Medicare Program; Amendment to Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to Part B for CY 2011, 1366-1367 [2011-164]
Download as PDF
1366
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Part 410
[CMS–1503–F2]
RIN 0938–AP79
Medicare Program; Amendment to
Payment Policies Under the Physician
Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to
Part B for CY 2011
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This amendment rescinds the
addition and definition of voluntary
advance care planning as a specified
element of the annual wellness visit that
was finalized in the ‘‘Medicare Program;
Payment Policies Under the Physician
Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to
Part B for CY 2011’’ that appeared in the
November 29, 2010 Federal Register.
DATES: Effective Date: This amendment
is effective on January 10, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dennis Wagoner, (410) 786–6841.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
I. Background
The final rule with comment period
entitled ‘‘Medicare Program; Payment
Policies Under the Physician Fee
Schedule and Other Revisions to Part B
for CY 2011’’ appeared in the November
29, 2010 Federal Register (75 FR
73170). The November 29, 2010 final
rule with comment period included the
agency’s responses to comments made
by the public in response to its Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
published on July 13, 2010. In that
NPRM, CMS sought to define the new
annual wellness visit providing
personalized prevention plan services as
provided by the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (the Affordable Care
Act or the Act). CMS proposed that the
specified elements of the ‘‘first annual
wellness visit’’ and the ‘‘subsequent
annual wellness visit’’ be only those
identified in the Act. In response, a
number of commenters urged CMS to
include voluntary advance care
planning as an additional specified
element of the annual wellness visit in
the final rule. As described more fully
below, we are rescinding this part of the
final rule.
II. Provisions of the Amendment
In the July 13, 2010 Federal Register
(75 FR 40039), we published the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:40 Jan 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
proposed rule entitled ‘‘Medicare
Program; Payment Policies Under the
Physician Fee Schedule and Other
Revisions to Part B for CY 2011.’’ In
response to this publication, we
received comments from health care
providers, and others urging us to add
voluntary advance care planning as a
specified element of the definitions of
both the ‘‘first annual wellness visit’’ and
the ‘‘subsequent annual wellness visit.’’
The commenters stated that their
recommendations were based upon a
number of recent research studies, and
the inclusion by the Medicare initial
preventive physical examination (IPPE)
provisions of a similar element in the
existing IPPE benefit.
CMS agreed with the commenters that
voluntary advance care planning should
be added as a specified element in the
definitions of both the ‘‘first annual
wellness visit’’ and the ‘‘subsequent
annual wellness visit’’ based on the
evidence provided and the inclusion of
a similar element in the IPPE benefit
(also referred to as the Welcome to
Medicare exam) since January 1, 2009,
and incorporated it into the final rule.
It has since become apparent that we
did not have an opportunity to consider
prior to the issuance of the final rule the
wide range of views on this subject held
by a broad range of stakeholders
(including members of Congress and
those who were involved with this
provision during the debate on the
Affordable Care Act). Therefore, we are
rescinding the provision of the final rule
that includes voluntary advance care
planning as a specified element of the
annual wellness visits providing
personalized prevention plan services,
and returning to the policy that was
proposed, which was limited to the
elements specified in the Act. We are
revising our regulation at § 410.15(a) to
remove voluntary advance care
planning as a specified element from the
definitions of ‘‘first annual wellness visit
providing personalized prevention plan
services’’ and ‘‘subsequent annual
wellness visit providing personalized
prevention plan services’’ and to remove
the definition of ‘‘voluntary advance
care planning.’’
III. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking
and Delay in Effective Date
We ordinarily publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register and invite public comment on
the proposed rule before the provisions
of the rule take effect in accordance
with section 553(b) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553(b)). The Physician Fee Schedule
notice of proposed rulemaking includes
a reference to the legal authority under
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
which the rule is proposed, and the
terms and substance of the proposed
rule or a description of the subjects and
issues involved. This notice and
comment procedure can be waived,
however, if an agency finds good cause
that the procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, and incorporates a statement of
the finding and its reasons for it in the
rule. Section 553(d) of the APA
ordinarily requires a 30-day delay in the
effective date of final rules after the date
of their publication. This 30-day delay
in effective date can be waived,
however, if an agency finds for good
cause that the delay is impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, and the agency incorporates a
statement of the findings and its reasons
in the rule issued.
As noted earlier, a number of
commenters suggested in response to
the NPRM that we should include
voluntary advance care planning as an
additional specified element of the new
annual wellness visit. While we believe
that we acted within our authority in
including voluntary advance care
planning as an additional specified
element of the new annual wellness
visit in the final rule, it has become
apparent that we did not have an
opportunity to consider prior to the
issuance of the final rule the wide range
of views on this subject held by a broad
range of stakeholders (including
members of Congress and those who
were involved with this provision
during the debate on the Affordable
Care Act). Because we believe it is in the
public interest to specify
contemporaneous with the January 1,
2011 effective date the scope of the new
‘‘annual wellness visit for personalized
prevention plan services’’ benefit, we
believe it would be contrary to the
public interest to provide for a 30-day
delay in effective date. Therefore, we
find good cause, based on the public
interest, both to waive the notice of
proposed rulemaking and the 30-day
delay in effective date, and to issue this
amendment effective January 1, 2011.
IV. Collection of Information
Requirements
This document does not impose
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements.
Consequently, it need not be reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget under the authority of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
V. Regulatory Impact Statement
We have examined the impact of this
amendment as required by Executive
Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning
E:\FR\FM\10JAR1.SGM
10JAR1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
and Review (September 30, 1993), the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–354),
section 1102(b) of the Social Security
Act, section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (March
22, 1995; Pub. L. 104–4), Executive
Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4,
1999) and the Congressional Review Act
(5 U.S.C. 804(2)).
Executive Order 12866 directs
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 (RIA) must be prepared for
major rules with economically
significant effects ($100 million or more
in any 1 year). This amendment does
not reach the economic threshold and
thus is not considered a major rule.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze
options for regulatory relief of small
businesses. For purposes of the RFA,
small entities include small businesses,
nonprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. Most
hospitals and most other providers and
suppliers are small entities, either by
nonprofit status or by having revenues
of $7.0 million to $34.5 million in any
1 year. Individuals and States are not
included in the definition of a small
entity. We are not preparing an analysis
for the RFA because we have
determined, and the Secretary certifies,
that this amendment will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act
requires us to prepare a regulatory
impact analysis if a rule may have a
significant impact on the operations of
a substantial number of small rural
hospitals. This analysis must conform to
the provisions of section 604 for final
rules of the RFA. For purposes of
section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a
small rural hospital as a hospital that is
located outside of a Metropolitan
Statistical Area for Medicare payment
regulations and has fewer than 100
beds. We are not preparing an analysis
for section 1102(b) of the Act because
we have determined, and the Secretary
certifies, that this amendment will not
have a significant impact on the
operations of a substantial number of
small rural hospitals.
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also
requires that agencies assess anticipated
costs and benefits before issuing any
rule whose mandates require spending
in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:40 Jan 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
dollars, updated annually for inflation.
In 2010, that threshold is approximately
$135 million. This amendment will
have no consequential effect on State,
local, or Tribal governments or on the
private sector.
Executive Order 13132 establishes
certain requirements that an agency
must meet when it promulgates a
proposed rule (and subsequent final
rule) that imposes substantial direct
requirement costs on State and local
governments, preempts State law, or
otherwise has Federalism implications.
Because this amendment does not
impose any costs on State or local
governments, the requirements of
Executive Order 13132 are not
applicable.
In accordance with the provisions of
Executive Order 12866, this amendment
was reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 410
Health facilities, Health professions,
Kidney diseases, Laboratories,
Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rural areas, X-rays.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR part
410 as set forth below:
PART 410—SUPPLEMENTARY
MEDICAL INSURANCE (SMI)
BENEFITS
1. The authority citation for part 410
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 1102, 1834, 1871, and
1893 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1302, 1395m, 1395hh, and 1395ddd).
Subpart B—Medical and Other Health
Services
§ 410.15
[Amended]
2. Section 410.15 is amended as
follows:
■ A. In paragraph (a), in the definition
of ‘‘First annual wellness visit providing
personalized prevention plan services’’
removing paragraph (ix) and
redesignating paragraph (x) as paragraph
(ix).
■ B. In paragraph (a), in the definition
of ‘‘Subsequent annual wellness visit
providing personalized prevention plan
services’’ removing paragraph (vii) and
redesignating paragraph (viii) as
paragraph (vii).
■ C. In paragraph (a), removing the
definition of ‘‘voluntary advance care
planning’’.
CMS–1503–F2.
■
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital
Insurance; and Program No. 93.774,
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1367
Medicare—Supplementary Medical
Insurance Program)
Dated: January 3, 2011.
Donald M. Berwick,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
Approved: January 4, 2011.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 2011–164 Filed 1–5–11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 580
[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0046; Notice 2]
Petition for Approval of Alternate
Odometer Disclosure Requirements
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final Determination.
AGENCY:
The State of Wisconsin has
petitioned for approval of alternate
requirements to certain requirements
under Federal odometer law. NHTSA is
issuing this final determination granting
Wisconsin’s petition as it pertains to
vehicle transfers. This determination
does not include vehicles covered by a
lease agreement.
DATES: Effective Date: February 9, 2011.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.
Anyone is able to search the electronic
form of all comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit
https://DocketInfo.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Case, Office of the Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone: 202–366–2239) (Fax: 202–
366–3820).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Introduction
Federal odometer law, which is
largely based on the Motor Vehicle
E:\FR\FM\10JAR1.SGM
10JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1366-1367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-164]
[[Page 1366]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
42 CFR Part 410
[CMS-1503-F2]
RIN 0938-AP79
Medicare Program; Amendment to Payment Policies Under the
Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to Part B for CY 2011
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment rescinds the addition and definition of
voluntary advance care planning as a specified element of the annual
wellness visit that was finalized in the ``Medicare Program; Payment
Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to Part B
for CY 2011'' that appeared in the November 29, 2010 Federal Register.
DATES: Effective Date: This amendment is effective on January 10, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Wagoner, (410) 786-6841.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The final rule with comment period entitled ``Medicare Program;
Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions
to Part B for CY 2011'' appeared in the November 29, 2010 Federal
Register (75 FR 73170). The November 29, 2010 final rule with comment
period included the agency's responses to comments made by the public
in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published on
July 13, 2010. In that NPRM, CMS sought to define the new annual
wellness visit providing personalized prevention plan services as
provided by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the
Affordable Care Act or the Act). CMS proposed that the specified
elements of the ``first annual wellness visit'' and the ``subsequent
annual wellness visit'' be only those identified in the Act. In
response, a number of commenters urged CMS to include voluntary advance
care planning as an additional specified element of the annual wellness
visit in the final rule. As described more fully below, we are
rescinding this part of the final rule.
II. Provisions of the Amendment
In the July 13, 2010 Federal Register (75 FR 40039), we published
the proposed rule entitled ``Medicare Program; Payment Policies Under
the Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to Part B for CY 2011.''
In response to this publication, we received comments from health care
providers, and others urging us to add voluntary advance care planning
as a specified element of the definitions of both the ``first annual
wellness visit'' and the ``subsequent annual wellness visit.'' The
commenters stated that their recommendations were based upon a number
of recent research studies, and the inclusion by the Medicare initial
preventive physical examination (IPPE) provisions of a similar element
in the existing IPPE benefit.
CMS agreed with the commenters that voluntary advance care planning
should be added as a specified element in the definitions of both the
``first annual wellness visit'' and the ``subsequent annual wellness
visit'' based on the evidence provided and the inclusion of a similar
element in the IPPE benefit (also referred to as the Welcome to
Medicare exam) since January 1, 2009, and incorporated it into the
final rule.
It has since become apparent that we did not have an opportunity to
consider prior to the issuance of the final rule the wide range of
views on this subject held by a broad range of stakeholders (including
members of Congress and those who were involved with this provision
during the debate on the Affordable Care Act). Therefore, we are
rescinding the provision of the final rule that includes voluntary
advance care planning as a specified element of the annual wellness
visits providing personalized prevention plan services, and returning
to the policy that was proposed, which was limited to the elements
specified in the Act. We are revising our regulation at Sec. 410.15(a)
to remove voluntary advance care planning as a specified element from
the definitions of ``first annual wellness visit providing personalized
prevention plan services'' and ``subsequent annual wellness visit
providing personalized prevention plan services'' and to remove the
definition of ``voluntary advance care planning.''
III. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and Delay in Effective Date
We ordinarily publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register and invite public comment on the proposed rule before
the provisions of the rule take effect in accordance with section
553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). The
Physician Fee Schedule notice of proposed rulemaking includes a
reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed, and
the terms and substance of the proposed rule or a description of the
subjects and issues involved. This notice and comment procedure can be
waived, however, if an agency finds good cause that the procedure is
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, and
incorporates a statement of the finding and its reasons for it in the
rule. Section 553(d) of the APA ordinarily requires a 30-day delay in
the effective date of final rules after the date of their publication.
This 30-day delay in effective date can be waived, however, if an
agency finds for good cause that the delay is impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, and the agency
incorporates a statement of the findings and its reasons in the rule
issued.
As noted earlier, a number of commenters suggested in response to
the NPRM that we should include voluntary advance care planning as an
additional specified element of the new annual wellness visit. While we
believe that we acted within our authority in including voluntary
advance care planning as an additional specified element of the new
annual wellness visit in the final rule, it has become apparent that we
did not have an opportunity to consider prior to the issuance of the
final rule the wide range of views on this subject held by a broad
range of stakeholders (including members of Congress and those who were
involved with this provision during the debate on the Affordable Care
Act). Because we believe it is in the public interest to specify
contemporaneous with the January 1, 2011 effective date the scope of
the new ``annual wellness visit for personalized prevention plan
services'' benefit, we believe it would be contrary to the public
interest to provide for a 30-day delay in effective date. Therefore, we
find good cause, based on the public interest, both to waive the notice
of proposed rulemaking and the 30-day delay in effective date, and to
issue this amendment effective January 1, 2011.
IV. Collection of Information Requirements
This document does not impose information collection and
recordkeeping requirements. Consequently, it need not be reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
V. Regulatory Impact Statement
We have examined the impact of this amendment as required by
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning
[[Page 1367]]
and Review (September 30, 1993), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96-354), section 1102(b) of the Social
Security Act, section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104-4), Executive Order 13132 on Federalism
(August 4, 1999) and the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)).
Executive Order 12866 directs 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 (RIA) must be prepared for major rules with economically
significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1 year). This
amendment does not reach the economic threshold and thus is not
considered a major rule.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief
of small businesses. For purposes of the RFA, small entities include
small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions. Most hospitals and most other providers and suppliers
are small entities, either by nonprofit status or by having revenues of
$7.0 million to $34.5 million in any 1 year. Individuals and States are
not included in the definition of a small entity. We are not preparing
an analysis for the RFA because we have determined, and the Secretary
certifies, that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act requires us to prepare a
regulatory impact analysis if a rule may have a significant impact on
the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals. This
analysis must conform to the provisions of section 604 for final rules
of the RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a
small rural hospital as a hospital that is located outside of a
Metropolitan Statistical Area for Medicare payment regulations and has
fewer than 100 beds. We are not preparing an analysis for section
1102(b) of the Act because we have determined, and the Secretary
certifies, that this amendment will not have a significant impact on
the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals.
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also
requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $100
million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. In 2010, that
threshold is approximately $135 million. This amendment will have no
consequential effect on State, local, or Tribal governments or on the
private sector.
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an
agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent
final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State
and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has Federalism
implications. Because this amendment does not impose any costs on State
or local governments, the requirements of Executive Order 13132 are not
applicable.
In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this
amendment was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 410
Health facilities, Health professions, Kidney diseases,
Laboratories, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rural
areas, X-rays.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR part 410 as set forth below:
PART 410--SUPPLEMENTARY MEDICAL INSURANCE (SMI) BENEFITS
0
1. The authority citation for part 410 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 1102, 1834, 1871, and 1893 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1395m, 1395hh, and 1395ddd).
Subpart B--Medical and Other Health Services
Sec. 410.15 [Amended]
0
2. Section 410.15 is amended as follows:
0
A. In paragraph (a), in the definition of ``First annual wellness visit
providing personalized prevention plan services'' removing paragraph
(ix) and redesignating paragraph (x) as paragraph (ix).
0
B. In paragraph (a), in the definition of ``Subsequent annual wellness
visit providing personalized prevention plan services'' removing
paragraph (vii) and redesignating paragraph (viii) as paragraph (vii).
0
C. In paragraph (a), removing the definition of ``voluntary advance
care planning''.
CMS-1503-F2.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.773,
Medicare--Hospital Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, Medicare--
Supplementary Medical Insurance Program)
Dated: January 3, 2011.
Donald M. Berwick,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
Approved: January 4, 2011.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2011-164 Filed 1-5-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P