents, three
expressed potential budget concerns while nine reported none. One large
agency estimated that increasing the maximum allowance to $1,500 would
raise its program expenses by up to $100,000 based on October 2024
costs. After applying the PPI factor, this
[[Page 19061]]
estimate increases to approximately $104,160. Another agency with a
smaller uniformed workforce estimated total uniform program costs of
$240,000 in October 2024, which increases to $249,984 after PPI
adjustment. Presenting both original and adjusted figures together
enables a clear understanding of both agency-reported conditions and
current-market implications, illustrating that the budgetary effects of
updating the allowance are proportionate and manageable across
agencies.
4. Benefits
This rule provides significant benefits to multiple stakeholders by
reducing financial burdens, improving program integrity, and enhancing
transparency and accountability in the administration of uniform
allowance programs.
Federal employees will benefit most directly from the increase in
the maximum uniform allowance rate from $800 to $1,500. This adjustment
reflects inflation and rising uniform costs, ensuring that employees
required to wear uniforms in the performance of official duties receive
an allowance that reasonably defrays the cost of those uniforms, as
Congress intended (See U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 100, p.
15037, August 18, 1954.) Under the current $800 maximum, employees in
occupations such as law enforcement and firefighting often incur
substantial out-of-pocket costs for required uniforms. Increasing the
maximum allowance will reduce these costs and provide parity across
uniformed positions.
Federal agencies will benefit from clearer regulatory standards and
improved guidance on distinguishing uniforms from PPE and other non-
uniform items, reducing ambiguity and preventing improper expenditures.
The enhanced policy requirements at Sec. 591.105 will strengthen
program integrity and ensure consistent application of statutory and
regulatory requirements.
In addition, providing a higher uniform allowance for law
enforcement personnel--and likely other occupations that require more
expensive, full uniform sets--may improve agencies' ability to recruit
new candidates and retain current employees, based on GAO's February
2026 report.
OPM will benefit from enhanced oversight capability through broader
policy requirements, enabling data-driven policy guidance and improved
compliance monitoring.
Congress will benefit from increased transparency and
accountability in uniform allowance programs. The codification of a
broader policy requirement supports Congressional oversight
responsibilities and ensures that taxpayer funds are used appropriately
and as intended under 5 U.S.C. 5901 through 5903.
Taxpayers and the public will benefit from improved fiscal
stewardship and accountability. By clarifying allowable expenses and
requiring agencies to establish policies, this rule reduces the risk of
misuse of funds and promotes responsible use of public resources.
5. Alternatives
Alternatives considered by OPM included maintaining the current
$800 maximum rate or setting a lower increase based solely on CPI-U
adjustments. Congress intended the uniform allowance to defray the
costs of purchasing a uniform for employees who were not being
furnished uniforms by their agencies (See U.S. Congress, Congressional
Record, 100, p. 15037, August 18, 1954), but the allowance was not
necessarily intended to cover the entire costs of all uniform items
needed by the employee. Furthermore, agencies are permitted to provide
a higher initial maximum allowance or furnishing of uniforms by
following procedures listed within Sec. 591.104. Nonetheless, OPM
determined that raising the maximum allowance governmentwide was a more
efficient approach to address the increased costs of uniforms reported
by agencies and verified by OPM's market research. OPM determined that
this approach would both (1) provide agencies with expensive uniform
needs the ability to provide a larger allowance without additional
notice and comment on a case-by-case basis (see Sec. 591.104) and (2)
not increase costs for agencies with less costly uniforms.
6. Severability
If any provision of this final rule is held to be invalid or
unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any person or
circumstance, we believe that the various provisions should be
severable and need not be impacted. Similarly, many of the operational
requirements have no bearing on other provisions and are severable. For
example, a change in the maximum uniform allowance rate is not subject
to notice and comment and should be upheld even if another provision,
such as the program administration provision, is found to be invalid.
V. Regulatory Compliance
1. Notice and Comment
Although 5 U.S.C. 1105 and 1103(b)(1) requires OPM to provide
notice of and to seek comment on certain rules, 5 U.S.C. 1103(b)(4)
exempts OPM rules that establish, among other things, allowances under
5 U.S.C. part III, subpart D. This rule establishes the allowance for
uniforms, the authority for which is found in subchapter I of chapter
59 of title 5, United States Code. This rule does not establish any
procedures, methodology, or criteria used to establish the uniform
allowance.
In addition to the change to the maximum uniform allowance rate,
which is not subject to notice and comment rulemaking, this rule makes
minor modifications to subpart A of part 591. This rule is suitable for
direct final rulemaking because it is non-controversial and consistent
with Federal law and policy. OPM does not expect to receive any
significant adverse comments related to these minor modifications.
These provisions of the rule will be beneficial to agencies and members
of the public because they will improve compliance with statutory
restrictions on the use of uniform allowances. The revision of the
definition of a uniform makes no changes to the legal obligations or
rights of any affected parties (i.e., reflects statutory requirements
that are already in effect). Similarly, the addition of the new program
administration section (Sec. 591.105) codifies existing expectations
and practices and does not impose new substantive obligations beyond
what agencies should already be doing under current regulations. OPM
accordingly finds that it is in the public interest to have this rule
be effective as soon as possible.
This rule will be effective July 13, 2026, unless significant
adverse comments are received by May 14, 2026. A significant adverse
comment is one that explains: (1) why the rule is inappropriate,
including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach; or
(2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable
without a change. If such comments are received, the provisions of this
direct final rule that are subject to notice and comment (i.e., uniform
definition and Sec. 591.105) will be withdrawn and OPM will publish a
proposed rule for comments. If no significant adverse comments are
received, this direct final rule will become effective 60 days after
the comment period expires to allow agencies time to make changes
needed to implement the rule. A comment recommending an addition to the
rule will not be considered significant and adverse unless the comment
explains how this direct final rule would be ineffective without the
addition.
[[Page 19062]]
2. Regulatory Review
OPM has examined the impact of this rule as required by E.O. 12866
and 13563, which direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public, health, and safety effects,
distributive impacts, and equity). A regulatory impact analysis must be
prepared for rules that have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities. This rulemaking does not reach that
threshold but has otherwise been designated as a ``significant
regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. This rule is not
expected to be considered an E.O. 14192 regulatory action because it
imposes no more than de minimis costs.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Director of OPM certifies that this rulemaking will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
because the rule will apply only to Federal agencies and employees.
4. Federalism
This rulemaking will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order 13132, the Director of OPM certifies that this rulemaking does
not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
5. Civil Justice Reform
This rulemaking meets the applicable standards set forth in section
3(a) and (b)(2) of Executive Order 12988.
6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that would impose spending costs on State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or on the private sector, in any 1
year of $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation.
That threshold is currently approximately $206 million. This rulemaking
will not result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, in excess of
the threshold. Thus, no written assessment of unfunded mandates is
required.
7. Congressional Review Act
OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined
this rule does not satisfy the criteria listed in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
8. Paperwork Reduction Act
This regulatory action does not impose any new reporting or record-
keeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
VI. References
<bullet> Ana Maria Santacreu and Jesse LaBelle, ``Global Supply
Chain Disruptions and Inflation During the COVID-19 Pandemic,''
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, Second Quarter 2022, pp.
78-91. Available at: <a href="https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2022/02/07/global-supply-chain-disruptions-and-inflation-during-the-covid-19-pandemic">https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2022/02/07/global-supply-chain-disruptions-and-inflation-during-the-covid-19-pandemic</a> (Accessed February 24, 2026).
<bullet> National Bureau of Economic Research. (2024). ``Supply
Chain Disruptions and Pandemic-Era Inflation.'' NBER Digest, April
2024. Available at: <a href="https://www.nber.org/digest/202404/supply-chain-disruptions-and-pandemic-era-inflation">https://www.nber.org/digest/202404/supply-chain-disruptions-and-pandemic-era-inflation</a> (Accessed February 24, 2026).
<bullet> Just Style. (2024). ``Impact of increasing labour costs
on apparel supply chains.'' Available at: <a href="https://www.just-style.com/comment/impact-of-increasing-labour-costs-on-apparel-supply-chains/">https://www.just-style.com/comment/impact-of-increasing-labour-costs-on-apparel-supply-chains/</a> (Accessed February 24, 2026).
<bullet> Cornell Chronicle. (2021, July 13). ``Post-COVID future
for apparel industry.'' Available at: <a href="https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/07/post-covid-future-apparel-industry-0">https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/07/post-covid-future-apparel-industry-0</a> (Accessed
February 24, 2026).
<bullet> U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2026).
Law Enforcement Officers: Observations on Recruitment and Retention
(Report Number: GAO-26-108495). Available at: <a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108495">https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108495</a> (Accessed February 24, 2026).
<bullet> Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Producer Price Index
for Textile Products & Apparel (WPU03). Available at: <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU03">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WPU03</a> (Accessed February 24, 2026).
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 591
Government employees, Travel and transportation expenses, Wages.
Signing Statement
The Director of OPM, Scott Kupor, reviewed and approved this
document and has authorized the undersigned to electronically sign and
submit this document to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication.
Office of Personnel Management
Jerson Matias,
Federal Register Liaison.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Office of Personnel
Management amends 5 CFR part 591 as follows:
PART 591--ALLOWANCES AND DIFFERENTIALS
Subpart A--Uniform Allowances
0
1. The authority citation for subpart A of part 591 is revised to read
as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 1103(b)(4), 5 U.S.C. 5901, 5902, 5903.
0
2. Revise Sec. 591.101 to read as follows:
Sec. 591.101 Purpose.
This subpart prescribes the regulations authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901
through 5903 for the purpose of payment of an allowance or to furnish
or purchase uniforms for one or more employees.
0
3. Amend Sec. 591.102 by revising the definition for ``Uniform'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 591.102 Definitions.
* * * * *
Uniform means a specified article or articles of clothing or other
items that are required by an agency to be worn by an employee to
provide a distinctive and easily identifiable appearance in performing
his or her job. Examples include hats, shirts, slacks, skirts,
neckties, outerwear, name pins or tags, flag pins, rank insignias or
cords, or patches. A ``uniform'' does not include personal protective
equipment (PPE) required to be donned for an employee's safety; normal
business or work attire (when an employee is not required to wear his
or her required uniform); tools, communication devices, or other
equipment required in the performance of an employee's job duties;
personal items worn at the discretion of the employee (for example,
jewelry or undergarments); or any items worn based solely on a
reasonable accommodation.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec. 591.103 to read as follows:
Sec. 591.103 Maximum uniform allowance rate.
(a) Unless a higher initial maximum uniform allowance rate is
payable under Sec. 591.104 or other agency authority or specific
appropriation to an employee who is required by statute, regulation, or
an agency's written administrative procedures to wear a uniform, the
head of an agency, out of funds available, must--
[[Page 19063]]
(1) Pay an allowance for a uniform not to exceed $1,500 a year; or
(2) Furnish a uniform at a cost not to exceed $1,500 a year.
(b) If an agency purchases a uniform directly from a vendor, the
agency can spend up to 4 percent on service charges but the total cost
of the uniform and any service charges cannot exceed the maximum
allowance set forth in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
0
5. Add Sec. 591.105 to read as follows:
Sec. 591.105 Program administration.
An agency that provides a uniform allowance or furnishes uniforms
under this subpart must establish policies to administer the program
sufficient to ensure compliance with 5 U.S.C. 5901 and this subpart.
[FR Doc. 2026-07245 Filed 4-13-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js" defer></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 14, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.