National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Calculation of Average Cost of a Health Insurance Policy, 36610-36612 [E7-13039]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
36610
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,
1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923,
3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.
not take effect and, EPA will prepare a
response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of
the notice of intent to delete and the
comments already received. There will
be no additional opportunity to
comment.
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: June 26, 2007.
Robert E. Roberts,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
I
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
For the reasons set out in this
document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300
is amended by revising the entry under
Colorado for ‘‘Uravan Uranium Project
(Union Carbide)’’ to read as follows:
PART 300—[AMENDED]
Appendix B to Part 300—National
Priorities List
I
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as follows:
I
TABLE 1.—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION
Notes
(a)
State
Site name
City/county
*
CO ................
*
*
*
Uravan Uranium Project (Union Carbide) ..........................
*
*
*
(former town of) Uravan .....................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
P*
*
(a) * * *
*P = sites with partial deletion(s).
[FR Doc. E7–13056 Filed 7–3–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services
Administration
42 CFR Part 100
RIN 0905–AA68
National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program: Calculation of Average Cost
of a Health Insurance Policy
Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Subtitle 2 of Title XXI of the
Public Health Service Act, as enacted by
the National Childhood Vaccine Injury
Act of 1986, as amended (the Act),
governs the National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program (VICP). The
VICP, administered by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services (the
Secretary), provides that a proceeding
for compensation for a vaccine-related
injury or death shall be initiated by
service upon the Secretary, and the
filing of a petition with the United
States Court of Federal Claims (the
Court). In some cases, the injured
individual may receive compensation
for future lost earnings, less appropriate
taxes and the ‘‘average cost of a health
insurance policy, as determined by the
Secretary.’’ The final rule establishes the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:34 Jul 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
new method of calculating the average
cost of a health insurance policy and
determines the amount of the average
cost of a health insurance policy to be
deducted from the compensation award.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 6, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tamara Overby, Chief, Policy Analysis
Branch, Division of Vaccine Injury
Compensation, Healthcare Systems
Bureau, Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), Room 11C–26,
Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville, Maryland 20857; e-mail:
toverby@hrsa.gov; telephone number:
(301) 443–6593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 9,
2006, the Secretary published in the
Federal Register (71 FR 33420), a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to
revise regulations for the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
(VICP) to establish a new method of
calculating the average cost of a health
insurance policy. The public comment
period on the NPRM closed on August
8, 2006.
The Secretary received one written
comment. The one commenter stated
that the proposed rule raises both
Federalism and Constitutional issues.
The Secretary has considered this
comment and notes that section
2115(a)(3)(B) of the Public Health
Service Act gives explicit authority to
the Secretary to determine the average
cost of a health insurance policy.
Based on the new methodology, the
amount of a health insurance policy to
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
be deducted from a compensation award
for the 12-month period, October 1,
2006—September 30, 2007 is $363.12
per month. In August 2006, Medical
Expenditure Panel Survey-Insurance
Component (MEPS–IC), available at
https://www.meps.ahrq.gov, published
the annual 2004 average total single
premium per enrolled employee at
private-sector establishments that
provide health insurance. The figure
published was $3,705. This figure is
divided by 12 months to determine the
cost per month of $308.75 which is the
proposed new baseline figure for 2004.
The baseline of $308.75 shall be
increased or decreased by the
percentage change reported by the most
recent ‘‘Employer Health Benefits’’
Annual Survey, Kaiser Family
Foundation and Health Research and
Educational Trust (KFF/HRET) survey at
https://www.kff.org. The percentage
increase from 2004–2005 was 9.2
percent. By adding this percentage
increase, the calculated average monthly
cost of a health insurance policy in 2005
is $337.16. The KFF/HRET reported
increase from 2005–2006 was 7.7
percent. By adding this percentage
increase to the calculated $337.16 for
2005, the calculated average cost of a
health insurance policy in 2006 is
$363.12 per month.
Because the KFF/HRET survey is
published annually, the Department
will periodically (generally on an
annual basis) recalculate the average
cost of a health insurance policy by
obtaining a new baseline from the latest
MEPS–IC data and updating this
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
36611
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
baseline using the percentage change(s)
reported by the most recent data from
KFF/HRET or other authoritative source
that may be more accurate or
appropriate in the future. The updated
calculation will be published as a notice
in the Federal Register and filed with
the Court.
Economic and Regulatory Impact
Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive
Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 directs
agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and,
when rulemaking is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that provide the
greatest net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health,
safety distributive and equity effects). In
addition, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), if a rule
has a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities, the
Secretary must specifically consider the
economic effect of a rule on small
entities and analyze regulatory options
that could lessen the impact of the rule.
In accordance with the provisions of
Executive Order 12866, this regulation
was reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget. Executive
Order 12866 requires that all regulations
reflect consideration of alternatives, of
costs, of benefits, of incentives, of
equity, and of available information.
Regulations must meet certain
standards, such as avoiding an
unnecessary burden. Regulations that
are ‘‘significant’’ because of cost,
adverse effects on the economy,
inconsistency with other agency actions,
effects on the budget, or novel legal or
policy issues, require special analysis.
The Secretary has determined that
minimal resources, if any, are required
to implement the provisions included in
this regulation. Therefore, in accordance
with the RFA, and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, which amended the RFA, the
Secretary certifies that this Final Rule
will not affect any entities defined as
small under this Act and will not have
a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
This Final Rule does not meet the
criteria for a major rule as defined by
Executive Order 12866. The Secretary
has determined that this Final Rule is
not a ‘‘major rule’’ within the meaning
of the statute providing for
Congressional Review of Agency
Rulemaking, 5 U.S.C. 801. The Secretary
conducted a cost analysis comparing the
two methodologies using a single claim.
This difference was multiplied by the
annual average percent of claims
compensated that include this
calculation (20 percent) in which the
award for lost wages is reduced by this
more accurate amount, resulting in a
slightly larger award. The new
methodology is estimated to increase
the annual total amount of awards by
$50,000. Therefore, the additional cost
to the Federal Government will be about
$50,000 per year.
The table below compares the average
cost of a health insurance policy using
MEPS–IC only, KFF/HRET only and the
new methodology.
KFF/HRET only
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
MEPS–IC only
$202
221
255
282
308
335
354
New methodology
1 $206.44
$221.22
240.77
265.75
290.08
308.75
NA
NA
2 232.46
3 276.98
4 309.61
5 336.59
6 352.25
7 363.12
1 1998
MEPS–IC increased by 1999 and 2000 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
MEPS–IC increased by 2000 and 2001 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
3 2000 MEPS–IC increased by 2001 and 2002 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
4 2001 MEPS–IC increased by 2002 and 2003 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
5 2002 MEPS–IC increased by 2003 and 2004 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
6 2003 MEPS–IC increased by the 2004 and 2005 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
7 2004 MEPS–IC increased by the 2005 and 2006 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
N/A—Not available due to 2-year lag in reporting data.
2 1999
The table below shows a comparison of
the average cost of a health insurance
policy using both methodologies, and
the percent change between these
methodologies.
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
a Revise
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Old methodology
New methodology
$276.28
294.24
313.78
332.60
353.81
374.82
a 397.45
Percent change
(old vs. new)
$206.44
232.46
276.98
309.61
336.59
352.25
363.12
¥25
¥21
¥12
¥7
¥5
¥6
¥9
this number when September 2006 CPI is published on October 31, 2006.
In accordance with the provisions of
Executive Order 12866, this regulation
was reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:50 Jul 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Secretary has determined that
this Final Rule will not have effects on
State, local, and tribal governments and
on the private sector such as to require
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
consultation under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Federalism Impact Statement
The Secretary has also reviewed this
Final Rule in accordance with Executive
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
36612
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Order 13132 regarding federalism, and
has determined that it does not have
‘‘federalism implications.’’ The Final
Rule would not ‘‘have substantial direct
effects on the States, or on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’
Impact on Family Well-Being
This Final Rule will not adversely
affect the following elements of family
well-being: family safety, family
stability, marital commitment; parental
rights in the education, nurture and
supervision of their children; family
functioning, disposable income or
poverty; or the behavior and personal
responsibility of youth, as determined
under section 654(c) of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999.
Impact of the New Rule
This Final Rule revises § 100.2 to
incorporate a new methodology for
calculating the average cost of a health
insurance policy. This new
methodology will result in a more
accurate reflection of the actual average
cost of a health insurance policy as
compared to the old methodology which
resulted in a number that was too high.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
This Final Rule has no information
collection requirements.
2. Section 100.2 is revised to read as
follows:
I
§ 100.2
policy.
Average cost of a health insurance
For purposes of determining the
amount of compensation under the
VICP, section 2115(a)(3)(B) of the PHS
Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa–15(a)(3)(B),
provides that certain individuals are
entitled to receive an amount reflecting
lost earnings, less certain deductions.
One of the deductions is the average
cost of a health insurance policy, as
determined by the Secretary. The
Secretary has determined that the
average cost of a health insurance policy
is $363.12 for 2006. This figure is
calculated periodically (generally on an
annual basis) using the most recent
Medical Expenditure Panel SurveyInsurance Component (MEPS–IC) data
available as the baseline for the average
monthly cost of a health insurance
policy. This baseline is adjusted by the
annual percentage increase/decrease
obtained from the most recent annual
Kaiser Family Foundation and Health
Research and Educational Trust (KFF/
HRET) Employer Health Benefits survey
or other authoritative source that may be
more accurate or appropriate in the
future. The revised amount will be
effective upon its delivery by the
Secretary to the United States Court of
Federal Claims, and the amount will be
published as a notice in the Federal
Register periodically (generally on an
annual basis).
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 100
Biologics, Compensation, Health
insurance, Immunizations.
[FR Doc. E7–13039 Filed 7–3–07; 8:45 am]
Dated: January 28, 2007.
Elizabeth M. Duke,
Administrator, HRSA.
Approved: March 29, 2007.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
BILLING CODE 4165–15–P
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
Editorial Note: This document was
received at the Office of the Federal Register
on June 29, 2007.
For the reasons stated above, HHS
amends part 100 of 42 CFR as follows:
I
PART 100—VACCINE INJURY
COMPENSATION
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Authority: Secs. 312 and 313 of Pub. L. 99–
660, 100 Stat. 3779–3782 (42 U.S.C. 300aa–
1 note); sec. 2114(c) and (e) of the PHS Act
(42 U.S.C. 300aa–14(c) and (e)); sec.
2115(a)(3)(B) of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C.
300aa–15(a)(3)(B)); sec. 904(b) of Pub. L. 105–
34, 111 Stat. 873; sec. 1503 of Pub. L. 105–
277, 112 Stat. 2681–741; and sec. 523(a) of
Pub. L. 106–170, 113 Stat. 1927–1928.
15:50 Jul 03, 2007
Jkt 211001
[CMS–1529–N]
RIN 0938–AO30
Medicare Program; Hospital Direct and
Indirect Graduate Medical Education
Policy Changes; Notice
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule; clarification.
AGENCY:
1. The authority section for 42 CFR
part 100 is revised to read as follows:
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
42 CFR Parts 412 and 413
SUMMARY: This notice clarifies the
availability of certain physician salary
proxy data for purposes of the hospital
direct and indirect graduate medical
education policy adopted in the
‘‘Medicare Program; Prospective
Payment System for Long-Term Care
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Hospitals RY 2008: Annual Payment
Rate Updates, and Policy Changes; and
Hospital Direct and Indirect Graduate
Medical Education Policy Changes’’
final rule that appeared in the May 11,
2007 Federal Register.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This notice is effective
on July 1, 2007.
Tzvi
Hefter, (410) 786–4487 (General
information). Miechal Lefkowitz, (410)
786–5316 (Graduate Medical Education
payments). Renate Rockwell, (410) 786–
4645 (Graduate Medical Education
payments).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In FR Doc. 07–2206 (72 FR 26870),
there was an erroneous statement of fact
relating to the GME policy adopted in
the final rule. In light of the error, this
notice serves to clarify the availability of
certain salary proxy data that can be
used for purposes of the hospital direct
and indirect graduate medical education
policy adopted in the final rule.
II. Provisions of the Notice
In the final rule that appeared in the
May 11, 2007 Federal Register (72 FR
26958), we responded erroneously to
the following comment, ‘‘One
commenter stated that CMS should use
average compensation figures for dental
faculty based on specialty and regional
variation. The commenter stated that the
commenter would be happy to work
with CMS to develop compensation
figures for dental programs.’’ We
responded, ‘‘The AMGA [American
Medical Group Association] data does
not apply to dental faculty, at this point
we are unaware of a comparable data
source for dental faculty salaries. We
will work with the commenter to
determine whether we can develop
proxy salary amounts for supervisory
dentists.’’ After the final rule was
issued, we were made aware that the
AMGA data, in fact, do apply to dentists
and podiatrists. Because AMGA data are
available for the dental and podiatry
specialties, the AMGA 2006 Medical
Group Compensation and Financial
Survey data can be used as the salary
proxy for both dentistry and podiatry in
accordance with the policies adopted in
the final rule. We will also correct our
posting of 2006 AMGA salary data at the
following Web site address to include
the median salary data for both dentistry
and podiatry: https://www.cms.hhs.gov/
AcuteInpatientPPS/Downloads/
Specialty_Table_050107.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\05JYR1.SGM
05JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 128 (Thursday, July 5, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36610-36612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-13039]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Health Resources and Services Administration
42 CFR Part 100
RIN 0905-AA68
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Calculation of
Average Cost of a Health Insurance Policy
AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Subtitle 2 of Title XXI of the Public Health Service Act, as
enacted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, as
amended (the Act), governs the National Vaccine Injury Compensation
Program (VICP). The VICP, administered by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services (the Secretary), provides that a proceeding for
compensation for a vaccine-related injury or death shall be initiated
by service upon the Secretary, and the filing of a petition with the
United States Court of Federal Claims (the Court). In some cases, the
injured individual may receive compensation for future lost earnings,
less appropriate taxes and the ``average cost of a health insurance
policy, as determined by the Secretary.'' The final rule establishes
the new method of calculating the average cost of a health insurance
policy and determines the amount of the average cost of a health
insurance policy to be deducted from the compensation award.
DATES: This regulation is effective August 6, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Overby, Chief, Policy Analysis
Branch, Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, Healthcare Systems
Bureau, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Room 11C-
26, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857; e-
mail: toverby@hrsa.gov; telephone number: (301) 443-6593.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 9, 2006, the Secretary published in
the Federal Register (71 FR 33420), a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) to revise regulations for the National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program (VICP) to establish a new method of calculating
the average cost of a health insurance policy. The public comment
period on the NPRM closed on August 8, 2006.
The Secretary received one written comment. The one commenter
stated that the proposed rule raises both Federalism and Constitutional
issues. The Secretary has considered this comment and notes that
section 2115(a)(3)(B) of the Public Health Service Act gives explicit
authority to the Secretary to determine the average cost of a health
insurance policy.
Based on the new methodology, the amount of a health insurance
policy to be deducted from a compensation award for the 12-month
period, October 1, 2006--September 30, 2007 is $363.12 per month. In
August 2006, Medical Expenditure Panel Survey-Insurance Component
(MEPS-IC), available at https://www.meps.ahrq.gov, published the annual
2004 average total single premium per enrolled employee at private-
sector establishments that provide health insurance. The figure
published was $3,705. This figure is divided by 12 months to determine
the cost per month of $308.75 which is the proposed new baseline figure
for 2004. The baseline of $308.75 shall be increased or decreased by
the percentage change reported by the most recent ``Employer Health
Benefits'' Annual Survey, Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research
and Educational Trust (KFF/HRET) survey at https://www.kff.org. The
percentage increase from 2004-2005 was 9.2 percent. By adding this
percentage increase, the calculated average monthly cost of a health
insurance policy in 2005 is $337.16. The KFF/HRET reported increase
from 2005-2006 was 7.7 percent. By adding this percentage increase to
the calculated $337.16 for 2005, the calculated average cost of a
health insurance policy in 2006 is $363.12 per month.
Because the KFF/HRET survey is published annually, the Department
will periodically (generally on an annual basis) recalculate the
average cost of a health insurance policy by obtaining a new baseline
from the latest MEPS-IC data and updating this
[[Page 36611]]
baseline using the percentage change(s) reported by the most recent
data from KFF/HRET or other authoritative source that may be more
accurate or appropriate in the future. The updated calculation will be
published as a notice in the Federal Register and filed with the Court.
Economic and Regulatory Impact
Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when rulemaking is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that provide the greatest
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health, safety distributive and equity effects). In addition, under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), if a rule has a significant
economic effect on a substantial number of small entities, the
Secretary must specifically consider the economic effect of a rule on
small entities and analyze regulatory options that could lessen the
impact of the rule.
In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this
regulation was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 12866 requires that all regulations reflect
consideration of alternatives, of costs, of benefits, of incentives, of
equity, and of available information. Regulations must meet certain
standards, such as avoiding an unnecessary burden. Regulations that are
``significant'' because of cost, adverse effects on the economy,
inconsistency with other agency actions, effects on the budget, or
novel legal or policy issues, require special analysis.
The Secretary has determined that minimal resources, if any, are
required to implement the provisions included in this regulation.
Therefore, in accordance with the RFA, and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, which amended the RFA, the
Secretary certifies that this Final Rule will not affect any entities
defined as small under this Act and will not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
This Final Rule does not meet the criteria for a major rule as
defined by Executive Order 12866. The Secretary has determined that
this Final Rule is not a ``major rule'' within the meaning of the
statute providing for Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking, 5
U.S.C. 801. The Secretary conducted a cost analysis comparing the two
methodologies using a single claim. This difference was multiplied by
the annual average percent of claims compensated that include this
calculation (20 percent) in which the award for lost wages is reduced
by this more accurate amount, resulting in a slightly larger award. The
new methodology is estimated to increase the annual total amount of
awards by $50,000. Therefore, the additional cost to the Federal
Government will be about $50,000 per year.
The table below compares the average cost of a health insurance
policy using MEPS-IC only, KFF/HRET only and the new methodology.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year KFF/HRET only MEPS-IC only New methodology
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000................................................... $202 $221.22 \1\ $206.44
2001................................................... 221 240.77 \2\ 232.46
2002................................................... 255 265.75 \3\ 276.98
2003................................................... 282 290.08 \4\ 309.61
2004................................................... 308 308.75 \5\ 336.59
2005................................................... 335 NA \6\ 352.25
2006................................................... 354 NA \7\ 363.12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 1998 MEPS-IC increased by 1999 and 2000 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
\2\ 1999 MEPS-IC increased by 2000 and 2001 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
\3\ 2000 MEPS-IC increased by 2001 and 2002 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
\4\ 2001 MEPS-IC increased by 2002 and 2003 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
\5\ 2002 MEPS-IC increased by 2003 and 2004 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
\6\ 2003 MEPS-IC increased by the 2004 and 2005 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
\7\ 2004 MEPS-IC increased by the 2005 and 2006 percent changes from KFF/HRET.
N/A--Not available due to 2-year lag in reporting data.
The table below shows a comparison of the average cost of a health
insurance policy using both methodologies, and the percent change
between these methodologies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent change
Year Old methodology New methodology (old vs. new)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000................................................... $276.28 $206.44 -25
2001................................................... 294.24 232.46 -21
2002................................................... 313.78 276.98 -12
2003................................................... 332.60 309.61 -7
2004................................................... 353.81 336.59 -5
2005................................................... 374.82 352.25 -6
2006................................................... \a\ 397.45 363.12 -9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Revise this number when September 2006 CPI is published on October 31, 2006.
In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this
regulation was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Secretary has determined that this Final Rule will not have
effects on State, local, and tribal governments and on the private
sector such as to require consultation under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995.
Federalism Impact Statement
The Secretary has also reviewed this Final Rule in accordance with
Executive
[[Page 36612]]
Order 13132 regarding federalism, and has determined that it does not
have ``federalism implications.'' The Final Rule would not ``have
substantial direct effects on the States, or on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
Impact on Family Well-Being
This Final Rule will not adversely affect the following elements of
family well-being: family safety, family stability, marital commitment;
parental rights in the education, nurture and supervision of their
children; family functioning, disposable income or poverty; or the
behavior and personal responsibility of youth, as determined under
section 654(c) of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999.
Impact of the New Rule
This Final Rule revises Sec. 100.2 to incorporate a new
methodology for calculating the average cost of a health insurance
policy. This new methodology will result in a more accurate reflection
of the actual average cost of a health insurance policy as compared to
the old methodology which resulted in a number that was too high.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
This Final Rule has no information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 100
Biologics, Compensation, Health insurance, Immunizations.
Dated: January 28, 2007.
Elizabeth M. Duke,
Administrator, HRSA.
Approved: March 29, 2007.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Secretary.
Editorial Note: This document was received at the Office of the
Federal Register on June 29, 2007.
0
For the reasons stated above, HHS amends part 100 of 42 CFR as follows:
PART 100--VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION
0
1. The authority section for 42 CFR part 100 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 312 and 313 of Pub. L. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3779-
3782 (42 U.S.C. 300aa-1 note); sec. 2114(c) and (e) of the PHS Act
(42 U.S.C. 300aa-14(c) and (e)); sec. 2115(a)(3)(B) of the PHS Act
(42 U.S.C. 300aa-15(a)(3)(B)); sec. 904(b) of Pub. L. 105-34, 111
Stat. 873; sec. 1503 of Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681-741; and
sec. 523(a) of Pub. L. 106-170, 113 Stat. 1927-1928.
0
2. Section 100.2 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 100.2 Average cost of a health insurance policy.
For purposes of determining the amount of compensation under the
VICP, section 2115(a)(3)(B) of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 300aa-
15(a)(3)(B), provides that certain individuals are entitled to receive
an amount reflecting lost earnings, less certain deductions. One of the
deductions is the average cost of a health insurance policy, as
determined by the Secretary. The Secretary has determined that the
average cost of a health insurance policy is $363.12 for 2006. This
figure is calculated periodically (generally on an annual basis) using
the most recent Medical Expenditure Panel Survey-Insurance Component
(MEPS-IC) data available as the baseline for the average monthly cost
of a health insurance policy. This baseline is adjusted by the annual
percentage increase/decrease obtained from the most recent annual
Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust
(KFF/HRET) Employer Health Benefits survey or other authoritative
source that may be more accurate or appropriate in the future. The
revised amount will be effective upon its delivery by the Secretary to
the United States Court of Federal Claims, and the amount will be
published as a notice in the Federal Register periodically (generally
on an annual basis).
[FR Doc. E7-13039 Filed 7-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
