Skip to content
LexBuild

42 CFR § 93.408 - Mitigating and aggravating factors in HHS administrative actions.

---
identifier: "/us/cfr/t42/s93.408"
source: "ecfr"
legal_status: "authoritative_unofficial"
title: "42 CFR § 93.408 - Mitigating and aggravating factors in HHS administrative actions."
title_number: 42
title_name: "Public Health"
section_number: "93.408"
section_name: "Mitigating and aggravating factors in HHS administrative actions."
chapter_name: "PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES"
subchapter_number: "H"
subchapter_name: "HEALTH ASSESSMENTS AND HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES RELEASES AND FACILITIES"
part_number: "93"
part_name: "PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE POLICIES ON RESEARCH MISCONDUCT"
positive_law: false
currency: "2026-04-05"
last_updated: "2026-04-05"
format_version: "1.1.0"
generator: "[email protected]"
authority: "42 U.S.C. 216 and 289b"
regulatory_source: "89 FR 76295, Sept. 17, 2024, unless otherwise noted."
cfr_part: "93"
---

# 93.408 Mitigating and aggravating factors in HHS administrative actions.

The purpose of HHS administrative actions is remedial. The appropriate administrative action is commensurate with the seriousness of the misconduct and the need to protect the health and safety of the public, promote the integrity of the PHS-supported research and research process, and conserve public funds. ORI considers the following aggravating and mitigating factors in determining appropriate HHS administrative actions and their terms. The existence or nonexistence of any factor is not determinative.

(a) *Knowing, intentional, or reckless.* Were the respondent's actions knowing or intentional or were the actions reckless?

(b) *Pattern.* Was the research misconduct an isolated event or part of a continuing or prior pattern of dishonest conduct?

(c) *Impact.* Did the misconduct have significant impact on the proposed or reported research record, research subjects, other researchers, institutions, or the public health or welfare?

(d) *Acceptance of responsibility.* Has the respondent accepted responsibility for the misconduct by:

(1) Admitting the conduct;

(2) Cooperating with the research misconduct proceedings;

(3) Demonstrating remorse and awareness of the significance and seriousness of the research misconduct; and

(4) Taking steps to correct or prevent the recurrence of the research misconduct?

(e) *Failure to accept responsibility.* Does the respondent blame others rather than accepting responsibility for the actions?

(f) *Retaliation.* Did the respondent retaliate against complainants, witnesses, committee members, or other individuals?

(g) *Continued risk to PHS funding.* Does the respondent demonstrate responsible stewardship of research resources?

(h) *Other factors.* Are other factors relevant to the circumstances of a particular case?