Notice of Hearing: Reconsideration of Disapproval of Maryland State Plan Amendment (05-06), 48155-48157 [05-16304]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
budget period. The progress report will
serve as your non-competing
continuation application, and must
contain the following elements:
a. Current Budget Period Activities
Objectives.
b. Current Budget Period Financial
Progress.
c. New Budget Period Program
Proposed Activity Objectives.
d. Budget.
e. Measures of Effectiveness,
including progress against the
numerical goals of the President’s
ˆ
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief for Cote
d’Ivoire.
f. Additional Requested Information.
2. Annual progress report, due no
more than 60 days after the end of the
budget period. Reports should include
progress against the numerical goals of
the President’s Emergency Plan for
ˆ
AIDS Relief for Cote d’Ivoire.
3. Financial status report, due no
more than 90 days after the end of the
budget period.
4. Final financial and performance
reports, no more than 90 days after the
end of the project period.
Recipients must mail these reports to
the Grants Management Specialist listed
in the ‘‘Agency Contacts’’ section of this
announcement. Copies of the reports
must also be submitted to the Project
Management Officer at the HHS/CDC
ˆ
Country Office in Cote d’Ivoire.
Please note: The grantee is responsible for
accurate translation of all reports, and should
submit French-language versions to the local
HHS/CDC office in Abidjan and Englishlanguage versions to the HHS/CDC Grants
Office in the U.S., by the established
deadlines. See the HHS/CDC project
management officer in Abidjan for more
details.
VII. Agency Contacts
We encourage inquiries concerning
this announcement. For general
questions, contact: Technical
Information Management Section, CDC
Procurement and Grants Office, U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services, 2920 Brandywine Road,
Atlanta, GA 30341. Telephone: 770–
488–2700.
For program technical assistance,
contact: Monica Nolan, Director, HHS/
CDC/Project RETRO–CI, 2010 Abidjan
Place, Dulles, Virginia 20189–2010.
Telephone: 225–21–25–41–89. E-mail:
mnolan@cdc.gov.
For report mailing, contact: JeanClaude Crinot, Project Management
Officer, HHS/CDC /Project RETRO–CI,
01 BP 1712 Abidjan 01. Telephone:
225–21–21–42–50. E-mail:
crinotj@gapcdcci.org.
For financial, grants management, or
budget assistance, contact: Diane
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
Flournoy, Grants Management
Specialist, CDC Procurement and Grants
Office, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, 2920 Brandywine
Road, Atlanta, GA 30341. Telephone:
770–488–2072. E-mail:
dflournoy@cdc.gov.
VIII. Other Information
Applicants can find this and other
HHS funding opportunity
announcements on the HHS/CDC Web
site, Internet address: https://
www.cdc.gov (Click on ‘‘Funding’’ then
‘‘Grants and Cooperative Agreements’’),
and on the Web site of the HHS Office
of Global Health Affairs, Internet
address: https://www.globalhealth.gov.
Dated: August 9, 2005.
William P. Nichols,
Director, Procurement and Grants Office,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 05–16174 Filed 8–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
[Request for Application (RFA) AA112]
Implementation of Programs To
Improve the Management of HIV/AIDS/
STI/TB Care in the Livingstone District
of the Republic of Zambia; Notice of
Intent To Fund Single Eligibility Award
A. Purpose
The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) announces the intent
to fund fiscal year (FY) 2005 funds for
a cooperative agreement program to
provide high-quality clinical care to
PLWHAs in the Livingstone District of
Southern Province of the Republic of
Zambia. The Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance number for this
program is 93.067.
B. Eligible Applicant
Assistance will be provided only to
the Southern Province Health Office of
the Republic of Zambia. No other
applications are solicited. The current
health system structure in Zambia
consists of the MOH, which has the
responsibility for policy guidance and
strategic planning, and the Central
Board of Health, which is responsible
for the translation and implementation
of government health policies. The
country is administratively divided into
nine Provinces and 72 districts. In the
health sector, the Provincial Health
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48155
Office provides technical support to the
districts in the areas of management of
service delivery, planning of health
programs, priority setting and resource
utilization. Within this framework the
Southern Province Health Office is the
only entity in Zambia qualified to
collaborate with HHS as part of the
Emergency Plan in Livingstone because
it has the legal authority, expertise, and
capacity to perform the key public
health activities that are part of this
cooperative agreement.
C. Funding
Approximately $200,000 is available
in FY 2005 to fund this award
September 15, 2005 and will be made
for a 12-month budget period within a
project period of up to five years.
Funding estimates may change.
D. Where To Obtain Additional
Information
For general comments or questions
about this announcement, contact:
Technical Information Management,
CDC Procurement and Grants Office,
2920 Brandywine Road, Atlanta, GA
30341–4146, telephone: 770–488–2700.
For program technical assistance,
contact: Marc Bulterys, Project Officer,
1600 Clifton Road NE, MS E–04,
Atlanta, GA 30333, telephone: 011 260
1 250 955, e-mail:
bulterysm@cdczm.org.
Dated: August 9, 2005.
William P. Nichols,
Director, Procurement and Grants Office,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05–16175 Filed 8–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
Notice of Hearing: Reconsideration of
Disapproval of Maryland State Plan
Amendment (05–06)
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Notice of hearing.
SUMMARY: This notice announces an
administrative hearing to be held on
September 15, 2005, at 12 noon, in the
Virginia Room 229, 150 S.
Independence Mall, West, Suite 216,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106, to
reconsider our decision to disapprove
Maryland’s State Plan Amendment
(SPA) 05–06.
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
48156
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
Requests to participate in the
hearing as a party must be received by
the presiding officer by August 31, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen Scully-Hayes, Presiding
Officer, CMS, Lord Baltimore Drive,
Mail Stop LB–23–20, Baltimore,
Maryland 21244, Telephone: (410) 786–
2055.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice announces an administrative
hearing to reconsider CMS’ decision to
disapprove Maryland State plan
amendment (SPA) 05–06, which was
submitted on January 25, 2005.
The amendment seeks approval to
place what the State believes to be
reasonable limits on the amounts of
incurred necessary medical and
remedial care expenses which must be
deducted from a nursing facility
resident’s income under the posteligibility treatment of income process.
Section 1902(r)(1)(A) of the Social
Security Act (the Act) requires States to
take into account, under the posteligibility process, amounts for incurred
medical and remedial care expenses that
are not subject to payment by a third
party. Section 1902(r)(1)(A)(ii) of the
Act permits States to place ‘‘reasonable’’
limits on the amounts of necessary
medical and remedial care expenses
recognized under State law but not
covered under the State plan. However,
those reasonable limits must ensure
nursing home residents are able to use
their own funds to purchase necessary
medical or remedial care not covered,
i.e., not paid for, by the State Medicaid
program.
The SPA 05–06 proposes to limit the
deduction of medical expenses to those
incurred only during a period of
eligibility for Medicaid. Thus, an
individual who incurred medical
expenses during the 3-month period
prior to the date of application would
not have any protection under the posteligibility calculation for medical
expenses incurred during that period
unless he or she were determined to be
eligible during that period.
In discussions with State Medicaid
program staff, we confirmed this is the
intent of the proposed amendment.
While we believe some limitations
imposed on the age of an incurred
expense could be considered
reasonable, we do not believe it would
be reasonable for a State to exclude from
post-eligibility protection an incurred
medical expense that could be deducted
from a person’s income under the
medically needy spenddown process.
While the medically needy spenddown
rules in Federal regulations at 42 CFR
435.831(g)(2) permit States to exclude
DATES:
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
expenses incurred earlier than 3 months
before the month of application,
Maryland proposes to only permit
deduction under its post-eligibility
process for expenses incurred while an
individual is actually eligible for
Medicaid.
The State’s limitation would result in
an individual being able to use certain
incurred medical expenses to establish
eligibility for Medicaid, but not being
able to deduct those same expenses
under the post-eligibility process. While
the statue permits the State to establish
reasonable limits on the amount of noncovered expenses, we do not believe the
limit is reasonable if the result were to
deny the individual the ability to pay
for a non-covered expense used to
establish eligibility during a budget
period.
The intent of section 1902(r)(1) of the
Act is to afford an institutionalized
individual with income the ability to
actually pay non-covered medical
expenses for medical and remedial care.
Section 1902(r)(1) of the Act was added
to the Medicaid statute by the Medicare
Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988. The
Conference Report explains it was
enacted to reinstate policies set forth
previously in Medicaid regulations
before they were revised by the
Department of Health and Human
Services in February 1988. Under that
revised regulation, Maryland would
have had the authority to implement the
limits it proposes in SPA 05–06.
However, by enacting section 1902(r)(1)
of the Act, Congress specifically rejected
that approach.
Moreover, by not protecting income to
pay for non-covered expenses which
were used to establish eligibility under
the medically needy spenddown, the
State’s proposed amendment undercuts
the Medicaid statute’s purpose of
requiring States to deduct incurred
expenses under the spenddown process.
To the extent that Maryland’s
amendment fails to protect income to
enable the individual to actually pay for
these incurred expenses, we view the
State’s proposed limit as not being
reasonable. As a result, we believe the
limit does not meet the requirements of
section 1902(a)(17) of the Act, as refined
by section 1902(r)(1) of the Act. For
individuals whose post-eligibility
calculation is determined using the
spousal impoverishment rules, specified
at section 1924 of the Act and refined
by section 1902(r)(1) of the Act, we
believe the limit does not meet the
requirements of section 1902(a)(51) of
the Act, which requires the State plan
to meet the requirements of section 1924
of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The issues to be considered during
the hearing are whether the
amendment’s limit violates the
requirements of sections 1902(a)(17) and
1902(a)(51) of the Act by imposing an
unreasonable limit on expenses for
medical and remedial care which will
be protected under the post-eligibility
process.
Section 1116 of the Act and Federal
regulations at 42 CFR Part 430 establish
Department procedures that provide an
administrative hearing for
reconsideration of a disapproval of a
State plan or plan amendment. The
CMS is required to publish a copy of the
notice to a State Medicaid agency that
informs the agency of the time and place
of the hearing and the issues to be
considered. If we subsequently notify
the agency of additional issues that will
be considered at the hearing, we will
also publish that notice.
Any individual or group that wants to
participate in the hearing as a party
must petition the presiding officer
within 15 days after publication of this
notice, in accordance with the
requirements contained in Federal
regulations at 42 CFR 430.76(b)(2). Any
interested person or organization that
wants to participate as amicus curiae
must petition the presiding officer
before the hearing begins in accordance
with the requirements contained in
Federal regulations at 42 CFR 430.76(c).
If the hearing is later rescheduled, the
presiding officer will notify all
participants.
Therefore, based on the reasoning set
forth above, and after consultation with
the Secretary as required under Federal
regulations at 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2), CMS
disapproved Maryland SPA 05–06. The
notice to Maryland announcing an
administrative hearing to reconsider the
disapproval of its SPA reads as follows:
Mr. Joel L. Tornari,
Assistant Attorney General, Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene,300 W. Preston
Street, Suite 302, Baltimore, MD 21201
Dear Mr. Tornari: I am responding to your
request for reconsideration of the decision to
disapprove Maryland State plan amendment
(SPA) 05–06, which was submitted on
January 25, 2005.
In SPA 05–06, Maryland seeks approval to
place what the State believes to be reasonable
limits on the amounts of incurred necessary
medical and remedial care expenses which
must be deducted from a nursing facility
resident’s income under the post-eligibility
treatment of income process.
Section 1902(r)(1)(A) of the Social Security
Act (the Act) requires States to take into
account, under the post-eligibility process,
amounts for incurred medical and remedial
care expenses that are not subject to payment
by a third party. Section 1902(r)(1)(A)(ii) of
the Act permits States to place ‘‘reasonable’’
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Notices
limits on the amounts of necessary medical
and remedial care expenses recognized under
State law but not covered under the State
plan. However, those reasonable limits must
ensure that nursing home residents are able
to use their own funds to purchase necessary
medical or remedial care not covered; i.e.,
not paid for, by the State Medicaid program.
The SPA 05–06 proposes to limit the
deduction of medical expenses to those
incurred only during a period of eligibility
for Medicaid. Thus, an individual who
incurred medical expenses during the 3month period prior to the date of application
would not have any protection under the
post-eligibility calculation for medical
expenses incurred during that period unless
he or she were determined to be eligible
during that period.
In discussions with State Medicaid
program staff, we confirmed this is the intent
of the proposed amendment. While we
believe some limitations imposed on the age
of an incurred expense could be considered
reasonable, we do not believe it would be
reasonable for a State to exclude from posteligibility protection an incurred medical
expense that could be deducted from a
person’s income under the medically needy
spenddown process. While the medically
needy spenddown rules in Federal
regulations at 42 CFR 435.831(g)(2) permit
States to exclude expenses incurred earlier
than 3 months before the month of
application, Maryland proposes to only
permit deduction under its post-eligibility
process for expenses incurred while an
individual is actually eligible for Medicaid.
The State’s limitation would result in an
individual being able to use certain incurred
medical expenses to establish eligibility for
Medicaid, but not being able to deduct those
same expenses under the post-eligibility
process. While the statute permits the State
to establish reasonable limits on the amount
of non-covered expenses, we do not believe
the limit is reasonable if the result were to
deny the individual the ability to pay for a
non-covered expense used to establish
eligibility during a budget period.
The intent of section 1902(r)(1) of the Act
is to afford an institutionalized individual
with income the ability to actually pay noncovered medical expenses for medical and
remedial care. Section 1902(r)(1) of the Act
was added to the Medicaid statute by the
Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988.
The Conference Report explains it was
enacted to reinstate policies set forth
previously in Medicaid regulations before
they were revised by the Department of
Health and Human Services in February
1988. Under that revised regulation,
Maryland would have had the authority to
implement the limits it proposes in SPA 05–
06. However, by enacting section 1902(r)(1)
of the Act, Congress specifically rejected that
approach.
Moreover, by not protecting income to pay
for non-covered expenses which were used to
establish eligibility under the medically
needy spenddown, the State’s proposed
amendment undercuts the Medicaid statute’s
purpose of requiring States to deduct
incurred expenses under the spenddown
process. To the extent that Maryland’s
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:02 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
amendment fails to protect income to enable
the individual to actually pay for these
incurred expenses, we view the State’s
proposed limit as not being reasonable. As a
result, we believe the limit does not meet the
requirements of section 1902(a)(17) of the
Act, as refined by section 1902(r)(1) of the
Act. For individuals whose post-eligibility
calculation is determined using the spousal
impoverishment rules, specified at section
1924 of the Act and refined by section
1902(r)(1) of the Act, we believe the limit
does not meet the requirements of section
1902(a)(51) of the Act, which requires the
State plan to meet the requirements of
section 1924 of the Act.
Based on the reasoning set forth above, and
after consulting with the Secretary as
required by Federal regulations at 42 CFR
430.15(c)(2), the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS) disapproved
Maryland Medicaid SPA 05–06.
I am scheduling a hearing to be held on
September 15, 2005, at 12:00 Noon in CMS’’
Philadelphia Regional Office, in the Virginia
Room 229;150 S. Independence Mall, West;
Suite 216; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106,
to reconsider our decision to disapprove
Maryland’s SPA 05–06. If this date is not
acceptable, we would be glad to set another
date that is mutually agreeable to the parties.
The hearing will be governed by the
procedures prescribed at 42 CFR, part 430.
The issues to be considered during the
hearing are whether the amendment’s limit
violates the requirements of sections
1902(a)(17) and 1902(a)(51) of the Act by
imposing an unreasonable limit on expenses
for medical and remedial care which will be
protected under the post-eligibility process.
I am designating Ms. Kathleen ScullyHayes as the presiding officer. If these
arrangements present any problems, please
contact the presiding officer. In order to
facilitate any communication which may be
necessary between the parties to the hearing,
please notify the presiding officer to indicate
acceptability of the hearing date that has
been scheduled and provide names of the
individuals who will represent the State at
the hearing. The presiding officer may be
reached at (410) 786–2055.
Sincerely,
Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D.
Section 1116 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. section 1316); 42 CFR section 430.18.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 13.714, Medicaid Assistance
Program.)
Dated: July 19, 2005.
Mark B. McClellan,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 05–16304 Filed 8–12–05; 1:32 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48157
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 2004N–0535]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission for Office of
Management and Budget Review;
Comment Request; MedWatch: Food
and Drug Administration Medical
Products Reporting Program
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing
that a proposed collection of
information has been submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and clearance under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Fax written comments on the
collection of information by September
15, 2005.
ADDRESSES: OMB is still experiencing
significant delays in the regular mail,
including first class and express mail,
and messenger deliveries are not being
accepted. To ensure that comments on
the information collection are received,
OMB recommends that written
comments be faxed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: Fumie Yokota, Desk Officer
for FDA, FAX: 202–395–6974.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen L. Nelson, Office of Management
Programs (HFA–250), Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–1482.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA
has submitted the following proposed
collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.
MedWatch: FDA Medical Products
Reporting Program, Form FDA 3500
and Form FDA 3500A—(OMB Control
Number 0910–0291)—Extension
Under sections 505, 512, 513, 515,
and 903 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 355,
360b, 360c, 360e, and 393), and section
351 of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 262), FDA has the responsibility
to ensure the safety and effectiveness of
drugs, biologics, and devices. Under
section 502(a) of the act (21 U.S.C.
352(a)), a drug or device is misbranded
if its labeling is false or misleading.
Under section 502(f)(1) of the act (21
U.S.C. 352(f)(1)), it is misbranded if it
fails to bear adequate warnings, and
under section 502(j) of the act (21 U.S.C.
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48155-48157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16304]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Notice of Hearing: Reconsideration of Disapproval of Maryland
State Plan Amendment (05-06)
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice of hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces an administrative hearing to be held on
September 15, 2005, at 12 noon, in the Virginia Room 229, 150 S.
Independence Mall, West, Suite 216, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106,
to reconsider our decision to disapprove Maryland's State Plan
Amendment (SPA) 05-06.
[[Page 48156]]
DATES: Requests to participate in the hearing as a party must be
received by the presiding officer by August 31, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scully-Hayes, Presiding
Officer, CMS, Lord Baltimore Drive, Mail Stop LB-23-20, Baltimore,
Maryland 21244, Telephone: (410) 786-2055.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces an administrative
hearing to reconsider CMS' decision to disapprove Maryland State plan
amendment (SPA) 05-06, which was submitted on January 25, 2005.
The amendment seeks approval to place what the State believes to be
reasonable limits on the amounts of incurred necessary medical and
remedial care expenses which must be deducted from a nursing facility
resident's income under the post-eligibility treatment of income
process.
Section 1902(r)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act) requires
States to take into account, under the post-eligibility process,
amounts for incurred medical and remedial care expenses that are not
subject to payment by a third party. Section 1902(r)(1)(A)(ii) of the
Act permits States to place ``reasonable'' limits on the amounts of
necessary medical and remedial care expenses recognized under State law
but not covered under the State plan. However, those reasonable limits
must ensure nursing home residents are able to use their own funds to
purchase necessary medical or remedial care not covered, i.e., not paid
for, by the State Medicaid program.
The SPA 05-06 proposes to limit the deduction of medical expenses
to those incurred only during a period of eligibility for Medicaid.
Thus, an individual who incurred medical expenses during the 3-month
period prior to the date of application would not have any protection
under the post-eligibility calculation for medical expenses incurred
during that period unless he or she were determined to be eligible
during that period.
In discussions with State Medicaid program staff, we confirmed this
is the intent of the proposed amendment. While we believe some
limitations imposed on the age of an incurred expense could be
considered reasonable, we do not believe it would be reasonable for a
State to exclude from post-eligibility protection an incurred medical
expense that could be deducted from a person's income under the
medically needy spenddown process. While the medically needy spenddown
rules in Federal regulations at 42 CFR 435.831(g)(2) permit States to
exclude expenses incurred earlier than 3 months before the month of
application, Maryland proposes to only permit deduction under its post-
eligibility process for expenses incurred while an individual is
actually eligible for Medicaid.
The State's limitation would result in an individual being able to
use certain incurred medical expenses to establish eligibility for
Medicaid, but not being able to deduct those same expenses under the
post-eligibility process. While the statue permits the State to
establish reasonable limits on the amount of non-covered expenses, we
do not believe the limit is reasonable if the result were to deny the
individual the ability to pay for a non-covered expense used to
establish eligibility during a budget period.
The intent of section 1902(r)(1) of the Act is to afford an
institutionalized individual with income the ability to actually pay
non-covered medical expenses for medical and remedial care. Section
1902(r)(1) of the Act was added to the Medicaid statute by the Medicare
Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988. The Conference Report explains it
was enacted to reinstate policies set forth previously in Medicaid
regulations before they were revised by the Department of Health and
Human Services in February 1988. Under that revised regulation,
Maryland would have had the authority to implement the limits it
proposes in SPA 05-06. However, by enacting section 1902(r)(1) of the
Act, Congress specifically rejected that approach.
Moreover, by not protecting income to pay for non-covered expenses
which were used to establish eligibility under the medically needy
spenddown, the State's proposed amendment undercuts the Medicaid
statute's purpose of requiring States to deduct incurred expenses under
the spenddown process. To the extent that Maryland's amendment fails to
protect income to enable the individual to actually pay for these
incurred expenses, we view the State's proposed limit as not being
reasonable. As a result, we believe the limit does not meet the
requirements of section 1902(a)(17) of the Act, as refined by section
1902(r)(1) of the Act. For individuals whose post-eligibility
calculation is determined using the spousal impoverishment rules,
specified at section 1924 of the Act and refined by section 1902(r)(1)
of the Act, we believe the limit does not meet the requirements of
section 1902(a)(51) of the Act, which requires the State plan to meet
the requirements of section 1924 of the Act.
The issues to be considered during the hearing are whether the
amendment's limit violates the requirements of sections 1902(a)(17) and
1902(a)(51) of the Act by imposing an unreasonable limit on expenses
for medical and remedial care which will be protected under the post-
eligibility process.
Section 1116 of the Act and Federal regulations at 42 CFR Part 430
establish Department procedures that provide an administrative hearing
for reconsideration of a disapproval of a State plan or plan amendment.
The CMS is required to publish a copy of the notice to a State Medicaid
agency that informs the agency of the time and place of the hearing and
the issues to be considered. If we subsequently notify the agency of
additional issues that will be considered at the hearing, we will also
publish that notice.
Any individual or group that wants to participate in the hearing as
a party must petition the presiding officer within 15 days after
publication of this notice, in accordance with the requirements
contained in Federal regulations at 42 CFR 430.76(b)(2). Any interested
person or organization that wants to participate as amicus curiae must
petition the presiding officer before the hearing begins in accordance
with the requirements contained in Federal regulations at 42 CFR
430.76(c). If the hearing is later rescheduled, the presiding officer
will notify all participants.
Therefore, based on the reasoning set forth above, and after
consultation with the Secretary as required under Federal regulations
at 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2), CMS disapproved Maryland SPA 05-06. The notice
to Maryland announcing an administrative hearing to reconsider the
disapproval of its SPA reads as follows:
Mr. Joel L. Tornari,
Assistant Attorney General, Department of Health and Mental
Hygiene,300 W. Preston Street, Suite 302, Baltimore, MD 21201
Dear Mr. Tornari: I am responding to your request for
reconsideration of the decision to disapprove Maryland State plan
amendment (SPA) 05-06, which was submitted on January 25, 2005.
In SPA 05-06, Maryland seeks approval to place what the State
believes to be reasonable limits on the amounts of incurred
necessary medical and remedial care expenses which must be deducted
from a nursing facility resident's income under the post-eligibility
treatment of income process.
Section 1902(r)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act)
requires States to take into account, under the post-eligibility
process, amounts for incurred medical and remedial care expenses
that are not subject to payment by a third party. Section
1902(r)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act permits States to place ``reasonable''
[[Page 48157]]
limits on the amounts of necessary medical and remedial care
expenses recognized under State law but not covered under the State
plan. However, those reasonable limits must ensure that nursing home
residents are able to use their own funds to purchase necessary
medical or remedial care not covered; i.e., not paid for, by the
State Medicaid program.
The SPA 05-06 proposes to limit the deduction of medical
expenses to those incurred only during a period of eligibility for
Medicaid. Thus, an individual who incurred medical expenses during
the 3-month period prior to the date of application would not have
any protection under the post-eligibility calculation for medical
expenses incurred during that period unless he or she were
determined to be eligible during that period.
In discussions with State Medicaid program staff, we confirmed
this is the intent of the proposed amendment. While we believe some
limitations imposed on the age of an incurred expense could be
considered reasonable, we do not believe it would be reasonable for
a State to exclude from post-eligibility protection an incurred
medical expense that could be deducted from a person's income under
the medically needy spenddown process. While the medically needy
spenddown rules in Federal regulations at 42 CFR 435.831(g)(2)
permit States to exclude expenses incurred earlier than 3 months
before the month of application, Maryland proposes to only permit
deduction under its post-eligibility process for expenses incurred
while an individual is actually eligible for Medicaid.
The State's limitation would result in an individual being able
to use certain incurred medical expenses to establish eligibility
for Medicaid, but not being able to deduct those same expenses under
the post-eligibility process. While the statute permits the State to
establish reasonable limits on the amount of non-covered expenses,
we do not believe the limit is reasonable if the result were to deny
the individual the ability to pay for a non-covered expense used to
establish eligibility during a budget period.
The intent of section 1902(r)(1) of the Act is to afford an
institutionalized individual with income the ability to actually pay
non-covered medical expenses for medical and remedial care. Section
1902(r)(1) of the Act was added to the Medicaid statute by the
Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988. The Conference Report
explains it was enacted to reinstate policies set forth previously
in Medicaid regulations before they were revised by the Department
of Health and Human Services in February 1988. Under that revised
regulation, Maryland would have had the authority to implement the
limits it proposes in SPA 05-06. However, by enacting section
1902(r)(1) of the Act, Congress specifically rejected that approach.
Moreover, by not protecting income to pay for non-covered
expenses which were used to establish eligibility under the
medically needy spenddown, the State's proposed amendment undercuts
the Medicaid statute's purpose of requiring States to deduct
incurred expenses under the spenddown process. To the extent that
Maryland's amendment fails to protect income to enable the
individual to actually pay for these incurred expenses, we view the
State's proposed limit as not being reasonable. As a result, we
believe the limit does not meet the requirements of section
1902(a)(17) of the Act, as refined by section 1902(r)(1) of the Act.
For individuals whose post-eligibility calculation is determined
using the spousal impoverishment rules, specified at section 1924 of
the Act and refined by section 1902(r)(1) of the Act, we believe the
limit does not meet the requirements of section 1902(a)(51) of the
Act, which requires the State plan to meet the requirements of
section 1924 of the Act.
Based on the reasoning set forth above, and after consulting
with the Secretary as required by Federal regulations at 42 CFR
430.15(c)(2), the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
disapproved Maryland Medicaid SPA 05-06.
I am scheduling a hearing to be held on September 15, 2005, at
12:00 Noon in CMS'' Philadelphia Regional Office, in the Virginia
Room 229;150 S. Independence Mall, West; Suite 216; Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19106, to reconsider our decision to disapprove
Maryland's SPA 05-06. If this date is not acceptable, we would be
glad to set another date that is mutually agreeable to the parties.
The hearing will be governed by the procedures prescribed at 42 CFR,
part 430.
The issues to be considered during the hearing are whether the
amendment's limit violates the requirements of sections 1902(a)(17)
and 1902(a)(51) of the Act by imposing an unreasonable limit on
expenses for medical and remedial care which will be protected under
the post-eligibility process.
I am designating Ms. Kathleen Scully-Hayes as the presiding
officer. If these arrangements present any problems, please contact
the presiding officer. In order to facilitate any communication
which may be necessary between the parties to the hearing, please
notify the presiding officer to indicate acceptability of the
hearing date that has been scheduled and provide names of the
individuals who will represent the State at the hearing. The
presiding officer may be reached at (410) 786-2055.
Sincerely,
Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D.
Section 1116 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. section
1316); 42 CFR section 430.18.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 13.714, Medicaid
Assistance Program.)
Dated: July 19, 2005.
Mark B. McClellan,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 05-16304 Filed 8-12-05; 1:32 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P