Waivers for State Innovation, 78131-78135 [2015-31563]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
2. In § 121.1, under Category XI, revise
paragraph (b), effective December 29,
2015 to read as follows:
■
§ 121.1
*
The United States Munitions List.
*
*
*
*
Category XI—Military Electronics
*
*
*
*
*
*(b) Electronic systems, equipment or
software, not elsewhere enumerated in
this sub-chapter, specially designed for
intelligence purposes that collect,
survey, monitor, or exploit, or analyze
and produce information from, the
electromagnetic spectrum (regardless of
transmission medium), or for
counteracting such activities.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 121.1, under Category XI, revise
paragraph (b), effective August 30, 2017,
to read as follows:
§ 121.1
*
The United States Munitions List.
*
*
*
*
Category XI—Military Electronics
*
*
*
*
*
*(b) Electronic systems or equipment,
not elsewhere enumerated in this subchapter, specially designed for
intelligence purposes that collect,
survey, monitor, or exploit the
electromagnetic spectrum (regardless of
transmission medium), or for
counteracting such activities.
*
*
*
*
*
Brian H. Nilsson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Trade
Controls, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs,
U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2015–31528 Filed 12–15–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
31 CFR Part 33
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Part 155
[CMS–9936–N]
Waivers for State Innovation
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS;
Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Guidance.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
This guidance relates to
Section 1332 of the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its
implementing regulations. Section 1332
provides the Secretary of Health and
Human Services and the Secretary of the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Dec 15, 2015
Jkt 238001
Treasury with the discretion to approve
a state’s proposal to waive specific
provisions of the ACA (a State
Innovation Waiver), provided the
proposal meets certain requirements. In
particular, the Secretaries can only
exercise their discretion to approve a
waiver if they find that the waiver
would provide coverage to a comparable
number of residents of the state as
would be provided coverage absent the
waiver, would provide coverage that is
at least as comprehensive and affordable
as would be provided absent the waiver,
and would not increase the Federal
deficit. If the waiver is approved, the
state may receive funding equal to the
amount of forgone Federal financial
assistance that would have been
provided to its residents pursuant to
specified ACA programs, known as
pass-through funding. State Innovation
Waivers are available for effective dates
beginning on or after January 1, 2017.
They may be approved for periods up to
5 years and can be renewed. The
Departments promulgated implementing
regulations in 2012. This document
provides additional information about
the requirements that must be met, the
Secretaries’ application review
procedures, the amount of pass-through
funding, certain analytical
requirements, and operational
considerations.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments may
be submitted at any time.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer
to file code CMS–9936–N. Because of
staff and resource limitations, we cannot
accept comments by facsimile (FAX)
transmission.
You may submit comments in one of
four ways (please choose only one of the
ways listed):
1. Electronically. You may submit
electronic comments on this document
to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions.
2. By regular mail. You may mail
written comments to the following
address ONLY: Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, Department of
Health and Human Services, Attention:
CMS–9936–N, P.O. Box 8016,
Baltimore, MD 21244–8016.
3. By express or overnight mail. You
may send written comments to the
following address ONLY: Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services,
Department of Health and Human
Services, Attention: CMS–9936–N, Mail
Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850.
4. By hand or courier. Alternatively,
you may deliver (by hand or courier)
your written comments ONLY to the
following addresses:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
78131
a. For delivery in Washington, DC—
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services, Department of Health and
Human Services, Room 445–G, Hubert
H. Humphrey Building, 200
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20201.
(Because access to the interior of the
Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not
readily available to persons without
Federal government identification,
commenters are encouraged to leave
their comments in the CMS drop slots
located in the main lobby of the
building. A stamp-in clock is available
for persons wishing to retain a proof of
filing by stamping in and retaining an
extra copy of the comments being filed.)
b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD—
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services, Department of Health and
Human Services, 7500 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850.
If you intend to deliver your
comments to the Baltimore address, call
telephone number (410) 786–9994 in
advance to schedule your arrival with
one of our staff members. Comments
erroneously mailed to the addresses
indicated as appropriate for hand or
courier delivery may be delayed.
For information on viewing public
comments, see the beginning of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services: Tricia Beckmann, 301–492–
4328, or Robert Yates, 301–492–5151.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inspection
of Public Comments: All comments
received are available for viewing by the
public, including any personally
identifiable or confidential business
information that is included in a
comment. We post all comments
received on the following Web site as
soon as possible after they have been
received: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the search instructions on that
Web site to view public comments.
Comments received will also be
available for public inspection as they
are received, generally beginning
approximately 3 weeks after publication
of a document, at the headquarters of
the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services, 7500 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, Maryland 21244, Monday
through Friday of each week from 8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m. To schedule an
appointment to view public comments,
phone 1–800–743–3951.
I. Statutory Requirements
Under Section 1332 of the Affordable
Care Act (ACA), the Secretaries of
Health and Human Services (HHS) and
the Treasury as appropriate may
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
78132
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
exercise their discretion to approve a
request for a State Innovation Waiver
only if the Secretaries determine that
the proposal meets the following four
requirements: (1) The proposal will
provide coverage to at least a
comparable number of the state’s
residents as would be provided absent
the waiver; (2) the proposal will provide
coverage and cost-sharing protections
against excessive out-of-pocket
spending that are at least as affordable
for the state’s residents as would be
provided absent the waiver; (3) the
proposal will provide coverage that is at
least as comprehensive for the state’s
residents as would be provided absent
the waiver; and, (4) the proposal will
not increase the Federal deficit. The
Secretaries retain their discretionary
authority under Section 1332 to deny
waivers when appropriate given
consideration of the application as
whole, including the four requirements.
As under similar waiver authorities, the
Secretaries reserve the right to suspend
or terminate a waiver, in whole or in
part, any time before the date of
expiration, if the Secretaries determine
that the state materially failed to comply
with the terms and conditions of the
waiver, including any of the
requirements discussed in this
guidance.
Final regulations at 31 CFR part 33
and 45 CFR part 155, subpart N require
a state to provide actuarial analyses and
actuarial certifications, economic
analyses, data and assumptions, targets,
an implementation timeline, and other
necessary information to support the
state’s estimates that the proposed
waiver will comply with these
requirements.1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Coverage
To meet the coverage requirement, a
comparable number of state residents
must be forecast to have coverage under
the waiver as would have coverage
absent the waiver.
Coverage refers to minimum essential
coverage (or, if the individual shared
responsibility provision is waived under
a State Innovation Waiver, to something
that would qualify as minimum
essential coverage but for the waiver).
For this purpose, ‘‘comparable’’ means
that the forecast of the number of
covered individuals is no less than the
forecast of the number of covered
individuals absent the waiver. This
condition generally must be forecast to
1 ‘‘Application, Review, and Reporting Process for
Waivers for State Innovation Final Rule.’’ February
27, 2012. Available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
pkg/FR-2012-02-27/pdf/2012-4395.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Dec 15, 2015
Jkt 238001
be met in each year that the waiver
would be in effect.
The impact on all state residents is
considered, regardless of the type of
coverage they would have absent the
waiver. (For example, while a State
Innovation Waiver may not change the
terms of a state’s Medicaid coverage or
change existing Medicaid demonstration
authority, changes in Medicaid
enrollment that result from a State
Innovation Waiver, holding the state’s
Medicaid policies constant, are
considered in evaluating the number of
residents with coverage under a waiver.)
Assessment of whether the proposal
covers a comparable number of
individuals also takes into account the
effects across different groups of state
residents, and, in particular, vulnerable
residents, including low-income
individuals, elderly individuals, and
those with serious health issues or who
have a greater risk of developing serious
health issues. Reducing coverage for
these types of vulnerable groups would
cause a waiver application to fail this
requirement, even if the waiver would
provide coverage to a comparable
number of residents overall. Finally,
analysis under the coverage requirement
takes into account whether the proposal
sufficiently prevents gaps in or
discontinuations of coverage.
As provided in 31 CFR part 33 and 45
CFR part 155, subpart N, the waiver
application must include analysis and
supporting data that establishes that the
waiver satisfies this requirement,
including information on the number of
individuals covered by income, health
status, and age groups, under current
law and under the waiver, including
year-by-year estimates. The application
should identify any types of individuals
who are less likely to be covered under
the waiver than under current law.
The state should also provide a
description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data
sources and quality, key assumptions,
and parameters. The state may be
required to provide micro data and
other information to inform the
Secretaries’ analysis.
B. Affordability
To meet the affordability requirement,
health care coverage under the waiver
must be forecast to be as affordable
overall for state residents as coverage
absent the waiver.
Affordability refers to state residents’
ability to pay for health care and may
generally be measured by comparing
residents’ net out-of-pocket spending for
health coverage and services to their
incomes. Out-of-pocket expenses
include both premium contributions (or
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
equivalent costs for enrolling in
coverage), and any cost sharing, such as
deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance,
associated with the coverage. Spending
on health care services that are not
covered by a plan may also be taken into
account if they are affected by the
waiver proposal. The impact on all state
residents is considered, regardless of the
type of coverage they would have absent
the waiver. This condition generally
must be forecast to be met in each year
that the waiver would be in effect.
Waivers are evaluated not only based
on how they affect affordability on
average, but also on how they affect the
number of individuals with large health
care spending burdens relative to their
incomes. Increasing the number of state
residents with large health care
spending burdens would cause a waiver
to fail the affordability requirement,
even if the waiver would increase
affordability for many other state
residents. Assessment of whether the
proposal meets the affordability
requirement also takes into account the
effects across different groups of state
residents, and, in particular, vulnerable
residents, including low-income
individuals, elderly individuals, and
those with serious health issues or who
have a greater risk of developing serious
health issues. Reducing affordability for
these types of vulnerable groups would
cause a waiver to fail this requirement,
even if the waiver maintained
affordability in the aggregate.
In addition, a waiver would fail the
affordability requirement if it would
reduce the number of individuals with
coverage that provides a minimal level
of protection against excessive cost
sharing. In particular, waivers that
reduce the number of people with
insurance coverage that provides both
an actuarial value equal to or greater
than 60 percent and an out-of-pocket
maximum that complies with section
1302(c)(1) of the ACA, would fail this
requirement. So too would waivers that
reduce the number of people with
coverage that meets the affordability
requirements set forth in sections 1916
and 1916A of the Social Security Act, as
codified in 42 CFR part 447, subpart A,
while holding the state’s Medicaid
policies constant.
As provided in 31 CFR part 33 and 45
CFR part 155, subpart N, the waiver
application must include analysis and
supporting data that establishes that the
waiver satisfies this requirement. This
includes information on estimated
individual out-of-pocket costs by
income, health status, and age groups,
absent the waiver and with the waiver.
The expected changes in premium
contributions and other out-of-pocket
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
costs and the combined impact of
changes in these components should be
identified separately. The application
should also describe any changes in
employer contributions to health
coverage or in wages expected under the
waiver. The application should identify
any types of individuals for whom
affordability of coverage would be
reduced by the waiver.
The state should also provide a
description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data
sources and quality, key assumptions,
and parameters. The state may be
required to provide micro data and
other information to inform the
Secretaries’ analysis.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Comprehensiveness
To meet the comprehensiveness
requirement, health care coverage under
the waiver must be forecast to be at least
as comprehensive overall for residents
of the state as coverage absent the
waiver.
Comprehensiveness refers to the
scope of benefits provided by the
coverage as measured by the extent to
which coverage meets the requirements
for essential health benefits (EHBs) as
defined in section 1302(b) of the ACA,
or, as appropriate, Medicaid and/or
CHIP standards. The impact on all state
residents is considered, regardless of the
type of coverage they would have absent
the waiver.
Comprehensiveness is evaluated by
comparing coverage under the waiver to
the state’s EHB benchmark, selected by
the state (or if the state does not select
a benchmark, the default basebenchmark plan) pursuant to 45 CFR
156.100, as well as to, in certain cases,
the coverage provided under the state’s
Medicaid and/or CHIP programs. A
waiver cannot satisfy the
comprehensiveness requirement if the
waiver decreases: (1) The number of
residents with coverage that is at least
as comprehensive as the benchmark in
all ten EHB categories; (2) for any of the
ten EHB categories, the number of
residents with coverage that is at least
as comprehensive as the benchmark in
that category; or (3) the number of
residents whose coverage includes the
full set of services that would be
covered under the state’s Medicaid and/
or CHIP programs, holding the state’s
Medicaid and CHIP policies constant.
That is, the waiver must not decrease
the number of individuals with coverage
that satisfies EHB requirements, the
number of individuals with coverage of
any particular category of EHB, or the
number of individuals with coverage
that includes the services covered under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Dec 15, 2015
Jkt 238001
the state’s Medicaid and/or CHIP
programs.
Assessment of whether the proposal
meets the comprehensiveness
requirement also takes into account the
effects across different groups of state
residents, and, in particular, vulnerable
residents, including low-income
individuals, elderly individuals, and
those with serious health issues or who
have a greater risk of developing serious
health issues. A waiver would fail the
comprehensiveness requirement if it
would reduce the comprehensiveness of
coverage provided to these types of
vulnerable groups, even if the waiver
maintained comprehensiveness in the
aggregate. This condition generally must
be forecast to be met in each year that
the waiver would be in effect.
As provided in the final regulations at
31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155,
subpart N, the waiver application must
include analysis and supporting data
that establishes that the waiver satisfies
this requirement. This includes an
explanation of how the benefits offered
under the waiver differ from the benefits
provided absent the waiver (if the
benefits differ at all) and how the state
determined the benefits to be as
comprehensive.
The state should also provide a
description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data
sources and quality, key assumptions,
and parameters. The state may be
required to provide micro data and
other information to inform the
Secretaries’ analysis.
D. Deficit Neutrality
Under the deficit neutrality
requirement, the projected Federal
spending net of Federal revenues under
the State Innovation Waiver must be
equal to or lower than projected Federal
spending net of Federal revenues in the
absence of the waiver.
The estimated effect on Federal
revenue includes all changes in income,
payroll, or excise tax revenue, as well as
any other forms of revenue (including
user fees), that would result from the
proposed waiver. Estimated effects
would include, for example, changes in:
The premium tax credit and health
coverage tax credit, individual shared
responsibility payments, employer
shared responsibility payments, the
excise tax on high-cost employersponsored plans, the credit for small
businesses offering health insurance,
and changes in income and payroll
taxes resulting from changes in tax
exclusions for employer-sponsored
insurance and in deductions for medical
expenses.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
78133
The effect on Federal spending
includes all changes in Exchange
financial assistance and other direct
spending, such as changes in Medicaid
spending (while holding the state’s
Medicaid policies constant) that result
from the changes made through the
State Innovation Waiver. Projected
Federal spending under the waiver
proposal also includes all
administrative costs to the Federal
government, including any changes in
Internal Revenue Service administrative
costs, Federal Exchange administrative
costs, or other administrative costs
associated with the waiver.
Waivers must not increase the Federal
deficit over the period of the waiver
(which may not exceed 5 years unless
renewed) or in total over the ten-year
budget plan submitted by the state as
part of the State Innovation Waiver
application. The ten-year budget plan
must describe for both the period of the
waiver and for the ten-year budget the
projected Federal spending net of
Federal revenues under the State
Innovation Waiver and the projected
Federal spending net of Federal
revenues in the absence of the waiver.
The ten-year budget plan should
assume the waiver would continue
permanently, but should not include
Federal spending or savings attributable
to any period outside of the ten-year
budget window. A variety of factors,
including the likelihood and accuracy of
projected spending and revenue effects
and the timing of these effects, are
considered when evaluating the effect of
the waiver on the Federal deficit. A
waiver that increases the deficit in any
given year is less likely to meet the
deficit neutrality requirement.
The state should also provide a
description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data
sources and quality, key assumptions,
and parameters. The state may be
required to provide micro data and
other information to inform the
Secretaries’ analysis.
As provided in 31 CFR part 33 and 45
CFR part 155, subpart N, a state must
submit evidence to demonstrate deficit
neutrality, including a description of the
analysis used to produce its estimate of
the impact of the waiver on the Federal
deficit. The description must include
detailed information about the model,
data sources and quality, key
assumptions, and parameters. The state
may be required to provide micro data
and other information to support
actuarial and economic analyses, so that
the Secretaries can independently verify
that the waiver meets the deficit
neutrality requirement.
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
78134
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
II. Impact of Other Program Changes on
Assessment of a Waiver Proposal
The assessment of whether a State
Innovation Waiver proposal satisfies the
statutory criteria set forth in Section
1332 takes into consideration the impact
of changes to ACA provisions made
pursuant to the State Innovation Waiver.
The assessment also considers related
changes to the state’s health care system
that, under state law, are contingent
only on the approval of the State
Innovation Waiver. For example, the
assessment would take into account the
impact of a new state-run health
benefits program that, under legislation
enacted by the state, would be
implemented if the State Innovation
Waiver were approved.
The assessment does not consider the
impact of policy changes that are
contingent on further state action, such
as state legislation that is proposed but
not yet enacted. It also does not include
the impact of changes contingent on
other Federal determinations, including
approval of Federal waivers pursuant to
statutory provisions other than Section
1332. Therefore, the assessment would
not take into account changes to
Medicaid or CHIP that require separate
Federal approval, such as changes in
coverage or Federal Medicaid or CHIP
spending that would result from a
proposed Section 1115 demonstration,
regardless of whether the Section 1115
demonstration proposal is submitted as
part of a coordinated waiver application
with a State Innovation Waiver. Savings
accrued under either proposed or
current Section 1115 Medicaid or CHIP
demonstrations are not factored into the
assessment of whether a proposed State
Innovation Waiver meets the deficit
neutrality requirement. The assessment
also does not take into account any
changes to the Medicaid or CHIP state
plan that are subject to Federal
approval.
The assessment does take into
account changes in Medicaid and/or
CHIP coverage or in Federal spending
on Medicaid and/or CHIP that would
result directly from the proposed waiver
of provisions pursuant to Section 1332,
holding state Medicaid and CHIP
policies constant.
As the Departments receive and
review waiver proposals, we will
continue to examine the types of
changes that will be considered in
assessing State Innovation Waivers.
Nothing in this guidance alters a
state’s authority to make changes to its
Medicaid and CHIP policies consistent
with applicable law. This guidance does
not alter the Secretary of Health and
Human Services’ authority or CMS’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Dec 15, 2015
Jkt 238001
policy regarding review and approval of
Section 1115 demonstrations, and states
should continue to work with CMS’
Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services
on issues relating to Section 1115
demonstrations. A state may submit a
coordinated waiver application as
provided in 31 CFR 33.102 and 45 CFR
155.1302; in such a case, each waiver
will be evaluated independently
according to applicable Federal laws.
III. Federal Pass-Through Funding
The amount of Federal pass-through
funding equals the Secretaries’ annual
estimate of the Federal cost (including
outlays and forgone revenue) for
Exchange financial assistance provided
pursuant to the ACA that would be
claimed by participants in the Exchange
in the state in the calendar year in the
absence of the waiver, but will not be
claimed as a result of the waiver. The
calculation of the amount of passthrough funding does not account for
any other changes in Federal spending
or revenues as a result of the waiver,
including Federal administrative
expenses for making the payments
(note, however that changes to Federal
spending on administrative expenses is
considered in determining whether a
waiver proposal meets the deficit
neutrality requirement). The estimates
take into account experience in the
relevant state and similar states. The
amount is calculated annually.
The waiver application must provide
analysis and supporting data to inform
the estimate of the pass-through funding
amount. For states that do not utilize a
Federally-facilitated or state Partnership
Exchange this includes information
about enrollment, premiums, and
Exchange financial assistance in the
state’s Exchange by age, income, and
type of policy, and other information as
may be required by the Secretaries.
For further information on the
demographic and economic
assumptions to be used in determining
the pass-through amount, see Section IV
below.
IV. Economic Assumptions and
Methodological Guidelines
The determination of whether a
waiver meets the requirements under
Section 1332 and the calculation of the
pass-through funding amount are made
using generally accepted actuarial and
economic analytic methods such as
micro-simulation. The analysis relies on
assumptions and methodologies that are
similar to those used to produce the
baseline and policy projections
included in the most recent President’s
Budget (or Mid-Session Review), but
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
adapted as appropriate to reflect statespecific conditions.
The analysis is based on state-specific
estimates of the current level and
distribution of population by the
relevant economic and demographic
characteristics, including income and
source of health coverage. It generally
uses Federal estimates of population
growth, economic growth as published
in the Analytical Perspectives volume
released as part of the President’s
Budget (https://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/budget/Analytical_Perspectives)
and health care cost growth (https://
www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Dataand-Systems/Statistics-Trends-andReports/NationalHealthExpendData/
index.html?redirect=/
NationalHealthExpendData/.) to project
the initial state variables through the
ten-year Budget plan window. However,
in limited circumstances where it is
expected that a state will experience
substantially different trends than the
nation as a whole in the absence of a
waiver, the Secretaries may determine
that state-specific assumptions will be
used.
Estimates of the effect of the waiver
assume, in accordance with standard
estimating conventions, that
macroeconomic variables like
population, output, and labor supply are
not affected by the waiver. However,
estimates take into account, as
appropriate, other changes in the
behavior of individuals, employers, and
other relevant entities induced by the
waiver, including employer decisions
regarding what coverage (and other
compensation) they offer and individual
decisions regarding whether to take up
coverage. The same state-specific and
Federal data, assumptions, and model
are used to calculate
comprehensiveness, affordability, and
coverage, and relevant state components
of Federal taxes and spending under the
waiver and under current law.
The analysis and information
submitted by the state as part of the
application must conform to these
standards. The application must
describe all modeling assumptions used,
sources of state-specific data, and the
rationale for any deviation from Federal
forecasts. A state may be required to
provide to the Secretaries copies of any
data used for their waiver analyses that
are not publicly available so that the
Secretaries can independently verify the
analysis produced by the state.
V. Operational Considerations
A. Federally-Facilitated Exchanges
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS) operates the Federally-
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
facilitated Exchange (FFE) platform.
Certain changes that affect FFE
processes may make a waiver proposal
not feasible to implement at this time.
Until further guidance is issued, the
Federal platform cannot accommodate
different rules for different states. For
example, waivers that would require
changes to the calculation of Exchange
financial assistance, non-standard
enrollment period determinations,
customized plan management review
options, or changes to the design used
to display plan options are generally not
feasible at this time due to operational
limitations. In addition, the Federal
platform cannot accommodate changes
to its plan management templates in the
near term. States contemplating a
waiver that requires such changes may
consider establishing their own platform
administered by the state.
As noted in Section I.D. of this
guidance, costs associated with changes
to Federal administrative processes are
taken into account in determining
whether a waiver application satisfies
the deficit neutrality requirement.
Regulations at 31 CFR part 33 and 45
CFR part 155, subpart N require that
such costs be included in the 10-year
budget plan submitted by the state.
B. Internal Revenue Service
Certain changes that affect Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) administrative
processes may make a waiver proposal
not feasible to implement. At this time,
the IRS is not generally able to
administer different sets of rules in
different states. As a result, while a state
may propose to entirely waive the
application of one or more of the tax
provisions listed in Section 1332 to
taxpayers in the state, it is generally not
feasible to design a waiver that would
require the IRS to administer an
alteration to these provisions for
taxpayers in the state. For example, it is
generally not feasible to have the IRS
administer a different set of eligibility
rules for the premium tax credit for
residents of a particular state. States
contemplating a waiver proposal that
includes a modified version of a Federal
tax provision may consider waiving the
provision entirely and relying on a tax
program administered by the state.
In addition, a waiver proposal that
completely waives one or more tax
provisions in a state may create
administrative costs for the IRS. As
noted in Section I.D. above, costs
associated with changes to Federal
administrative processes are taken into
account in determining whether a
waiver application satisfies the deficit
neutrality requirement. Regulations at
31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Dec 15, 2015
Jkt 238001
subpart N require that such costs be
included in the 10-year budget plan
submitted by the state.
VI. Public Input on Waiver Proposals
Consistent with the statutory
provisions of Section 1332, regulations
at 31 CFR 33.112 and 45 CFR 155.1312
require states to provide a public notice
and comment period for a waiver
application sufficient to ensure a
meaningful level of public input prior to
submitting an application. As part of the
public notice and comment period, a
state with one or more Federallyrecognized tribes must conduct a
separate process for meaningful
consultation with such tribes. Because
State Innovation Waiver applications
may vary significantly in their
complexity and breadth, the regulations
provide states with flexibility in
determining the length of the comment
period required to allow for meaningful
and robust public engagement. The
comment period must be sufficient to
ensure a meaningful level of public
input and in no case can be less than 30
days.
Consistent with HHS regulations,
waiver applications must be posted
online in a manner that meets national
standards to assure access to individuals
with disabilities. Such standards are
issued by the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board, and are referred to as ‘‘section
508’’ standards. Alternatively, the
World Wide Web Consortium’s Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG) 2.0 Level AA standards would
also be considered as acceptable
national standard for Web site
accessibility. For more information, see
the WCAG Web site at https://
www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.
Section 1332 and its implementing
regulations also require the Federal
Government to provide a public notice
and comment period, once the
Secretaries receive an application. The
period must be sufficient to ensure a
meaningful level of public input and
must not impose requirements that are
in addition to, or duplicative of,
requirements imposed under the
Administrative Procedures Act, or
requirements that are unreasonable or
unnecessarily burdensome with respect
to state compliance. As with the
comment period described above, the
length of the comment period should
reflect the complexity of the proposal
and in no case can be less than 30 days.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
78135
Dated: December 8, 2015.
Andrew M. Slavitt,
Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services.
Dated: December 11, 2015.
Sylvia M. Burwell,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
Approved: December 10, 2015.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax
Policy).
[FR Doc. 2015–31563 Filed 12–11–15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4150–28–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0950; A–1–FRL–
9940–15–Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; NH; Infrastructure
State Implementation Plan
Requirements for Ozone, Lead, and
Nitrogen Dioxide
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving elements of
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submissions from New Hampshire
regarding the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act) for the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone,
and 2010 nitrogen dioxide National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). EPA is also converting
conditional approvals for several
infrastructure requirements for the 1997
and 2006 fine particle (PM2.5) NAAQS to
full approval under the CAA.
Furthermore, we are updating the
classification for one of New
Hampshire’s air quality control regions
for ozone based on recent air quality
monitoring data collected by the state,
and are granting the state’s request for
an exemption from the infrastructure
SIP contingency plan obligation for
ozone. Last, we are conditionally
approving certain elements of New
Hampshire’s submittal relating to
prevention of significant deterioration
requirements.
The infrastructure requirements are
designed to ensure that the structural
components of each state’s air quality
management program are adequate to
meet the state’s responsibilities under
the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on January
15, 2016.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM
16DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 241 (Wednesday, December 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78131-78135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31563]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
31 CFR Part 33
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Part 155
[CMS-9936-N]
Waivers for State Innovation
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS; Department
of the Treasury.
ACTION: Guidance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This guidance relates to Section 1332 of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and its implementing
regulations. Section 1332 provides the Secretary of Health and Human
Services and the Secretary of the Treasury with the discretion to
approve a state's proposal to waive specific provisions of the ACA (a
State Innovation Waiver), provided the proposal meets certain
requirements. In particular, the Secretaries can only exercise their
discretion to approve a waiver if they find that the waiver would
provide coverage to a comparable number of residents of the state as
would be provided coverage absent the waiver, would provide coverage
that is at least as comprehensive and affordable as would be provided
absent the waiver, and would not increase the Federal deficit. If the
waiver is approved, the state may receive funding equal to the amount
of forgone Federal financial assistance that would have been provided
to its residents pursuant to specified ACA programs, known as pass-
through funding. State Innovation Waivers are available for effective
dates beginning on or after January 1, 2017. They may be approved for
periods up to 5 years and can be renewed. The Departments promulgated
implementing regulations in 2012. This document provides additional
information about the requirements that must be met, the Secretaries'
application review procedures, the amount of pass-through funding,
certain analytical requirements, and operational considerations.
DATES: Comment Date: Comments may be submitted at any time.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer to file code CMS-9936-N. Because
of staff and resource limitations, we cannot accept comments by
facsimile (FAX) transmission.
You may submit comments in one of four ways (please choose only one
of the ways listed):
1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this
document to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the ``Submit a comment''
instructions.
2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following
address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of
Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-9936-N, P.O. Box 8016,
Baltimore, MD 21244-8016.
3. By express or overnight mail. You may send written comments to
the following address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services,
Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-9936-N, Mail
Stop C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.
4. By hand or courier. Alternatively, you may deliver (by hand or
courier) your written comments ONLY to the following addresses:
a. For delivery in Washington, DC--Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Room 445-G, Hubert
H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC
20201.
(Because access to the interior of the Hubert H. Humphrey Building
is not readily available to persons without Federal government
identification, commenters are encouraged to leave their comments in
the CMS drop slots located in the main lobby of the building. A stamp-
in clock is available for persons wishing to retain a proof of filing
by stamping in and retaining an extra copy of the comments being
filed.)
b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD--Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services, Department of Health and Human Services, 7500 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.
If you intend to deliver your comments to the Baltimore address,
call telephone number (410) 786-9994 in advance to schedule your
arrival with one of our staff members. Comments erroneously mailed to
the addresses indicated as appropriate for hand or courier delivery may
be delayed.
For information on viewing public comments, see the beginning of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services: Tricia Beckmann, 301-492-4328, or Robert Yates, 301-492-5151.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inspection of Public Comments: All comments
received are available for viewing by the public, including any
personally identifiable or confidential business information that is
included in a comment. We post all comments received on the following
Web site as soon as possible after they have been received: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the search instructions on that Web site to
view public comments.
Comments received will also be available for public inspection as
they are received, generally beginning approximately 3 weeks after
publication of a document, at the headquarters of the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore,
Maryland 21244, Monday through Friday of each week from 8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m. To schedule an appointment to view public comments, phone 1-800-
743-3951.
I. Statutory Requirements
Under Section 1332 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the
Secretaries of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Treasury as
appropriate may
[[Page 78132]]
exercise their discretion to approve a request for a State Innovation
Waiver only if the Secretaries determine that the proposal meets the
following four requirements: (1) The proposal will provide coverage to
at least a comparable number of the state's residents as would be
provided absent the waiver; (2) the proposal will provide coverage and
cost-sharing protections against excessive out-of-pocket spending that
are at least as affordable for the state's residents as would be
provided absent the waiver; (3) the proposal will provide coverage that
is at least as comprehensive for the state's residents as would be
provided absent the waiver; and, (4) the proposal will not increase the
Federal deficit. The Secretaries retain their discretionary authority
under Section 1332 to deny waivers when appropriate given consideration
of the application as whole, including the four requirements. As under
similar waiver authorities, the Secretaries reserve the right to
suspend or terminate a waiver, in whole or in part, any time before the
date of expiration, if the Secretaries determine that the state
materially failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the
waiver, including any of the requirements discussed in this guidance.
Final regulations at 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155, subpart N
require a state to provide actuarial analyses and actuarial
certifications, economic analyses, data and assumptions, targets, an
implementation timeline, and other necessary information to support the
state's estimates that the proposed waiver will comply with these
requirements.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Application, Review, and Reporting Process for Waivers for
State Innovation Final Rule.'' February 27, 2012. Available at:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-02-27/pdf/2012-4395.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Coverage
To meet the coverage requirement, a comparable number of state
residents must be forecast to have coverage under the waiver as would
have coverage absent the waiver.
Coverage refers to minimum essential coverage (or, if the
individual shared responsibility provision is waived under a State
Innovation Waiver, to something that would qualify as minimum essential
coverage but for the waiver). For this purpose, ``comparable'' means
that the forecast of the number of covered individuals is no less than
the forecast of the number of covered individuals absent the waiver.
This condition generally must be forecast to be met in each year that
the waiver would be in effect.
The impact on all state residents is considered, regardless of the
type of coverage they would have absent the waiver. (For example, while
a State Innovation Waiver may not change the terms of a state's
Medicaid coverage or change existing Medicaid demonstration authority,
changes in Medicaid enrollment that result from a State Innovation
Waiver, holding the state's Medicaid policies constant, are considered
in evaluating the number of residents with coverage under a waiver.)
Assessment of whether the proposal covers a comparable number of
individuals also takes into account the effects across different groups
of state residents, and, in particular, vulnerable residents, including
low-income individuals, elderly individuals, and those with serious
health issues or who have a greater risk of developing serious health
issues. Reducing coverage for these types of vulnerable groups would
cause a waiver application to fail this requirement, even if the waiver
would provide coverage to a comparable number of residents overall.
Finally, analysis under the coverage requirement takes into account
whether the proposal sufficiently prevents gaps in or discontinuations
of coverage.
As provided in 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155, subpart N, the
waiver application must include analysis and supporting data that
establishes that the waiver satisfies this requirement, including
information on the number of individuals covered by income, health
status, and age groups, under current law and under the waiver,
including year-by-year estimates. The application should identify any
types of individuals who are less likely to be covered under the waiver
than under current law.
The state should also provide a description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data sources and quality, key
assumptions, and parameters. The state may be required to provide micro
data and other information to inform the Secretaries' analysis.
B. Affordability
To meet the affordability requirement, health care coverage under
the waiver must be forecast to be as affordable overall for state
residents as coverage absent the waiver.
Affordability refers to state residents' ability to pay for health
care and may generally be measured by comparing residents' net out-of-
pocket spending for health coverage and services to their incomes. Out-
of-pocket expenses include both premium contributions (or equivalent
costs for enrolling in coverage), and any cost sharing, such as
deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance, associated with the coverage.
Spending on health care services that are not covered by a plan may
also be taken into account if they are affected by the waiver proposal.
The impact on all state residents is considered, regardless of the type
of coverage they would have absent the waiver. This condition generally
must be forecast to be met in each year that the waiver would be in
effect.
Waivers are evaluated not only based on how they affect
affordability on average, but also on how they affect the number of
individuals with large health care spending burdens relative to their
incomes. Increasing the number of state residents with large health
care spending burdens would cause a waiver to fail the affordability
requirement, even if the waiver would increase affordability for many
other state residents. Assessment of whether the proposal meets the
affordability requirement also takes into account the effects across
different groups of state residents, and, in particular, vulnerable
residents, including low-income individuals, elderly individuals, and
those with serious health issues or who have a greater risk of
developing serious health issues. Reducing affordability for these
types of vulnerable groups would cause a waiver to fail this
requirement, even if the waiver maintained affordability in the
aggregate.
In addition, a waiver would fail the affordability requirement if
it would reduce the number of individuals with coverage that provides a
minimal level of protection against excessive cost sharing. In
particular, waivers that reduce the number of people with insurance
coverage that provides both an actuarial value equal to or greater than
60 percent and an out-of-pocket maximum that complies with section
1302(c)(1) of the ACA, would fail this requirement. So too would
waivers that reduce the number of people with coverage that meets the
affordability requirements set forth in sections 1916 and 1916A of the
Social Security Act, as codified in 42 CFR part 447, subpart A, while
holding the state's Medicaid policies constant.
As provided in 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155, subpart N, the
waiver application must include analysis and supporting data that
establishes that the waiver satisfies this requirement. This includes
information on estimated individual out-of-pocket costs by income,
health status, and age groups, absent the waiver and with the waiver.
The expected changes in premium contributions and other out-of-pocket
[[Page 78133]]
costs and the combined impact of changes in these components should be
identified separately. The application should also describe any changes
in employer contributions to health coverage or in wages expected under
the waiver. The application should identify any types of individuals
for whom affordability of coverage would be reduced by the waiver.
The state should also provide a description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data sources and quality, key
assumptions, and parameters. The state may be required to provide micro
data and other information to inform the Secretaries' analysis.
C. Comprehensiveness
To meet the comprehensiveness requirement, health care coverage
under the waiver must be forecast to be at least as comprehensive
overall for residents of the state as coverage absent the waiver.
Comprehensiveness refers to the scope of benefits provided by the
coverage as measured by the extent to which coverage meets the
requirements for essential health benefits (EHBs) as defined in section
1302(b) of the ACA, or, as appropriate, Medicaid and/or CHIP standards.
The impact on all state residents is considered, regardless of the type
of coverage they would have absent the waiver.
Comprehensiveness is evaluated by comparing coverage under the
waiver to the state's EHB benchmark, selected by the state (or if the
state does not select a benchmark, the default base-benchmark plan)
pursuant to 45 CFR 156.100, as well as to, in certain cases, the
coverage provided under the state's Medicaid and/or CHIP programs. A
waiver cannot satisfy the comprehensiveness requirement if the waiver
decreases: (1) The number of residents with coverage that is at least
as comprehensive as the benchmark in all ten EHB categories; (2) for
any of the ten EHB categories, the number of residents with coverage
that is at least as comprehensive as the benchmark in that category; or
(3) the number of residents whose coverage includes the full set of
services that would be covered under the state's Medicaid and/or CHIP
programs, holding the state's Medicaid and CHIP policies constant. That
is, the waiver must not decrease the number of individuals with
coverage that satisfies EHB requirements, the number of individuals
with coverage of any particular category of EHB, or the number of
individuals with coverage that includes the services covered under the
state's Medicaid and/or CHIP programs.
Assessment of whether the proposal meets the comprehensiveness
requirement also takes into account the effects across different groups
of state residents, and, in particular, vulnerable residents, including
low-income individuals, elderly individuals, and those with serious
health issues or who have a greater risk of developing serious health
issues. A waiver would fail the comprehensiveness requirement if it
would reduce the comprehensiveness of coverage provided to these types
of vulnerable groups, even if the waiver maintained comprehensiveness
in the aggregate. This condition generally must be forecast to be met
in each year that the waiver would be in effect.
As provided in the final regulations at 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR
part 155, subpart N, the waiver application must include analysis and
supporting data that establishes that the waiver satisfies this
requirement. This includes an explanation of how the benefits offered
under the waiver differ from the benefits provided absent the waiver
(if the benefits differ at all) and how the state determined the
benefits to be as comprehensive.
The state should also provide a description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data sources and quality, key
assumptions, and parameters. The state may be required to provide micro
data and other information to inform the Secretaries' analysis.
D. Deficit Neutrality
Under the deficit neutrality requirement, the projected Federal
spending net of Federal revenues under the State Innovation Waiver must
be equal to or lower than projected Federal spending net of Federal
revenues in the absence of the waiver.
The estimated effect on Federal revenue includes all changes in
income, payroll, or excise tax revenue, as well as any other forms of
revenue (including user fees), that would result from the proposed
waiver. Estimated effects would include, for example, changes in: The
premium tax credit and health coverage tax credit, individual shared
responsibility payments, employer shared responsibility payments, the
excise tax on high-cost employer-sponsored plans, the credit for small
businesses offering health insurance, and changes in income and payroll
taxes resulting from changes in tax exclusions for employer-sponsored
insurance and in deductions for medical expenses.
The effect on Federal spending includes all changes in Exchange
financial assistance and other direct spending, such as changes in
Medicaid spending (while holding the state's Medicaid policies
constant) that result from the changes made through the State
Innovation Waiver. Projected Federal spending under the waiver proposal
also includes all administrative costs to the Federal government,
including any changes in Internal Revenue Service administrative costs,
Federal Exchange administrative costs, or other administrative costs
associated with the waiver.
Waivers must not increase the Federal deficit over the period of
the waiver (which may not exceed 5 years unless renewed) or in total
over the ten-year budget plan submitted by the state as part of the
State Innovation Waiver application. The ten-year budget plan must
describe for both the period of the waiver and for the ten-year budget
the projected Federal spending net of Federal revenues under the State
Innovation Waiver and the projected Federal spending net of Federal
revenues in the absence of the waiver.
The ten-year budget plan should assume the waiver would continue
permanently, but should not include Federal spending or savings
attributable to any period outside of the ten-year budget window. A
variety of factors, including the likelihood and accuracy of projected
spending and revenue effects and the timing of these effects, are
considered when evaluating the effect of the waiver on the Federal
deficit. A waiver that increases the deficit in any given year is less
likely to meet the deficit neutrality requirement.
The state should also provide a description of the model used to
produce these estimates, including data sources and quality, key
assumptions, and parameters. The state may be required to provide micro
data and other information to inform the Secretaries' analysis.
As provided in 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155, subpart N, a
state must submit evidence to demonstrate deficit neutrality, including
a description of the analysis used to produce its estimate of the
impact of the waiver on the Federal deficit. The description must
include detailed information about the model, data sources and quality,
key assumptions, and parameters. The state may be required to provide
micro data and other information to support actuarial and economic
analyses, so that the Secretaries can independently verify that the
waiver meets the deficit neutrality requirement.
[[Page 78134]]
II. Impact of Other Program Changes on Assessment of a Waiver Proposal
The assessment of whether a State Innovation Waiver proposal
satisfies the statutory criteria set forth in Section 1332 takes into
consideration the impact of changes to ACA provisions made pursuant to
the State Innovation Waiver. The assessment also considers related
changes to the state's health care system that, under state law, are
contingent only on the approval of the State Innovation Waiver. For
example, the assessment would take into account the impact of a new
state-run health benefits program that, under legislation enacted by
the state, would be implemented if the State Innovation Waiver were
approved.
The assessment does not consider the impact of policy changes that
are contingent on further state action, such as state legislation that
is proposed but not yet enacted. It also does not include the impact of
changes contingent on other Federal determinations, including approval
of Federal waivers pursuant to statutory provisions other than Section
1332. Therefore, the assessment would not take into account changes to
Medicaid or CHIP that require separate Federal approval, such as
changes in coverage or Federal Medicaid or CHIP spending that would
result from a proposed Section 1115 demonstration, regardless of
whether the Section 1115 demonstration proposal is submitted as part of
a coordinated waiver application with a State Innovation Waiver.
Savings accrued under either proposed or current Section 1115 Medicaid
or CHIP demonstrations are not factored into the assessment of whether
a proposed State Innovation Waiver meets the deficit neutrality
requirement. The assessment also does not take into account any changes
to the Medicaid or CHIP state plan that are subject to Federal
approval.
The assessment does take into account changes in Medicaid and/or
CHIP coverage or in Federal spending on Medicaid and/or CHIP that would
result directly from the proposed waiver of provisions pursuant to
Section 1332, holding state Medicaid and CHIP policies constant.
As the Departments receive and review waiver proposals, we will
continue to examine the types of changes that will be considered in
assessing State Innovation Waivers.
Nothing in this guidance alters a state's authority to make changes
to its Medicaid and CHIP policies consistent with applicable law. This
guidance does not alter the Secretary of Health and Human Services'
authority or CMS' policy regarding review and approval of Section 1115
demonstrations, and states should continue to work with CMS' Center for
Medicaid and CHIP Services on issues relating to Section 1115
demonstrations. A state may submit a coordinated waiver application as
provided in 31 CFR 33.102 and 45 CFR 155.1302; in such a case, each
waiver will be evaluated independently according to applicable Federal
laws.
III. Federal Pass-Through Funding
The amount of Federal pass-through funding equals the Secretaries'
annual estimate of the Federal cost (including outlays and forgone
revenue) for Exchange financial assistance provided pursuant to the ACA
that would be claimed by participants in the Exchange in the state in
the calendar year in the absence of the waiver, but will not be claimed
as a result of the waiver. The calculation of the amount of pass-
through funding does not account for any other changes in Federal
spending or revenues as a result of the waiver, including Federal
administrative expenses for making the payments (note, however that
changes to Federal spending on administrative expenses is considered in
determining whether a waiver proposal meets the deficit neutrality
requirement). The estimates take into account experience in the
relevant state and similar states. The amount is calculated annually.
The waiver application must provide analysis and supporting data to
inform the estimate of the pass-through funding amount. For states that
do not utilize a Federally-facilitated or state Partnership Exchange
this includes information about enrollment, premiums, and Exchange
financial assistance in the state's Exchange by age, income, and type
of policy, and other information as may be required by the Secretaries.
For further information on the demographic and economic assumptions
to be used in determining the pass-through amount, see Section IV
below.
IV. Economic Assumptions and Methodological Guidelines
The determination of whether a waiver meets the requirements under
Section 1332 and the calculation of the pass-through funding amount are
made using generally accepted actuarial and economic analytic methods
such as micro-simulation. The analysis relies on assumptions and
methodologies that are similar to those used to produce the baseline
and policy projections included in the most recent President's Budget
(or Mid-Session Review), but adapted as appropriate to reflect state-
specific conditions.
The analysis is based on state-specific estimates of the current
level and distribution of population by the relevant economic and
demographic characteristics, including income and source of health
coverage. It generally uses Federal estimates of population growth,
economic growth as published in the Analytical Perspectives volume
released as part of the President's Budget (https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Analytical_Perspectives) and health care cost growth
(https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/?redirect=/NationalHealthExpendData/.) to project the initial state variables
through the ten-year Budget plan window. However, in limited
circumstances where it is expected that a state will experience
substantially different trends than the nation as a whole in the
absence of a waiver, the Secretaries may determine that state-specific
assumptions will be used.
Estimates of the effect of the waiver assume, in accordance with
standard estimating conventions, that macroeconomic variables like
population, output, and labor supply are not affected by the waiver.
However, estimates take into account, as appropriate, other changes in
the behavior of individuals, employers, and other relevant entities
induced by the waiver, including employer decisions regarding what
coverage (and other compensation) they offer and individual decisions
regarding whether to take up coverage. The same state-specific and
Federal data, assumptions, and model are used to calculate
comprehensiveness, affordability, and coverage, and relevant state
components of Federal taxes and spending under the waiver and under
current law.
The analysis and information submitted by the state as part of the
application must conform to these standards. The application must
describe all modeling assumptions used, sources of state-specific data,
and the rationale for any deviation from Federal forecasts. A state may
be required to provide to the Secretaries copies of any data used for
their waiver analyses that are not publicly available so that the
Secretaries can independently verify the analysis produced by the
state.
V. Operational Considerations
A. Federally-Facilitated Exchanges
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) operates the
Federally-
[[Page 78135]]
facilitated Exchange (FFE) platform. Certain changes that affect FFE
processes may make a waiver proposal not feasible to implement at this
time. Until further guidance is issued, the Federal platform cannot
accommodate different rules for different states. For example, waivers
that would require changes to the calculation of Exchange financial
assistance, non-standard enrollment period determinations, customized
plan management review options, or changes to the design used to
display plan options are generally not feasible at this time due to
operational limitations. In addition, the Federal platform cannot
accommodate changes to its plan management templates in the near term.
States contemplating a waiver that requires such changes may consider
establishing their own platform administered by the state.
As noted in Section I.D. of this guidance, costs associated with
changes to Federal administrative processes are taken into account in
determining whether a waiver application satisfies the deficit
neutrality requirement. Regulations at 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part
155, subpart N require that such costs be included in the 10-year
budget plan submitted by the state.
B. Internal Revenue Service
Certain changes that affect Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
administrative processes may make a waiver proposal not feasible to
implement. At this time, the IRS is not generally able to administer
different sets of rules in different states. As a result, while a state
may propose to entirely waive the application of one or more of the tax
provisions listed in Section 1332 to taxpayers in the state, it is
generally not feasible to design a waiver that would require the IRS to
administer an alteration to these provisions for taxpayers in the
state. For example, it is generally not feasible to have the IRS
administer a different set of eligibility rules for the premium tax
credit for residents of a particular state. States contemplating a
waiver proposal that includes a modified version of a Federal tax
provision may consider waiving the provision entirely and relying on a
tax program administered by the state.
In addition, a waiver proposal that completely waives one or more
tax provisions in a state may create administrative costs for the IRS.
As noted in Section I.D. above, costs associated with changes to
Federal administrative processes are taken into account in determining
whether a waiver application satisfies the deficit neutrality
requirement. Regulations at 31 CFR part 33 and 45 CFR part 155, subpart
N require that such costs be included in the 10-year budget plan
submitted by the state.
VI. Public Input on Waiver Proposals
Consistent with the statutory provisions of Section 1332,
regulations at 31 CFR 33.112 and 45 CFR 155.1312 require states to
provide a public notice and comment period for a waiver application
sufficient to ensure a meaningful level of public input prior to
submitting an application. As part of the public notice and comment
period, a state with one or more Federally-recognized tribes must
conduct a separate process for meaningful consultation with such
tribes. Because State Innovation Waiver applications may vary
significantly in their complexity and breadth, the regulations provide
states with flexibility in determining the length of the comment period
required to allow for meaningful and robust public engagement. The
comment period must be sufficient to ensure a meaningful level of
public input and in no case can be less than 30 days.
Consistent with HHS regulations, waiver applications must be posted
online in a manner that meets national standards to assure access to
individuals with disabilities. Such standards are issued by the
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, and are
referred to as ``section 508'' standards. Alternatively, the World Wide
Web Consortium's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level
AA standards would also be considered as acceptable national standard
for Web site accessibility. For more information, see the WCAG Web site
at https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.
Section 1332 and its implementing regulations also require the
Federal Government to provide a public notice and comment period, once
the Secretaries receive an application. The period must be sufficient
to ensure a meaningful level of public input and must not impose
requirements that are in addition to, or duplicative of, requirements
imposed under the Administrative Procedures Act, or requirements that
are unreasonable or unnecessarily burdensome with respect to state
compliance. As with the comment period described above, the length of
the comment period should reflect the complexity of the proposal and in
no case can be less than 30 days.
Dated: December 8, 2015.
Andrew M. Slavitt,
Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
Dated: December 11, 2015.
Sylvia M. Burwell,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
Approved: December 10, 2015.
Mark J. Mazur,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2015-31563 Filed 12-11-15; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4150-28-P