Medicare Program; Durable Medical Equipment Fee Schedule Adjustments To Resume the Transitional 50/50 Blended Rates To Provide Relief in Rural Areas and Non-Contiguous Areas, 21912-21925 [2018-10084]
Download as PDF
21912
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. The CRA allows the issuing
agency to make a rule effective sooner
than otherwise provided by the CRA if
the agency makes a good cause finding
that notice-and-comment rulemaking
procedures are impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public
interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has
made a good cause finding for this rule
as discussed in Section II.B of this
document, including the basis for that
finding.
IV. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action
is provided by sections 110, 126 and
307 of the CAA as amended (42 U.S.C.
7410, 7426 and 7607).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practices and
procedures, Air pollution control,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxides, Ozone.
Dated: May 3, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018–09892 Filed 5–8–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Part 414
[CMS–1687–IFC]
RIN 0938–AT21
Medicare Program; Durable Medical
Equipment Fee Schedule Adjustments
To Resume the Transitional 50/50
Blended Rates To Provide Relief in
Rural Areas and Non-Contiguous
Areas
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Interim final rule with comment
period.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
This interim final rule with
comment period makes technical
amendments to the regulation to reflect
the extension of the transition period
from June 30, 2016 to December 31,
2016 that was mandated by the 21st
Century Cures Act for phasing in fee
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
schedule adjustments for certain
durable medical equipment (DME) and
enteral nutrition paid in areas not
subject to the Durable Medical
Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and
Supplies (DMEPOS) Competitive
Bidding Program (CBP). In addition, this
interim final rule with comment period
amends the regulation to resume the
transition period’s blended fee schedule
rates for items furnished in rural areas
and non-contiguous areas (Alaska,
Hawaii, and United States territories)
not subject to the CBP from June 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018. This
interim final rule with comment period
also makes technical amendments to
existing regulations for DMEPOS items
and services to reflect the exclusion of
infusion drugs used with DME from the
DMEPOS CBP.
DATES:
Effective date: The provisions of this
interim final rule with comment period
are effective on June 1, 2018.
Comment date: To be assured
consideration, comments must be
received at one of the addresses
provided below, no later than 5 p.m. on
July 9, 2018.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer
to file code CMS–1687–IFC. Because of
staff and resource limitations, we cannot
accept comments by facsimile (FAX)
transmission.
Comments, including mass comment
submissions, must be submitted in one
of the following three ways (please
choose only one of the ways listed):
1. Electronically. You may submit
electronic comments on this regulation
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–1687–IFC, P.O. Box 8010,
Baltimore, MD 21244–8010.
Please allow sufficient time for mailed
comments to be received before the
close of the comment period.
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–1687–IFC,
Mail Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850.
For information on viewing public
comments, see the beginning of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laurence Wilson, 410–786–4602 and
DMEPOS@cms.hhs.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Inspection
of Public Comments: All comments
received before the close of the
comment period 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 before the close of the
comment period on the following
website as soon as possible after they
have been received: https://
regulations.gov. Follow the search
instructions on that website to view
public comments.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
C. Summary of Costs and Benefits
II. Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,
Orthotics Supplies (DMEPOS) Fee
Schedule and Competitive Bidding
Program (CBP)
A. Background for Payment Revisions for
Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,
Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS)
1. Fee Schedule Payment Basis for Certain
DMEPOS
2. DMEPOS CBP
a. Payment Basis
b. Geographic Areas Designated Under the
DMEPOS CBPs
B. Background on the Methodology for
Adjusting Payment Amounts for Certain
DMEPOS Using Information From
DMEPOS CBPs
C. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee
Schedule Adjustments
1. Statutory Mandate To Reconsider Fee
Schedule Adjustments
2. Fee Schedule Adjustment Impact
Monitoring Data
3. Restoring Transitional Blended Fee
Schedule Rates in Rural Areas and NonContiguous Areas
D. Fee Schedule Amounts for Accessories
Used With Group 3 Complex
Rehabilitative Power Wheelchairs
E. Technical Changes To Conform the
Regulation to Section 5004(b) of the 21st
Century Cures Act (the Cures Act):
Exclusion of DME Infusion Drugs Under
CBPs
III. Provisions of the Interim Final Rule With
Comment Period
A. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee
Schedule Adjustments
B. Technical Changes To Conform the
Regulation to Section 5004(b) of the
Cures Act: Exclusion of DME Infusion
Drugs Under CBPs
IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking
V. Collection of Information Requirements
VI. Response to Comments
VII. Economic Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Introduction
2. Statement of Need
3. Overall Impact
B. Detailed Economic Analysis
a. Effects on the Medicare Program and
Beneficiaries
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
b. Impact on Beneficiaries and Other
Payers
c. Alternatives Considered
d. Regulatory Familiarization Costs
C. Accounting Statement
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis
X. Federalism Analysis
XI. Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
XII. Congressional Review Act
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
This interim final rule with comment
period amends the regulation at 42 CFR
414.210(g)(9) to reflect the extension of
the transition period for phasing in fee
schedule adjustments for certain
durable medical equipment (DME) and
enteral nutrition paid in areas not
subject to the Durable Medical
Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and
Supplies (DMEPOS) Competitive
Bidding Program (CBP) through
December 31, 2016, mandated by
section 16007(a) of the 21st Century
Cures Act (the Cures Act) (Pub. L. 114–
255). In addition, in light of
information, the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS) has gathered
in accordance with section 16008 of the
Cures Act, this interim final rule with
comment period resumes the transition
period for phasing in adjusted fee
schedule rates for DME items and
services furnished in rural areas and
non-contiguous areas (Alaska, Hawaii,
and United States (U.S.) territories) not
subject to the CBP from June 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018. It also
makes technical amendments to existing
regulations for DMEPOS items and
services to reflect the exclusion of
infusion drugs used with DME from the
DMEPOS CBP, as required by section
5004(b) of the Cures Act.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
• Transition Period for Phase in of
Adjustments to Fee Schedule Amounts:
We are amending § 414.210(g)(9)(i) to
reflect the extension of the transition
period to December 31, 2016 for phasing
in adjustments to the fee schedule
amounts for certain items based on
information from the DMEPOS CBP that
was required by section 16007(a) of the
Cures Act. In addition, we are adding
§ 414.210(g)(9)(iii) to resume the fee
schedule adjustment transition period
in rural areas and non-contiguous areas
effective June 1, 2018, in light of
concerns regarding the impact of the full
fee schedule adjustments in rural and
non-contiguous areas, so that the 50/50
blended fee schedule rates will apply
for certain items and services furnished
in rural and non-contiguous areas from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
June 1, 2018 through December 31,
2018. We are also amending
§ 414.210(g)(9)(ii) to reflect that for
items and services furnished with dates
of service from January 1, 2017 to May
31, 2018, and on or after January 1,
2019, the fee schedule amount for the
area is equal to 100 percent of the
adjusted payment amount. We are
soliciting comments on the resumption
of the transition period for the phase in
of fee schedule adjustments.
• Technical Change Excluding DME
Infusion Drugs From the DMEPOS CBP:
Section 5004(b) of the Cures Act amends
section 1847(a)(2)(A) of the Social
Security Act (the Act) to exclude drugs
and biologicals described in section
1842(o)(1)(D) of the Act from the
DMEPOS CBP. We are making
conforming changes to the regulation to
reflect the exclusion of infusion drugs,
described in section 1842(o)(1)(D) of
Act, from items subject to the DMEPOS
CBP.
C. Summary of Costs and Benefits
This interim final rule with comment
period resumes the blended adjusted
Medicare fee schedule amounts during
the transition period for certain items
and services that are furnished in rural
and non-contiguous areas not subject to
the CBP beginning June 1, 2018. It is
estimated that these adjustments will
cost $290 million in Medicare benefit
payments and $70 million in Medicare
beneficiary cost sharing for the period
beginning June 1, 2018 and ending
December 31, 2018.
We are unable to quantify the benefits
of this interim final rule with comment
period at this time; however, the goal of
this interim final rule is to preserve
beneficiary access to DME items and
services in rural and non-contiguous
areas not subject to the CBP during a
transition period in which CMS will
continue to study the impact of the
change in payment rates on access to
items and services in these areas. The
alternative to this interim final rule with
comment period would have been to
allow the full phase in of fee schedule
adjustments based on competitive
bidding prices to continue in all noncompetitive bidding areas (non-CBAs).
We believe that resuming the fee
schedule adjustment transition period
in rural and non-contiguous areas
promotes stability in the DMEPOS
market in these areas, and enables CMS
to work with stakeholders to preserve
beneficiary access to DMEPOS.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21913
II. Durable Medical Equipment,
Prosthetics, Orthotics Supplies
(DMEPOS) Fee Schedule and
Competitive Bidding Program (CBP)
A. Background for Payment Revisions
for Durable Medical Equipment,
Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies
(DMEPOS)
1. Fee Schedule Payment Basis for
Certain DMEPOS
Section 1834(a) of the Act governs
payment for DME covered under Part B
and under Part A for a home health
agency and provides for the
implementation of a fee schedule
payment methodology for DME
furnished on or after January 1, 1989.
Sections 1834(a)(2) through (a)(7) of the
Act set forth separate payment
categories of DME and describe how the
fee schedule for each of the following
categories are established:
• Inexpensive or other routinely
purchased items.
• Items requiring frequent and
substantial servicing.
• Customized items.
• Oxygen and oxygen equipment.
• Other covered items (other than
DME).
• Other items of DME (capped rental
items).
Section 1834(h) of the Act governs
payment for prosthetic devices,
prosthetics, and orthotics (P&O) and sets
forth fee schedule payment rules for
P&O. Effective for items furnished on or
after January 1, 2002, payment is also
made on a national fee schedule basis
for parenteral and enteral nutrition
(PEN) in accordance with the authority
under section 1842(s) of the Act. The
term ‘‘enteral nutrition’’ will be used
throughout this document to describe
enteral nutrients, supplies and
equipment covered under the Part B
benefit for prosthetic devices defined at
section 1861(s)(8) of the Act. The
Medicare allowed amount for DMEPOS
items and services paid on a fee
schedule basis is equal to the lower of
the supplier’s actual charge or the fee
schedule amount. We refer readers to
the November 6, 2014 calendar year
(CY) 2015 ESRD PPS final rule entitled
‘‘Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal
Disease Prospective Payment System,
Quality Incentive Program, and Durable
Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,
Orthotics, and Supplies’’ (79 FR 66223
through 66233) for additional
background discussion about DMEPOS
items subject to section 1834 of the Act,
rules for calculating reasonable charges,
and fee schedule payment
methodologies for PEN and for DME
prosthetic devices, prosthetics,
orthotics, and surgical dressings.
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
21914
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
2. DMEPOS CBP
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
a. Payment Basis
The DMEPOS CBP is mandated by
section 1847(a) of the Act and requires
the Secretary of the Department of
Health and Human Services (the
Secretary) to establish and implement
CBPs in competitive bidding areas
(CBAs) throughout the U.S for contract
award purposes for the furnishing of
certain competitively priced DMEPOS
items and services. Section 1847(a)(2) of
the Act describes the items and services
subject to the DMEPOS CBP:
• Off-the-shelf (OTS) orthotics for
which payment would otherwise be
made under section 1834(h) of the Act.
• Enteral nutrients, equipment and
supplies described in section
1842(s)(2)(D) of the Act.
• Certain DME and medical supplies,
which are covered items (as defined in
section 1834(a)(13) of the Act) for which
payment would otherwise be made
under section 1834(a) of the Act.
The DME and medical supplies
category includes items used in infusion
and drugs (other than inhalation drugs)
and supplies used in conjunction with
DME, but excludes devices that have
been classified in class III under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
and Group 3 or higher complex
rehabilitative power wheelchairs and
related accessories when furnished in
connection with such wheelchairs.
Although initially identified in section
1847(a)(2) of the Act, infusion drugs
were excluded from the DMEPOS CBP
by section 5004(b) of the Cures Act.
Sections 1847(a) and (b) of the Act
specify certain requirements and
conditions for implementation of the
Medicare DMEPOS CBP.
Under the DMEPOS CBP, Medicare
sets single payment amounts (SPAs) for
selected DMEPOS items and services
furnished to beneficiaries in CBAs based
on the median of bids submitted by
winning suppliers and accepted by
Medicare for each individual item and
service. For competitively bid items and
services furnished in a CBA, the SPAs
replace the Medicare allowed amounts
established using the lower of the
supplier’s actual charge or the payment
amount recognized under sections
1834(a)(2) through (7) of the Act.
Section 1847(b)(5) of the Act provides
that Medicare payment for
competitively bid items and services is
made on an assignment-related basis,
and is equal to 80 percent of the
applicable SPA, less any unmet Part B
deductible described in section 1833(b)
of the Act.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
B. Background on the Methodology for
Adjusting Payment Amounts for Certain
DMEPOS Using Information From
DMEPOS CBPs
For DME furnished on or after January
1, 2016, section 1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) of the
Act requires the Secretary to use
information on the payment determined
under the DMEPOS CBP to adjust the
fee schedule amounts for DME items
and services furnished in all non-CBAs.
Section 1834(a)(1)(F)(iii) of the Act
requires the Secretary to continue to
make these adjustments as additional
covered items are phased in or
information is updated as new CBP
contracts are awarded. Similarly,
sections 1842(s)(3)(B) and
1834(h)(1)(H)(ii) of the Act authorize the
Secretary to use payment information
from the DMEPOS CBP to adjust the fee
schedule amounts for enteral nutrition
and OTS orthotics, respectively,
furnished in all non-CBAs. Section
1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act requires that in
promulgating the methodology used in
making these adjustments to the fee
schedule amounts, the Secretary
consider the costs of items and services
in areas in which the adjustments
would be applied compared to the
payment rates for such items and
services in the CBAs.
On February 26, 2014, we published
an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal
Register entitled, ‘‘Medicare Program;
Methodology for Adjusting Payment
Amounts for Certain Durable Medical
Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and
Supplies (DMEPOS) Using Information
from Competitive Bidding Programs’’
(79 FR 10754). In that ANPRM, we
solicited stakeholder input on several
factors including whether the costs of
furnishing various DMEPOS items and
services vary based on the geographic
area in which they are furnished in
relation to developing a payment
methodology to adjust DMEPOS fee
schedule amounts or other payment
amounts in non-CBAs based on
DMEPOS competitive bidding payment
information.
We received approximately 185
comments from suppliers,
manufacturers, professional, state and
national trade associations, physicians,
physical therapists, beneficiaries and
their caregivers, and one state
government office. Commenters
generally stated that costs do vary by
geographic region and that costs in rural
and non-contiguous areas of the U.S.
(Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, etc.) are
significantly higher than costs in urban
areas and contiguous areas of the U.S.
One commenter representing many
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
manufacturers and suppliers listed
several key variables or factors that
influence the cost of furnishing items
and services in different areas that
should be considered. This commenter
stated that information on all bids
submitted under the CBP should be
considered and not just the bids of
winning suppliers. Some commenters
expressed concern that the SPAs assume
a significant increase in volume to offset
lower payment amounts. Commenters
also recommended phasing in the
adjusted fee schedule amounts, allowing
for adjustments in fees if access issues
arise, and annual inflation updates to
adjusted fee schedule amounts.
On July 11, 2014, we published the
CY 2015 ESRD PPS proposed rule in the
Federal Register entitled ‘‘Medicare
Program; End-Stage Renal Disease
Prospective Payment System, Quality
Incentive Program, and Durable Medical
Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and
Supplies;’’ (79 FR 40208) as required by
section 1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act, to
establish methodologies for using
information from the CBP to adjust the
fee schedule amounts for items and
services furnished in non-CBAs in
accordance with sections
1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) and 1834(h)(1)(H)(ii) of
the Act. We also proposed making
adjustments to the payment amounts for
enteral nutrition as authorized by
section 1842(s)(3)(B) of the Act.
We received 89 public comments on
the proposed rule, including comments
from patient organizations, patients,
manufacturers, health care systems, and
DME suppliers. We made changes to the
proposed methodologies based on these
comments and finalized a method for
paying higher amounts for certain items
furnished in areas defined as rural areas.
In addition, we provided a 6-month fee
schedule adjustment phase in period
from January through June of 2016,
during which the fee schedule amounts
would be based on 50 percent of the
unadjusted fees and 50 percent of the
adjusted fees to allow time for suppliers
to adjust to the new payment rates and
to monitor the impact of the change in
payment rates on access to items and
services. On November 6, 2014, we
published the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final
rule (79 FR 66223 through 66265) to
finalize the methodologies at
§ 414.210(g) based on public comments
received on the CY 2015 ESRD PPS
proposed rule (79 FR 40208). A
summary of the methodologies are
provided below.
In order to delineate geographic areas
to which adjusted fee schedule amounts
for certain DMEPOS items are applied,
we set forth a methodology to identify
geographic areas using zip codes into 3
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
categories of rural, non-rural, and noncontiguous. We promulgated § 414.202
to define a rural area to mean, for the
purpose of implementing § 414.210(g), a
geographic area represented by a postal
zip code if at least 50 percent of the total
geographic area of the area included in
the zip code is estimated to be outside
any Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)
(79 FR 66228). A rural area also
includes a geographic area represented
by a postal zip code that is a low
population density area excluded from
a CBA in accordance with section
1847(a)(3)(A) of the Act at the time the
rules in § 414.210(g) are applied.
In accordance with § 414.210(g)(1)(i)
through (v), CMS first determines
regional adjustments to the fee schedule
amounts using the 8 regions of the
Bureau of Economic Analysis. Also, the
regional prices are determined and
limited by a national ceiling (110
percent of the average of regional prices)
and floor (90 percent of the average of
regional prices). In addition, adjusted
fee schedules for non-contiguous areas
are based on the higher of the average
of the SPAs for CBAs in areas outside
the contiguous U.S. or the national
ceiling amount in accordance with our
regulations at § 414.210(g)(2)(i) through
(ii). Also, § 414.210(g)(3) specifies
adjustments for low volume items (that
is, bid in only 10 or fewer competitive
bidding programs) are based on 110
percent of the average of the SPAs. In
addition, adjustments for items and
services included in CBPs no longer in
effect is set forth at § 414.210(g)(4). In
cases where the SPAs from the DMEPOS
CBP that are no longer in effect are used
to adjust fee schedule amounts,
§ 414.210(g)(4) provides that the SPAs
be updated by an inflation adjustment
factor for each year from the last year
when the SPAs were in effect to the year
in which the adjustment would go into
effect (for example, 2016) and for each
subsequent year (for example, 2017 and
2018). Furthermore, § 414.210(g)(5)
establishes adjustments for accessories
used with different types of base
equipment in situations where a
Healthcare Common Procedure Coding
System (HCPCS) code describing an
item used with different types of base
equipment is included in more than one
product category in a CBA under the
CBP; a weighted average of the SPAs for
the code is computed for each CBA
prior to applying the other payment
adjustment methodologies in
§ 414.210(g). Finally, in accordance with
§ 414.210(g)(6), adjustments are made to
the SPAs for certain items due to price
inversions under the DMEPOS CBP (for
example, the SPA for a walker without
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
wheels is higher than the SPA for a
walker with wheels) before the SPAs are
used to adjust fee schedule amounts.
For groupings of similar items (for
example, walkers) where price
inversions have occurred, the SPAs for
the items in the grouping are all
adjusted to equal the weighted average
of the SPAs for all of the items in the
grouping. Price inversions are situations
where the higher weighted and higher
priced item at the time of competition
becomes the lower priced item in the
CBP following the competition. For a
discussion regarding adjustments to
SPAs to address price inversions, see
the CY 2017 ESRD PPS proposed rule
published in the Federal Register on
June 30, 2016 entitled ‘‘Medicare
Program; End-Stage Renal Disease
Prospective Payment System, Coverage
and Payment for Renal Dialysis Services
Furnished to Individuals with Acute
Kidney Injury, End-Stage Renal Disease
Quality Incentive Program, Durable
Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,
Orthotics, and Supplies Competitive
Bidding Program Bid Surety Bonds,
State Licensure and Appeals Process for
Breach of Contract Actions, Durable
Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,
Orthotics, and Supplies Competitive
Bidding Program and Fee Schedule
Adjustments, Access to Care Issues for
Durable Medical Equipment, and the
Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease
Care Model’’ (81 FR 42851).
In order to update the adjusted fee
schedule amounts based on new
competitions and provide for a
transitional phase-in period of the fee
schedule adjustments, we established
§ 414.210(g)(8) and (g)(9) in the CY 2015
ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66263). In
§ 414.210(g)(8), the adjusted fee
schedule amounts are updated when an
SPA for an item or service is updated
following one or more new DMEPOS
CBP competitions and as other items are
added to DMEPOS CBP. The fee
schedule amounts that are adjusted
using SPAs are not subject to the annual
DMEPOS covered item update and are
only updated when SPAs from the
DMEPOS CBP are updated. Updates to
the SPAs may occur as contracts are
recompeted. Section 414.210(g)(9)(i),
specifies that the fee schedule
adjustments were phased in for items
and services furnished with dates of
service from January 1, 2016 through
June 30, 2016, so that each fee schedule
amount was adjusted based on a blend
of 50 percent of the fee schedule amount
if not adjusted based on information
from the CBP, and 50 percent of the
adjusted fee schedule amount. Section
414.210(g)(9)(ii) specifies that for items
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21915
and services furnished with dates of
service on or after July 1, 2016, the fee
schedule amounts would be equal to
100 percent of the adjusted fee schedule
amounts. Commenters recommended
CMS phase in the fee schedule
adjustments to give suppliers time to
adjust to the change in payment
amounts (79 FR 66228). Some
commenters recommended a 4-year
phase-in of the adjusted fees. CMS
agreed that phasing in the adjustments
to the fee schedule amounts would
allow time for suppliers to adjust to the
new payment rates and would allow
time to monitor the impact of the
change in payment rates on access to
items and services. We decided 6
months was enough time to monitor
access and health outcomes to
determine if the fee schedule
adjustments created a negative impact
on access to items and services.
Therefore, we finalized a 6-month
phase-in period of the blended rates (79
FR 66228 through 66229).
We finalized the 6-month transition
period from January 1 through June 30,
2016 in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final
rule (79 FR 66223) that was published
in the Federal Register on November 6,
2014. The Cures Act was enacted on
December 13, 2016, and section
16007(a) of the Cures Act extended the
transition period for the phase-in of fee
schedule adjustments at
§ 414.210(g)(9)(i) by 6 additional months
so that fee schedule amounts were based
on a blend of 50 percent of the adjusted
fee schedule amount and 50 percent of
the unadjusted fee schedule amount
until December 31, 2016 (with full
implementation of the fee schedule
adjustments applying to items and
services furnished with dates of service
on or after January 1, 2017).
C. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee
Schedule Adjustments
We have determined that the
transitional period for the phase-in of
adjustments to fee schedule amounts
should be resumed in non-CBA rural
and non-contiguous areas in order to
ensure access to necessary items and
services in these areas. This interim
final rule with comment period amends
§ 414.210(g)(9) to change the end date
for the initial transition period for the
phase-in of adjustments to fee schedule
amounts for certain items based on
information from the DMEPOS CBP
from June 30, 2016 to December 31,
2016, to reflect the extension that was
mandated by section 16007(a) of the
Cures Act. This interim final rule with
comment period also amends
§ 414.210(g)(9) to resume the transition
period for the phase-in of adjustments to
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
21916
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
fee schedule amounts for certain items
furnished in non-CBA rural and noncontiguous areas from June 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018, for the
reasons discussed in this preamble.
1. Statutory Mandate To Reconsider Fee
Schedule Adjustments
After we established the fee schedule
adjustment methodology under
§ 414.210(g), Congress amended section
1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act to require that
CMS take certain steps and factors into
consideration regarding the fee schedule
adjustments for items and services
furnished on or after January 1, 2019, to
ensure that the rates take into account
certain aspects of providing services in
non-CBAs. Specifically, section 16008
of the Cures Act amended section
1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act to require in the
case of items and services furnished on
or after January 1, 2019, that in making
any adjustments to the fee schedule
amounts in accordance with sections
1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) and (iii) of the Act, the
Secretary shall: (1) Solicit and take into
account stakeholder input; and (2) take
into account the highest bid by a
winning supplier in a CBA and a
comparison of each of the following
factors with respect to non-CBAs and
CBAs:
• The average travel distance and cost
associated with furnishing items and
services in the area.
• The average volume of items and
services furnished by suppliers in the
area.
• The number of suppliers in the
area.
On March 23, 2017, CMS hosted a
national provider call to solicit
stakeholder input regarding adjustments
to fee schedule amounts using
information from the DMEPOS CBP.
The national provider call was
announced on March 3, 2017, and we
requested written comments by April 6,
2017. We received 125 written
comments from stakeholders. More than
330 participants called into our national
provider call, with 23 participants
providing oral comments during the
call. In general, the commenters were
mostly suppliers, but also included
manufacturers, trade organizations, and
healthcare providers such as physical
and occupational therapists. These
stakeholders expressed concerns that
the level of the adjusted payment
amounts constrains suppliers from
furnishing items and services to rural
areas. Stakeholders requested an
increase to the adjusted payment
amounts for these areas. The written
comments generally echoed the oral
comments from the call held on March
23, 2017, whereby stakeholders claimed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
that the adjusted fees are not sufficient
to cover the costs of furnishing items
and services in rural and noncontiguous areas and that this is having
an impact on access to items and
services in these areas.
The oral and written comments are
organized into the following categories:
Inadequacy of Adjusted Fee Schedule
Amounts: Commenters claim the
adjusted fee schedule amounts do not
cover the cost of furnishing the items
and are not sustainable. Many
commenters opposed the current
adjusted payment amounts as
insufficient to sustain the current cost of
doing business. Some commenters
stated that current reimbursement levels
are below the cost of doing business.
Many commenters stated they were
billing non-assigned for items, or were
considering billing non-assigned in the
future.
Travel Distance: Commenters claim
the average travel distance and cost for
suppliers serving rural areas are greater
than the average travel distance and cost
for suppliers serving CBAs. Many
commenters described farther travel
distances in rural areas than in nonrural areas. For the purpose of
implementing the fee schedule
adjustment methodologies at
§ 414.210(g), the term ‘‘rural area’’ is
defined at § 414.202 and essentially
includes any areas outside an MSA or
excluded from a CBA.
Volume of Services: Many
commenters asserted that the average
volume of services furnished by
suppliers, when serving non-CBAs, are
lower than the average volume of
services furnished by suppliers, when
serving CBAs. Many commenters stated
that they do not get the same increase
in volume that suppliers who obtain
competitive bidding contracts get,
which does not allow them to have
economies of scale and obtain products
at lower costs. Claims data for 2016 and
2017 indicates that the average volume
of allowed services for suppliers serving
CBAs is significantly higher than the
average volume of allowed services for
suppliers serving non-CBAs,
particularly rural and non-contiguous
areas.
Beneficiary Access: Many commenters
stated that the adjusted fees have
reduced the number of suppliers in the
area, and that this has caused or will
cause beneficiary access issues. Some
commenters explained that they were
the only supplier in the area. Claims
data indicates that the number of
supplier locations furnishing items and
services subject to the fee schedule
adjustments changed from 13,535 in
2015 to 12,617 in 2016.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Adverse Beneficiary Health
Outcomes: Commenters stated that
beneficiaries are going without items
and this is causing adverse health
outcomes. Commenters stated that
hospital readmissions and lengths of
stay, falls, and fractures are increasing
as a result of the fee schedule
reductions.
Delivery Expenses: A few commenters
provided an estimate of how much their
delivery expenses cost, their estimated
service radius, and the average distance
traveled. Several commenters stated that
they have reduced the size of their
service area due to the level of
reimbursement that they are receiving.
Costs in Rural and Non-Contiguous
Areas: Many commenters stated rural
areas have unique costs, costs that are
higher than non-rural areas. Similar to
comments received on our CY 2015
ESRD PPS proposed rule (79 FR 40275
through 40315) and discussed in the CY
2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66223
through 66265), some commenters
stated that a 10 percent payment
increase in rural areas is not enough to
cover costs in rural areas. One
commenter stated that non-contiguous
areas, such as Alaska and Hawaii, face
unique and greater costs due to higher
shipping costs, a smaller amount of
suppliers, and more logistical
challenges related to delivery. Some
commenters stated specific costs, as
well as data sources, that CMS should
take into account when adjusting fees in
non-CBAs. These included the
following: Geographic wage index
factors, gas, taxes, employee wages and
benefits, wear and tear of vehicle,
average per capita income, training,
delivery, set up, historical Medicare
home placement volume, proximity to
nearby CBAs, employing a respiratory
therapist, electricity charges, freight
charges, 24/7 service, documentation
requirements, average per patient cost,
licensing accreditation, surety bonds,
audits, population density, miles and
time between points of service,
regulatory costs, vehicle insurance, and
liability insurance.
Two commenters pointed to the
Ambulance Fee Schedule and one
commenter pointed to the Bureau of
Labor Statistic Consumer Expenditure
Survey as evidence that health care
costs in rural areas are higher than in
urban areas. Another commenter
mentioned the Internal Revenue Service
Mileage Rate, the minimum wage, AAA
Gallon of Gasoline prices, and the price
of a loaf of white bread, to highlight
how the prices of such items have
increased over the years, while
reimbursement for DME has not.
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Using the Highest Winning Bids for
the Adjusted Fee Schedule
Methodology: Five commenters
suggested that the adjusted fee schedule
amounts be based on maximum winning
bids in CBAs rather than the median of
winning bids in CBAs. One commenter
suggested that the maximum winning
bids should be the starting point for the
adjustments and that additional
payment should be added on to these
amounts to pay for the higher costs of
furnishing items and services in nonCBAs.
One of the factors CMS must consider
when making fee schedule adjustments
for items and services furnished on or
after January 1, 2019, in accordance
with section 16008 of the Cures Act, is
the average volume of items and
services furnished by suppliers in an
area. A supplier recoups costs through
the payments made for the items they
furnish. In the case of overhead costs
such as rent, utilities, salaries, and
employee benefits, the more items a
supplier furnishes, the more the
supplier is able to recoup these
overhead costs. Data for items furnished
in 2016 and 2017 shows that the average
volume of items furnished by suppliers
in CBAs exceeds the average volume of
items furnished by suppliers in rural
and non-contiguous areas. The fact that
the volume of items furnished per
supplier in rural and non-contiguous
areas is less than the volume furnished
in CBAs indicates that the cost per item
in rural and non-contiguous areas may
be higher than the cost per item in
CBAs. Because there are fewer suppliers
in CBAs furnishing a higher volume of
items and services, these suppliers
likely have lower costs per item because
they can make up their overhead costs
over more items. In addition, the higher
the volume of items a supplier
furnishes, the larger the volume
purchasing discount is likely to be when
purchasing equipment from a
manufacturer. This supports stakeholder
input that the suppliers in rural and
non-contiguous areas have an average
volume of business less than that of
their counterparts in CBAs, and that this
difference may make it more difficult for
suppliers in rural and non-contiguous
areas to meet their expenses.
In addition, the adjusted fee schedule
amounts for stationary oxygen
equipment in non-contiguous, nonCBAs are lower than the SPA for
stationary oxygen equipment in the
Honolulu, Hawaii, CBA and the
adjusted fee schedule amounts for
stationary oxygen equipment in some
rural areas are lower than the SPAs in
CBAs within the same state. This is due
to the combination of the fee schedule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
adjustments and the budget neutrality
offset that CMS applies to stationary
oxygen equipment and contents due to
the separate oxygen class for oxygen
generating portable equipment (OGPE).
In 2006, CMS established a separate
payment class for OGPE (which are
portable concentrators with transfilling
equipment), through notice and
comment rulemaking (71 FR 65884).
The authority to add this payment class,
located at section 1834(a)(9)(D) of the
Act, only allows CMS to establish new
classes of oxygen and oxygen equipment
if such classes are budget neutral, which
means that the establishment of new
oxygen payment classes does not result
in oxygen and oxygen equipment
expenditures for any year that are more
or less than the expenditures that would
have been made had the new classes not
been established. In accordance with
§ 414.226(c)(6), CMS reduces the fee
schedule amounts for stationary oxygen
equipment in non-CBAs in order to
make the payment classes for oxygen
and oxygen equipment budget neutral as
required by section 1834(a)(9)(D) of the
Act. Due to the combination of the fee
schedule adjustment and the budget
neutrality offset, the adjusted fee
schedule amounts for stationary oxygen
equipment in non-contiguous non-CBAs
and some rural areas are lower than the
SPAs in Honolulu, Hawaii, and CBAs
within the same state, respectively. This
is significant because the current
methodology at 42 CFR 414.210(g)
attempts to ensure that the adjusted fee
schedule amounts for items and services
furnished in rural areas within a state
are no lower than the adjusted fee
schedule amounts for non-rural areas
within the same state. CBAs are areas
where payment for certain DME items
and services is based on SPAs
established under the CBP rather than
adjusted fee schedule amounts. It is
worth noting that CBAs tend to have
higher population densities and
typically correspond with urban census
tracts.
The establishment of the payment
class for OGPE resulted in an increase
in Medicare payments for these items
and services. Therefore, each year, a
budget neutrality offset is applied to the
monthly payment amount for stationary
oxygen equipment to ensure that the
OGPE payment class does not result in
oxygen and oxygen equipment
expenditures that would be more or less
than the expenditures that would have
been made without the OGPE class. As
more beneficiaries shift to using OGPE,
the budget neutrality offset that is
applied to the stationary oxygen
equipment payment rate increases. The
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21917
budget neutrality requirement does not
apply under the DMEPOS CBP because
under section 1847(a) of the Act, the
payment amounts for oxygen and
oxygen equipment are established based
on bids submitted and accepted by
winning suppliers under the program,
and not based on the payment rules
under section 1834(a) of the Act. The
budget neutrality offset has resulted in
payment amounts for stationary oxygen
equipment in CBAs being higher than
the adjusted fee schedule amounts in
some cases. Restoring the blended fee
schedule rates paid in rural and noncontiguous non-CBAs during the
transition period would result in fee
schedule amounts for oxygen and
oxygen equipment in these areas being
higher than the SPAs paid in all of the
CBAs. Therefore, payment at the
blended rates would avoid situations
where payment for furnishing oxygen in
a rural or non-contiguous, non-CBA is
lower than payment for furnishing
oxygen in a CBA.
2. Fee Schedule Adjustment Impact
Monitoring Data
Regarding adverse health beneficiary
outcomes, we have been monitoring
claims data from non-CBAs, some of
which pre-dates the implementation of
the fully adjusted fee schedule amounts.
To the extent that this data pre-dates the
implementation of the fully adjusted
fees, it is less likely to demonstrate any
adverse impacts. The data does not
show any observable trends indicating
an increase in adverse health outcomes
such as mortality, hospital and nursing
home admission rates, monthly hospital
and nursing home days, physician visit
rates, or emergency room visits in 2016
or 2017 compared to 2015 in the nonCBAs, overall. In addition, we have
been monitoring data on the rate of
assignment in non-CBAs, which reflects
when suppliers are accepting Medicare
payment as payment in full and not
balance billing beneficiaries for the cost
of the DME. More importantly, the
monitoring data does not indicate the
extent to which suppliers that have not
already exited the Medicare program are
struggling to maintain current service
levels or individual cases where access
or health outcomes may have been
affected. We are soliciting comments on
ways to improve our fee schedule
adjustment impact monitoring data.
3. Resuming Transitional Blended Fee
Schedule Rates in Rural and NonContiguous Areas
The monitoring data described in
section II.C.2 of this interim final rule
with comment is retrospective claims
data for payment of items already
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
21918
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
furnished. Stakeholders state that this
data is of limited utility in assessing the
development of adverse trends in access
to items and services, or that the health
of beneficiaries is being negatively
affected by the fully adjusted fee
schedule amounts. Claims data does not
capture all of the challenges
experienced by beneficiaries and
suppliers, such as suppliers going out of
business or timely delivery of items.
Further, this claims data is also limited
to a retrospective view to address
potential future problems. In other
words, it does not serve as a tool that
can guard against the negative outcomes
raised by stakeholders, as discussed
elsewhere in the preamble. In fact, the
Government Accountability Office
(GAO) acknowledged challenges
associated with the monitoring of
DMEPOS and the CBP in its review of
the first year of the DMEPOS CBP
Round 1 Rebid, stating that the
monitoring methods used by CMS in
assessing the impact of competitive
bidding did not directly show whether
beneficiaries received the DME they
needed on time.1 We do note, however,
that the Office of Inspector General
(OIG) has found that the
implementation of Round 2 Competitive
Bidding did not appear to disrupt
beneficiary access to CPAP/RAD
equipment.2
Approximately 85 percent of the DME
industry are considered small
businesses according to the Small
Business Administration’s size
standards. According to Medicare
claims data, the number of supplier
locations furnishing DME items and
services subject to the fee schedule
adjustments decreased by 22 percent
from 2013 to 2016. In 2016 alone there
was a 7 percent decline from the
previous year in the number of DME
supplier locations furnishing items and
services subject to the fee schedule
adjustments. The magnitude of this
decline in DME supplier locations, from
13,535 (2015) to 12,617 (2016),3
indicates that the number of DME
supplier locations serving these areas
continues to decline. Based on partial
year data, there was a further reduction
1 U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Medicare: Review of the First Year of CMS’s
Durable Medical Equipment Competitive Bidding
Program’s Round 1 Rebid, May 2012 (GAO–12–
693), https://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590712.pdf
(accessed 4 November 2015), page 42.
2 Office of Inspector General. U.S. Department of
Health & Human Services. Round 2 Competitive
Bidding for CPAP/RAD: Disrupted Access Unlikely
for Devices, Inconclusive for Supplies, June 2017
(OEI–01–15–00040).
3 Medicare claims process through November 3,
2017
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
in supplier locations of 9 percent in
2017.4
There are additional factors that
section 16008 of the Cures Act requires
us to take into account in making
adjustments to the fee schedule amounts
for items and services furnished
beginning in 2019. We know that the
average volume of items and services
furnished per supplier in non-CBAs is
significantly less than the average
volume of items and services furnished
per supplier in CBAs. Additionally, the
number of suppliers in general has been
steadily decreasing over time and this
trend is not abating. As the number of
suppliers serving non-CBAs continues
to decline, the volume of items and
services furnished by the remaining
suppliers is increasing. However, we do
not know if the suppliers that remain
will have the financial ability to
continue expanding their businesses to
continue to satisfy market demand. We
also do not know if large suppliers
serving both urban and rural areas will
continue to serve the rural areas
representing a much smaller percentage
of their business than urban areas. We
specifically address the stakeholder
comments and concerns below.
Based on the stakeholder comments
and decrease in the number of supplier
locations, there is an immediate need to
resume the transitional, blended fee
schedule amounts in rural and noncontiguous areas. Resuming these
transitional blended rates will preserve
beneficiary access to needed DME items
and services in a contracting supplier
marketplace, while allowing CMS to
address the adequacy of the fee
schedule adjustment methodology, as
required by section 16008 of the Cures
Act. We recognize that reduced access
to DME may put beneficiaries at risk of
poor health outcomes or increase the
length of hospital stays.
Suppliers have noted that they have
struggled under the fully adjusted fee
schedule and that they do not believe
they can continue to furnish the items
and services at the current rates.
Stakeholders overwhelmingly have
stated that the fully adjusted fee
schedule amounts are not sufficient to
cover supplier costs for furnishing items
and services in rural and noncontiguous areas and the number of
suppliers furnishing items in these areas
continues to decline. Further, section
16008 of the Cures Act mandates that
we consider stakeholder input and
4 There were 12,537 supplier locations furnishing
items subject to the fee reductions in 2016, based
on claims processed through April 6, 2017, and
11,384 supplier locations furnishing items subject
to the fee reductions in 2017, based on claims
processed through April 7, 2018.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
additional information in making fee
schedule adjustments based on
information from the DMEPOS CBP for
items and services furnished beginning
in 2019. The information we have
collected, however, includes input from
many stakeholders indicating that the
fully adjusted fee schedule amounts are
too low and that this is having an
adverse impact on beneficiary access to
items and services, particularly in rural
and non-contiguous areas. Given the
strong stakeholder concern about the
continued viability of many DMEPOS
suppliers, coupled with the Cures Act
mandate to consider additional
information material to setting fee
schedule adjustments, it would be
unwise to continue with the fully
adjusted fee schedule rates in the
vulnerable rural and non-contiguous
areas for 7 months. Any adverse impacts
on beneficiary health outcomes, or on
small businesses exiting the market,
could be irreversible. It is in the best
interest of the beneficiaries living in
these areas to maintain a blend of the
historic unadjusted fee schedule
amounts and fee schedule amounts
adjusted using SPAs established under
the DMEPOS CBP to prevent suppliers
that might be on the verge of closing
from closing, as they may be the only
option for beneficiaries in these areas.
While our systematic monitoring in
these areas has not shown problematic
trends to this point, that monitoring by
its nature looks backward and reflects
other limitations, as discussed in
section II.C.2 of this interim final rule
with comment. Given the rapid changes
in health care delivery that may
disproportionately impact rural and
more isolated geographic areas, there is
concern that the continued decline of
the fees and the number of suppliers in
such areas may impact beneficiary
access to items and services. These
adjustments would maintain a balance
between the higher historic rates and
rates adjusted based on bidding in larger
metropolitan areas where suppliers
furnish a much larger volume of
DMEPOS items and services and
support continued access to services. In
order to safeguard beneficiaries’ access
to necessary items and services, we
should immediately resume the
transition period for the phase-in of fee
schedule adjustments in these areas that
was in place during CY 2016. Therefore,
we are revising § 414.210(g)(9) to
resume the fee schedule adjustment
transition rates for items and services
furnished in rural and non-contiguous
areas from June 1, 2018 through
December 31, 2018, while we further
analyze this issue. During this extended
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
transition period, CMS will take into
account the information required by
section 16008 of the Cures Act in
determining whether changes to the
methodology for adjusting fee schedule
amounts for items furnished on or after
January 1, 2019, are necessary.
D. Fee Schedule Amounts for
Accessories Used With Group 3
Complex Rehabilitative Power
Wheelchairs
In the CY 2010 final rule (75 FR
73390) published in the Federal
Register on November 29, 2010, entitled
‘‘Medicare Program; Payment Policies
Under the Physician Fee Schedule and
Other Revisions to Part B for CY 2011,’’
we reviewed the HCPCS coding for
power wheelchairs that were updated in
2006 in response to the release of the
Power Mobility Device Coding
Guidelines published by the DME
Medicare Administrative Contractors.
Codes were added to the HCPCS for
various types of power wheelchair
bases, differentiated based on level of
performance, with group 1 being the
lowest and group 3 being the highest
level covered by Medicare, and the
ability to accommodate complex
rehabilitative power options such as
power seating systems or a specialty
interface, such as sip and puff controls.
Codes were established at both the
group 2 and 3 performance level for
‘‘complex rehabilitative’’ power
wheelchair bases.
Section 154(a)(1)(B) of the Medicare
Improvements for Patients and
Providers Act (MIPPA) of 2008 (Pub. L.
110–275), amended section
1847(a)(2)(A) of the Act to exclude
group 3 or higher complex rehabilitative
power wheelchairs and related
accessories when furnished in
connection with such wheelchairs from
competitive bidding. At the same time,
section 154(a)(1)(A) of MIPPA amended
section 1847(a)(1) of the Act to add
paragraph (D) which terminated Round
1 and required rebidding Round 1 for
the same items and services and the
same areas with some changes. Since we
included group 2 complex rehabilitative
power wheelchairs and related
accessories (including seating systems)
and seat and back cushions, under
Round 1 of the DMEPOS CBP, we were
required to include those wheelchairs
and accessories in the Round 1 Rebid of
the DMEPOS CBP. The accessories
(including seating systems) and
cushions furnished in connection with
group 2 complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs (HCPCS codes K0835
through K0843) are the same items
furnished in connection with group 3
complex rehabilitative power
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
wheelchairs (HCPCS codes K0848
through K0864).
Single payment amounts were
implemented on January 1, 2011, in the
nine Round 1 Rebid areas, for group 1
and 2 standard power wheelchair bases,
group 2 complex rehabilitative power
wheelchair bases, and the
interchangeable accessories used with
the different bases (for example,
batteries used with all power
wheelchairs and power seating systems
used with both group 2 and 3 complex
rehabilitative power wheelchairs). As
noted above, these items are
competitively bid under section 1847 of
the Act, and we did not competitively
bid group 3 wheelchairs or use
competitively bid prices for related
accessories when used with a group 3
wheelchair in the Round 1 Rebid of the
DMEPOS CBP.
Section 1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) of the Act
mandates the adjustment of fee schedule
amounts for items that are furnished in
non-CBAs based on information from
the CBPs beginning on January 1, 2016.
We established a policy under
§ 414.210(g)(5) for adjusting the fee
schedule amounts for accessories used
with different types of base equipment
that are included in one or more
product categories under competitive
bidding in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final
rule (79 FR 66223 through 66233). In
that rulemaking, we stated the Agency’s
belief that it would be unnecessarily
burdensome to have different fee
schedule amounts for the same item
(HCPCS code) when it is used with
similar, but different types of base
equipment, and that the costs of
furnishing the accessory should not vary
significantly based on the type of base
equipment it is used with (79 FR
66230). We finalized § 414.210(g)(5) to
adjust the fee schedule amount for a
HCPCS code for an accessory for use
with all types of base equipment using
pricing information for the item when it
is included in one or more product
categories under competitive bidding.
The adjusted fee schedule amounts for
these common accessories became
effective on January 1, 2016.
Section 2 of the Patient Access and
Medicare Protection Act of 2015 (Pub. L.
114–115) delayed the adjustments to the
fee schedule amounts for accessories
(including seating systems) and seat and
back cushions when furnished in
connection with group 3 complex
rehabilitative power wheelchairs until
January 1, 2017. Subsequently, section
16005 of the Cures Act extended this
delay in the DME fee schedule
adjustments based on competitive
bidding information for certain
wheelchair accessories used with group
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21919
3 complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs from January 1, 2017 until
July 1, 2017. Since the Congress has
acted twice to address the issue, these
legislative actions highlight a general
concern regarding access to this
specialized equipment by the vulnerable
patient population that depends on this
equipment and technology.
Complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs are used by patients
needing functionality, such as head or
sip and puff controls, power tilt or
recline seating, or ventilators mounted
to the wheelchair, which are not
available on standard power
wheelchairs. The ability and
performance of the wheelchair in
meeting the patients’ specialized needs
is critical, and most patients use
wheelchair bases with group 3 level
performance to meet these needs. Far
fewer use group 2 wheelchair bases,
which are the bases that the accessories
were included with under Round 1 of
the DMEPOS CBP.
Section 1847(a)(2)(A) of the Act
provides the categories of items that are
subject to the CBP and excludes certain
complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs recognized by the Secretary
as classified within group 3 or higher
(and related accessories when furnished
in connection with such wheelchairs).
This statutory exclusion should inform
our implementation of section
1834(a)(1)(F) of the Act such that the fee
schedule amounts for wheelchair
accessories and back and seat cushions
used in conjunction with group 3
complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs should not be adjusted
based on the methodologies set forth in
§ 414.210(g)(5). Therefore, as we have
announced in guidance available on the
CMS website in June (located at: https://
www.cms.gov/Center/Provider-Type/
Durable-Medical-Equipment-DMECenter.html) the fee schedule amounts
for wheelchair accessories and back and
seat cushions used in conjunction with
group 3 power wheelchairs continue to
be based on the unadjusted fee schedule
amounts updated by the covered item
update specified in section 1834(a)(14)
of the Act. The fee schedule amounts for
all other accessories used with different
types of base equipment continue to be
calculated in accordance with the
adjustment methodology set forth in
§ 414.210(g)(5) of our regulations.
E. Technical Changes To Conform the
Regulations to Section 5004(b) of the
Cures Act: Exclusion of DME Infusion
Drugs Under CBPs
Section 5004(b) of the Cures Act
amends section 1847(a)(2)(A) of the Act
to exclude drugs and biologicals
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
21920
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
described in section 1842(o)(1)(D) of the
Act from the CBP. We are making
conforming technical changes to the
regulations text consistent with
statutory requirements to exclude drugs
and biologicals from the CBP. We are
amending 42 CFR 414.402 to reflect that
infusion drugs are not included in the
CBP by revising the definition of ‘‘Item’’
in paragraph (2) to add the words ‘‘and
infusion’’ after the words ‘‘other than
inhalation’’. The sentence will read as
follows: ‘‘Supplies necessary for the
effective use of DME other than
inhalation and infusion drugs.’’ We are
also removing a reference to drugs being
included in the CBP by deleting the
phrase ‘‘or subpart I’’ in § 414.412(b)(2).
The sentence will read as follows: ‘‘The
bids submitted for each item in a
product category cannot exceed the
payment amount that would otherwise
apply to the item under subpart C of this
part, without the application of
§ 414.210(g), or subpart D of this part,
without the application of § 414.105.
The bids submitted for items in
accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this
section cannot exceed the weighted
average, weighted by total nationwide
allowed services, as defined in
§ 414.202, of the payment amounts that
would otherwise apply to the grouping
of similar items under subpart C of this
part, without the application of
§ 414.210(g), or subpart D of this part,
without the application of § 414.105.’’
Similarly, we are making a conforming
technical change to § 414.414(f) in the
discussion of ‘‘expected savings’’ so that
infusion drugs are not taken into
account by deleting the words ‘‘or drug’’
and the phrase ‘‘or the same drug under
subpart I’’ from § 414.414(f). The
‘‘expected savings’’ text will read as
follows: ‘‘A contract is not awarded
under this subpart unless CMS
determines that the amounts to be paid
to contract suppliers for an item under
a competitive bidding program are
expected to be less than the amounts
that would otherwise be paid for the
same item under subpart C or subpart
D.’’
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
III. Provisions of the Interim Final Rule
With Comment Period
A. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee
Schedule Adjustments
We are amending § 414.210(g)(9)(i) to
change the end date for the initial
transition period for the phase in of
adjustments to fee schedule amounts for
certain items based on information from
the DMEPOS CBP from June 30, 2016 to
December 31, 2016, as mandated by
section 16007(a) of the Cures Act. We
are also amending § 414.210(g)(9)(ii) to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
reflect that fully adjusted fee schedule
amounts apply from January 1, 2017
through May 31, 2018, and then on or
after January 1, 2019. We are also
adding § 414.210(g)(9)(iii) to resume the
transition period for the phase in of
adjustments to fee schedule amounts for
certain items furnished in rural and
non-contiguous areas from June 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018. Finally, we
are adding § 414.210(g)(9)(iv) to reflect
that fully adjusted fee schedule amounts
apply for certain items furnished in
non-CBA areas other than rural and
non-contiguous areas from June 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018.
As previously stated in section II.C.1
of this interim final rule with comment,
stakeholders overwhelmingly have
stated that the fully adjusted fee
schedule amounts are not sufficient to
cover supplier costs for furnishing items
and services in rural and noncontiguous areas and are impacting
beneficiary health outcomes. Section
16008 of the Cures Act requires CMS to
consider certain factors in making fee
schedule adjustments using information
from the CBP for items and services
furnished in non-CBAs on or after
January 1, 2019. Given the limitations
associated with our retrospective claims
data prevent us from detecting rapidly
developing beneficiary access issues, we
believe we should immediately resume
the blended fee schedule rates in rural
and non-contiguous areas that were in
place during CY 2016, while we further
analyze this issue in order to safeguard
beneficiaries’ access to necessary items
and services in rural and noncontiguous areas. Given that additional
information and factors will be
considered when addressing the fee
schedule adjustments for items and
services furnished on or after January 1,
2019, and that these factors include
differences in costs (yet to be quantified)
associated with furnishing items in
heavier populated CBAs versus less
populated or remote rural and noncontiguous areas, we have concluded
that we should adjust fee schedule
amounts based on competitive bidding
information prior to 2019. The volume
of items furnished per supplier in rural
and non-contiguous areas is far less than
the volume of items furnished per
supplier in CBAs, indicating that the
cost per item in these areas may be
higher than the cost per item in CBAs.
Also, as noted earlier, our systematic
claims monitoring only looks backward
in time and may not detect rapidly
emerging trends, particularly in isolated
or rural areas. We also referenced the
GAO’s acknowledgement that there are
challenges associated with the
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
monitoring CBP. In its report regarding
the first year of the DMEPOS CBP
Round 1 Rebid, the GAO stated that the
monitoring methods used by CMS in
assessing the impact of competitive
bidding did not directly show whether
beneficiaries received the DME needed
on time or whether adverse health
outcomes were caused by problems
accessing DMEPOS. As the fee schedule
amounts and the number of suppliers
continue to decline, we are concerned
that DME access in remote areas of the
country may be negatively affected by
significant payment reductions put in
place prior to a full analysis of the
factors affecting the cost of furnishing
items and services in distinctly different
market areas. We are also concerned
that national chain suppliers may close
locations in more remote areas if the
rate they are paid for furnishing items
in a market where the volume of
services is low does not justify the
overhead expenses of retaining the
locations.
Finally, because this IFC will result in
a change to the 2018 fee schedule
amounts for the various classes of
oxygen and oxygen equipment, the
annual budget neutrality adjustment for
2018, mandated by regulations at
§ 414.226(c)(6), will need to be
recomputed. This annual adjustment to
the monthly payment amount for
stationary oxygen equipment and
oxygen contents is mandated by section
1834(a)(9)(D)(ii) of the Act as a
condition for maintaining the higher
portable oxygen equipment add-on
payment for portable concentrators and
transfilling equipment.
B. Technical Changes To Conform the
Regulations to Section 5004(b) of the
Cures Act: Exclusion of DME Infusion
Drugs Under CBPs
We are making conforming technical
changes to the regulations text
consistent with statutory requirements
to exclude drugs and biologicals from
the CBP. Specifically, we are amending
§ 414.402 to reflect that infusion drugs
are not included in the CBP by revising
the definition of ‘‘Item’’ in paragraph (2)
to add the words ‘‘and infusion’’ after
the words ‘‘other than inhalation’’. We
are also removing a reference to drugs
being included in the CBP by deleting
the phrase ‘‘or subpart I’’ in
§ 414.412(b)(2). Similarly, we are
making a conforming technical change
to the regulations text on ‘‘expected
savings’’ so that infusion drugs are not
taken into account in § 414.414(f) by
deleting the words ‘‘or drug’’ and the
phrase ‘‘or the same drug under subpart
I’’.
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking
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 5 U.S.C. 553(b) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
and section 1871 of the Act.
Specifically, section 553(b) of the APA
requires the agency to publish a notice
of the proposed rule in the Federal
Register that includes a reference to the
legal authority under which the rule is
proposed, and the terms and substances
of the proposed rule or a description of
the subjects and issues involved.
Section 553(c) of the APA further
requires the agency to give interested
parties the opportunity to participate in
the rulemaking through public comment
before the provisions of the rule take
effect. Similarly, section 1871(b)(1) of
the Act requires the Secretary to provide
for notice of the proposed rule in the
Federal Register and provide a period of
not less than 60 days for public
comment. Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
APA and section 1871(b)(2)(C) of the
Act authorize an agency to waive these
procedures, however, if an agency finds
good cause that a notice-and-comment
procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest and incorporates a statement of
the finding and its reasons in the rule
issued. Section 553(d) of the APA
ordinarily requires a 30-day delay in the
effective date of a final rule from the
date of its publication in the Federal
Register. This 30-day delay in effective
date can be waived, however, if an
agency finds good cause to support an
earlier effective date. Section
1871(e)(1)(B)(i) of the Act also prohibits
a rule from taking effect before the end
of the 30-day period that begins the date
that the rule is issued or published.
However, section 1871(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the
Act permits a substantive rule to take
effect before 30 days if the Secretary
finds that a waiver of the 30-day period
is necessary to comply with statutory
requirements or that the 30-day delay
would be contrary to the public interest.
In addition, the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801(a)(3)), requires a 60day delayed effective date for major
rules. However, we can waive the delay
in effective date of the rule if the
Secretary finds, for good cause, that
notice and public procedure is
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest, and incorporates
a statement of the finding and the
reasons in the rule issued (5 U.S.C.
808(2)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
As discussed below, and for reasons
cited throughout this interim final rule
with comment period, we find good
cause to waive notice-and-comment
rulemaking and issue this interim final
rule with comment period to address fee
schedule adjustments based on
information from the CBP in rural and
non-contiguous areas because we
believe it is contrary to the public
interest to go through notice-andcomment rulemaking for this provision.
We also find good cause to waive the
30-day delay in effective date of this
interim final rule with comment period
as a delay in effective date would also
be contrary to the public interest. The
full fee schedule adjustments took effect
on January 1, 2017, and we understand
from stakeholders that some DMEPOS
suppliers cannot exist at the current
fully adjusted fee levels and have
already had to drop out of Medicare,
and even close down. Delaying the
effective date of this interim final rule
with comment period by 30 days could
result in a further decline in the number
of DMEPOS suppliers, and would pose
an unnecessary risk of harm to
beneficiaries in certain areas of the
country that rely on one or a few
suppliers to access to items and services
and these suppliers are no longer able
to furnish the items and services at the
fully adjusted fee schedule amounts. We
also note that in this interim final rule
with comment period, CMS is reverting
to a prior transitional payment policy
that was in place from January 1, 2016
through December 31, 2016, to allow
time for further engagement with
stakeholders, through future notice and
comment rulemaking, in the
development of a long-term, more
sustainable fee schedule adjustment
methodology for items and services
furnished in rural and non-contiguous
areas.
We also find it unnecessary to
undertake notice-and-comment
rulemaking to make technical changes
to conform the regulations to the
statutory requirement under section
5004(b) of the Cures Act that infusion
drugs used with DME be excluded from
the DMEPOS CBP. We also find good
cause to waive the delay in the effective
date for this interim final rule with
comment period because it would be
contrary to the public interest to further
delay updating the regulations to be
consistent with the statute and avoid
possible confusion that infusion drugs
are still subject to competitive bidding,
particularly given that the statutory
exclusion is self-implementing and
already effective.
Although we did not formally publish
a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21921
Federal Register, we have solicited
stakeholder input regarding the impact
of the fee schedule adjustments as
required by section 16008 of the Cures
Act, through a national provider call on
March 23, 2017, as well as through an
accompanying written comment period.
We sought feedback on section 16008 of
the Cures Act, which mandates
stakeholder input on the methodology
for using information from the DMEPOS
CBP for adjusting Medicare fee schedule
amounts paid in non-CBAs.
We received numerous comments
from stakeholders, such as comments
that expressed how the current adjusted
fee schedule is not enough to cover a
DME supplier’s costs of running a
business and that many suppliers are
not able to sustain reductions in
payment of up to 60 percent on average
that resulted from the full fee schedule
adjustments, resulting in a number of
suppliers leaving the business and many
more considering leaving the business
in the near future. Such a result would
negatively impact beneficiaries’ access
to critical items and services necessary
for their care. Some stakeholders
commented that some of the more
remote, high cost areas are served by
only one or a few suppliers. In 2016,
there was a 7 percent decline in the
number of supplier locations furnishing
items and services subject to the fee
schedule adjustments in non-CBAs. The
magnitude of this decline in supplier
locations from 13,535 to 12,617
indicates that the number of supplier
locations serving these areas continues
to decline at the same time that
stakeholders are indicating their
expectations of additional supplier
exits. In situations where there may
only be one supplier serving an area, if
the supplier were to stop furnishing
items (for example oxygen), the
beneficiaries in this area could be
harmed significantly if there are no
suppliers left to deliver replacement of
necessary oxygen. We are concerned
that national chain suppliers of oxygen
may close locations in more remote
areas if the rate they are paid for
furnishing items in a market where the
volume of services is low does not
justify the overhead expenses of
retaining the locations. Due to the
inherent limitation associated with
using retrospective claims data, our
systematic monitoring in these areas has
not been able to reflect problematic
trends identified by numerous
stakeholders. As noted, the GAO has
also acknowledged challenges
associated with the monitoring of
DMEPOS and the CBP, stating that the
monitoring methods used by CMS in
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
21922
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
assessing the impact of competitive
bidding did not directly show whether
beneficiaries received the DME they
needed on time or whether adverse
health outcomes were caused by
problems accessing DMEPOS. Given the
rapid changes in health care delivery
that may disproportionately impact
rural and more isolated geographic
areas, we are concerned that the
continued decline of the fees and the
number of suppliers in such areas may
exacerbate the already emergent access
concerns faced by beneficiaries. In
general, we are concerned that
beneficiaries in certain areas of the
country could lose access to items and
services if they rely on one or a few
suppliers to furnish these items and
services and these suppliers are no
longer able to furnish the items and
services at the fully adjusted fee
schedule amounts.
Our monitoring data, by its very
nature, would not alert us to the present
and imminent threats to beneficiary
access that stakeholders have raised in
recent months. If CMS continues to pay
the fully adjusted payment rates in rural
and non-contiguous areas, it could
further jeopardize the infrastructure of
suppliers that beneficiaries rely on for
access to necessary items and services
in remote areas of the country. Smaller
suppliers that serve remote areas may
not be able to sustain larger reductions
in payment because they have a limited
number of ways to reduce costs. If they
only have one location and a few
employees to begin with, they cannot
close locations or lay off employees to
reduce costs. Larger suppliers that serve
both remote, rural areas and urban areas
may elect to close locations in the
remote areas where volume of services
are significantly lower because the
overhead expense of maintaining the
location may no longer justify retaining
these locations. Therefore, we believe it
is necessary to prevent future, potential
access problems and adverse health
outcomes for beneficiaries by resuming
the fee schedule adjustment transition
period in rural and non-contiguous
areas. Immediately restoring the
blended rates in rural and noncontiguous areas, which will cut the
magnitude of the full adjustments in
half, can prevent potential erosion of the
supplier infrastructure that could
potentially be on the verge of impacting
access and health outcomes in rural and
non-contiguous areas. By restoring the
transition period in rural and noncontiguous areas effective June 1, 2018,
this in essence extends the fee schedule
adjustment phase in period by an
additional 7 months and leaves a gap of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
17 months from January 1, 2017 through
May 31, 2018, during which suppliers
have been subject to the full fee
schedule adjustments in rural and noncontiguous areas. This extended phasein period would end on December 31,
2018, since section 16008 of the Cures
Act mandates that CMS consider certain
factors and information in making fee
schedule adjustments for items and
services furnished on or after January 1,
2019. This gives suppliers serving rural
and non-contiguous areas more time to
adjust their businesses and may prevent
the imminent closure of some supplier
locations, thereby safeguarding
beneficiary access to necessary items
and services in rural and noncontiguous areas. It also prevents
irreparable harm to businesses in rural
and non-contiguous areas that would
not be able to adjust to the full payment
reductions, but might be able to adjust
to smaller reductions in payments
during an interim period until
additional cost information is examined
more closely by CMS to provide a more
accurate reflection of the unique costs of
furnishing items and services in market
areas that are distinctly different from
CBAs. This also allows time for CMS to
receive supplier feedback and analyze
the costs of furnishing DME items in
rural and non-contiguous areas and
other factors identified in section 16008
of the Cures Act. Resuming the fee
schedule adjustment transition period
for an additional 7 months in rural and
non-contiguous areas seems reasonable
during this interim period to allow for
the more in depth analysis of the factors
and information to be considered in
accordance with section 16008 of the
Cures Act.
In light of these concerns, while we
consider broader changes to the fee
schedule adjustment methodology as
required by section 16008 of the Cures
Act, we believe there is good cause to
issue this interim final rule with
comment period to revise
§ 414.210(g)(9) to immediately restore
the fee schedule adjustment transition
period in rural and non-contiguous
areas. Resuming the transition period
and blended rates based on adjusted and
unadjusted fee schedule amounts for
items and services furnished in rural
and non-contiguous areas from June 1,
2018 through December 31, 2018, will
allow additional time for suppliers
serving rural and non-contiguous areas
to adjust their businesses, prevent
suppliers that beneficiaries may rely on
for access to items and services in rural
and non-contiguous areas from exiting
the business, and allow additional time
for CMS to monitor the impact of the
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
blended rates. We believe it is contrary
to the public interest to go through
notice and comment rulemaking
because of the stakeholder input we
have already solicited that supports this
change and because any further delay in
implementation risks impeding
beneficiary access to DME in rural and
non-contiguous areas. To further delay
restoring the transitional fee schedule
rates in rural and non-contiguous areas
for additional months raises the access
concerns described earlier in the
preamble. As such, in
§ 414.210(g)(9)(iii), for items and
services furnished in rural and noncontiguous areas on or after June 1,
2018, the payment adjustments will be
based on a blend of 50 percent of the
unadjusted fee schedule amount and 50
percent of the adjusted payment amount
established in accordance with the
methodologies in § 414.210(g)(1)
through (8). We are also amending
§ 414.210(g)(9)(ii) to reflect that for
items and services furnished with dates
of service from January 1, 2017 to May
31, 2018, the fee schedule amount for
the area is equal to 100 percent of the
adjusted payment amount.
We note that this rule is urgent to
preserve beneficiary access to DME
items and services in rural and noncontiguous areas during this transition
period, that CMS is continuing to study
the impact of the change in payment
rates on access to items and services in
these areas, and that we intend to
undertake subsequent notice-andcomment rulemaking for CY 2019.
Section 5004(b) of the Cures Act
further amends section 1847(a)(2)(A) of
the Act to exclude drugs and biologicals
described in section 1842(o)(1)(D) of the
Act. We are finalizing conforming
regulatory changes to reflect our
interpretation of these statutory
requirements to exclude infusion drugs,
described in section 1842(o)(1)(D) of the
Act, as a covered item that could be
subject to the DMEPOS CBPs. Because
this is just a minor technical change to
conform the language in the regulations
to the statute, we believe that a notice
and comment period for this change is
unnecessary.
Therefore, as noted above, we find
good cause to waive the notice of
proposed rulemaking to address fee
schedule adjustments in rural and noncontiguous areas based on information
from the CBP, and to make technical
changes to the regulations so they
conform to the statutory requirement
under section 5004(b) of the Cures Act
that infusion drugs used with DME be
excluded from the DMEPOS CBP. We
also find good cause to waive the delay
in effective date and issue this interim
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
21923
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
final rule with comment period with an
effective date of June 1, 2018. We are
providing a 60-day public comment
period.
V. Collection of Information
Requirements
This document does not impose
information collection requirements,
that is, reporting, recordkeeping or
third-party disclosure requirements.
Consequently, there is no need for
review by the Office of Management and
Budget under the authority of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
VI. Response to Comments
Because of the large number of public
comments we normally receive on
Federal Register documents, we are not
able to acknowledge or respond to them
individually. We will consider all
comments we receive by the date and
time specified in the DATES section of
this preamble, and, when we proceed
with a subsequent document, we will
respond to the comments in the
preamble to that document.
VII. Economic Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Introduction
We have examined the impacts of this
interim final rule with comment period
as required by Executive Order 12866
on Regulatory Planning and Review
(September 30, 1993), Executive Order
13563 on Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review (January 18, 2011),
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), the Congressional Review Act (5
U.S.C. 804(2)), and Executive Order
13771 on Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs (January
30, 2017).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct 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). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as an action that is likely to
result in a rule: (1) Having an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more in any 1 year, or adversely and
materially affecting a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or state, local or tribal
governments or communities (also
referred to as ‘‘economically
significant’’); (2) creating a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfering
with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially altering
the budgetary impacts of entitlement
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects ($100
million or more in any 1 year). We
estimate that this rulemaking is
‘‘economically significant’’ as measured
by the $100 million threshold, and
hence also a major rule under the
Congressional Review Act. In addition,
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that the actions
are significant within the meaning of
section 3(f)(4) of the Executive Order.
Accordingly, we have prepared a
Regulatory Impact Analysis that to the
best of our ability presents the costs and
benefits of the rulemaking. Therefore,
OMB has reviewed this interim final
rule with comment period, and the
Departments have provided the
following assessment of their impact.
We solicit comments on the regulatory
impact analysis provided.
2. Statement of Need
This interim final rule with comment
period amends the regulation to revise
the date that the initial fee schedule
adjustment transition period ended and
resumes the fee schedule adjustment
transition period for certain DME items
and services and enteral nutrition
furnished in rural and non-contiguous
areas not subject to the DMEPOS CBP
from June 1, 2018 through December 31,
2018. This interim final rule with
comment period also makes technical
amendments to existing regulations for
DMEPOS items and services to note the
exclusion of infusion drugs used with
DME from the DMEPOS CBP.
3. Overall Impact
The interim final rule with comment
period resumes the transitional adjusted
Medicare fee schedule amounts for
certain items and services that are
furnished in rural and non-contiguous
areas beginning June 1, 2018 until
December 31, 2018. It is estimated that
these fee schedule adjustments will cost
over $290 million in Medicare Part B
benefit payments and $70 million in
Medicare beneficiary cost sharing. For
dual eligible beneficiaries Medicaid
pays the cost sharing. The Medicaid
payment is split between a Federal
portion and the states’ portion, which
for this rule is $10 million and $10
million, respectively.
B. Detailed Economic Analysis
a. Effects on the Medicare Program and
Beneficiaries
This interim final rule with comment
period resumes transitional adjusted
Medicare fee schedule amounts for
certain items and services furnished in
rural and non-contiguous areas
beginning June 1, 2018 until December
31, 2018. It is estimated that these
adjustments will cost over $290 million
in Medicare Part B benefit payments
and $70 million in beneficiary cost
sharing. The suppliers will get increased
revenue from the increased fee schedule
amounts. See Table 1.
TABLE 1—CASH IMPACT OF RESUMING THE ADJUSTED FEE SCHEDULE TRANSITION
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
FY
Impact on the benefit
payments in dollars
(to the nearer 10 million) 1
Impact on beneficiary
cost sharing in dollars
(to the nearer 10 million) 2
Federal share
of Medicaid 3
States’ share
of Medicaid 3
2018 .................................................
2019 .................................................
170
120
40
30
5
5
5
5
1 Does
not include premium offset.
Medicaid payments.
made for dual eligible Medicare beneficiaries.
2 Includes
3 Copayments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
21924
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
b. Impact on Beneficiaries and Other
Payers
In order to preserve beneficiary access
to DME items and services, this rule, as
indicated above, will result in a $70
million dollar Medicare cost sharing
increase to the beneficiaries. For those
beneficiaries who have supplemental
insurance, this increase may be covered
by supplemental insurance programs
(for example, Medigap). This is a
temporary time-limited extension of the
fee schedule adjustment transition
period.
For dual eligible beneficiaries,
Medicaid pays the cost sharing. The
Medicaid payment is split between a
Federal portion and the states’ portion,
which for this rule is $10 million and
$10 million, respectively.
Beneficiaries who do not have
supplemental insurance or who are not
dual eligible will have increased cost
sharing as a result of this interim final
rule with comment period.
c. Alternatives Considered
One alternative considered to address
concerns about access to items and
services in non-CBAs would be to apply
the 50/50 blended rates in all non-CBAs,
since stakeholders commented
regarding problems related to access to
necessary items and services in all nonCBAs. This would cost $570 million in
Medicare Part B benefit payments and
$140 million in beneficiary cost sharing.
Of the $140 million in beneficiary cost
sharing, $45 million is the Medicaid
impact for dual eligibles, of which $25
million is the Federal portion, and $20
million is the state portion. A second
alternative would be to apply the
blended rates in all non-CBAs, but
change the blend from 50 percent
unadjusted fee and 50 percent adjusted
fee to 25 percent unadjusted fee and 75
percent adjusted fee. This would cost
$290 million in Medicare Part B benefit
payments and $70 million in beneficiary
cost sharing. Of the $70 million in
beneficiary cost sharing, $20 million is
the Medicaid impact for dual eligibles,
of which $10 million is the Federal
portion, and $10 million is the state
portion. Table 2 compared the annual
costs of these alternative rules to the
annual costs of the interim final rule
with comment period.
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF THE COSTS OF ALTERNATIVE RULES WITH THE INTERIM FINAL RULE WITH COMMENT PERIOD
FY
Interim
final rule
50/50 Blend in
all non-CBAs
25/75 Blend in
all non-CBAs
2018 ...........................................................................................................................
2019 ...........................................................................................................................
170
120
330
240
170
120
We did not elect either of these
alternatives and chose to apply the 50/
50 blended rates in rural and noncontiguous areas only to ensure access
to items and services for Medicare
beneficiaries in these areas.
Public comments are requested on
these and any other related alternatives.
d. Regulatory Familiarization Costs
If regulations impose administrative
costs on private entities, such as the
time needed to read and interpret this
interim final rule with comment period,
we should estimate the cost associated
with regulatory review. Due to the
uncertainty involved with accurately
quantifying the number of entities that
will review the rule, we assume that the
number of reviewers of this final rule is
about the same number of commenters
on similar, past rules. We acknowledge
that this assumption may understate or
overstate the costs of reviewing this
interim final rule with comment period.
Using the wage information from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for
medical and health service managers
(Code 11–9111), we estimate that the
cost of reviewing this interim final rule
with comment period is $105.16 per
hour, including overhead and fringe
benefits (https://www.bls.gov/oes/
current/oes_nat.htm). Assuming an
average reading speed, we estimate that
it will take approximately 2 hours for
the staff to review this interim final rule
with comment period. For each entity
that reviews this interim final rule with
comment period, the estimated cost is
$210.32 (2 hours × $105.16). Therefore,
we estimate that the total cost of
reviewing this interim final rule with
comment period is $21,320 ($210.32 ×
100 reviewers).
C. Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A–4
(available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_
a004_a-4), in Table 3, we have prepared
an accounting statement showing the
classification of the transfers and costs
associated with the various provisions
of this interim final rule with comment
period.
TABLE 3—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT: CLASSIFICATION OF ESTIMATED TRANSFERS AND COSTS/SAVINGS, WITH
ANNUALIZATION PERIOD 2018–2019
DME provisions
Category
Transfers
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Annualized Monetized Transfers ..............................................................
From Whom to Whom ..............................................................................
Increased Beneficiary Co-insurance Payments .......................................
From Whom to Whom ..............................................................................
In accordance with the provisions of
Executive Order 12866, this rule was
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
$146 million (7%) or $145 million (3%).
Federal government to Medicare providers.
$35 million (7%) or 35 million (3%).
Beneficiaries to Medicare providers.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–354)
(RFA) requires agencies to analyze
options for regulatory relief of small
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
entities, if a rule has a significant impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. For purposes of the RFA, small
entities include small businesses,
nonprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 92 / Friday, May 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
rule does not impose substantial direct
requirement costs on state or local
governments, preempt states, or
otherwise have a Federalism
implication.
IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Analysis
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
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 2018, that
threshold is approximately $150
million. The Secretary has determined
that UMRA does not apply to this rule
in that this rule does not contain
mandates that impose spending costs on
state, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Approximately 85 percent of the DME
industry are considered small
businesses according to the Small
Business Administration’s size
standards with total revenues of $6.5
million or less in any 1 year and a small
percentage are nonprofit organizations.
Individuals and states are not included
in the definition of a small entity. We
expect the interim final rule with
comment period DME provisions will
have a significant impact on small
suppliers. A substantial number of small
suppliers will benefit from the increased
fee schedule amounts. Although not
legally required, this interim final rule
with comment period will increase
payments to small suppliers such that
the beneficiaries should have improved
access to items.
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 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 and has
fewer than 100 beds. Our data indicates
that only around 6.9 percent of small
rural hospitals are organizationally
linked to a DME supplier with paid
claims in 2017. Thus, we do not believe
this interim final rule with comment
period will have a significant impact on
operations of a substantial number of
small rural hospitals.
■
X. Federalism Analysis
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.
The Secretary has determined that this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:27 May 10, 2018
Jkt 244001
XI. Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs
Executive Order 13771, titled
Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs, was issued on January
30, 2017. This interim final rule with
comment period is not subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 13771
because it is estimated to result in no
more than de minimis costs.
XII. Congressional Review Act
This rule is subject to the
Congressional Review Act provisions of
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) and has been
transmitted to the Congress and the
Comptroller General for review.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 414
Administrative practice and
procedure, Health facilities, Health
professions, Kidney diseases, Medicare,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR
Chapter IV as set forth below:
PART 414—PAYMENT FOR PART B
MEDICAL AND OTHER HEALTH
SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 414
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 1102, 1871, and 1881(b)(l)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302,
1395hh, and 1395rr(b)(l)).
2. Section 414.210 is amended by
revising paragraph (g)(9) to read as
follows.
■
§ 414.210
percent of the adjusted payment amount
established under this section.
(iii) For items and services furnished
in rural areas and non-contiguous areas
(Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories)
with dates of service from June 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018, based on
the fee schedule amount for the area is
equal to 50 percent of the adjusted
payment amount established under this
section and 50 percent of the unadjusted
fee schedule amount.
(iv) For items and services furnished
in areas other than rural or noncontiguous areas with dates of service
from June 1, 2018 through December 31,
2018, based on the fee schedule amount
for the area is equal to 100 percent of
the adjusted payment amount
established under this section.
§ 414.402
[Amended]
3. Section 414.402 is amended in
paragraph (2) of the definition of ‘‘Item’’
by removing the words ‘‘inhalation
drugs’’ and by adding in their place
‘‘inhalation and infusion drugs’’.
■
§ 414.412
[Amended]
4. Section 414.412(b)(2) is amended
by removing the phrase ‘‘, or subpart I
of this part’’.
■
§ 414.414
[Amended]
5. Section 414.414(f) is amended by
removing the words ‘‘or drug’’ and the
phrase ‘‘or the same drug under subpart
I’’.
■
Dated: May 7, 2018.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
Dated: May 7, 2018.
Alex M. Azar II,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 2018–10084 Filed 5–9–18; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
General payment rules.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(9) Transition rules. The payment
adjustments described above are phased
in as follows:
(i) For applicable items and services
furnished with dates of service from
January 1, 2016 through December 31,
2016, based on the fee schedule amount
for the area is equal to 50 percent of the
adjusted payment amount established
under this section and 50 percent of the
unadjusted fee schedule amount.
(ii) For items and services furnished
with dates of service from January 1,
2017, through May 31, 2018, and on or
after January 1, 2019, the fee schedule
amount for the area is equal to 100
PO 00000
21925
Frm 00085
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Parts 147, 153, 154, 155, 156,
157, and 158
[CMS–9930–F]
RIN 0938–AT12
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; HHS Notice of Benefit and
Payment Parameters for 2019;
Correction
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21912-21925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10084]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
42 CFR Part 414
[CMS-1687-IFC]
RIN 0938-AT21
Medicare Program; Durable Medical Equipment Fee Schedule
Adjustments To Resume the Transitional 50/50 Blended Rates To Provide
Relief in Rural Areas and Non-Contiguous Areas
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Interim final rule with comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule with comment period makes technical
amendments to the regulation to reflect the extension of the transition
period from June 30, 2016 to December 31, 2016 that was mandated by the
21st Century Cures Act for phasing in fee schedule adjustments for
certain durable medical equipment (DME) and enteral nutrition paid in
areas not subject to the Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics,
Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Competitive Bidding Program (CBP). In
addition, this interim final rule with comment period amends the
regulation to resume the transition period's blended fee schedule rates
for items furnished in rural areas and non-contiguous areas (Alaska,
Hawaii, and United States territories) not subject to the CBP from June
1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. This interim final rule with comment
period also makes technical amendments to existing regulations for
DMEPOS items and services to reflect the exclusion of infusion drugs
used with DME from the DMEPOS CBP.
DATES:
Effective date: The provisions of this interim final rule with
comment period are effective on June 1, 2018.
Comment date: To be assured consideration, comments must be
received at one of the addresses provided below, no later than 5 p.m.
on July 9, 2018.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer to file code CMS-1687-IFC.
Because of staff and resource limitations, we cannot accept comments by
facsimile (FAX) transmission.
Comments, including mass comment submissions, must be submitted in
one of the following three ways (please choose only one of the ways
listed):
1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this
regulation 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-1687-IFC, P.O. Box 8010,
Baltimore, MD 21244-8010.
Please allow sufficient time for mailed comments to be received
before the close of the comment period.
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-1687-IFC, Mail
Stop C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.
For information on viewing public comments, see the beginning of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurence Wilson, 410-786-4602 and
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inspection of Public Comments: All comments
received before the close of the comment period 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 before the close of the comment period on
the following website as soon as possible after they have been
received: https://regulations.gov. Follow the search instructions on
that website to view public comments.
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
C. Summary of Costs and Benefits
II. Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics Supplies
(DMEPOS) Fee Schedule and Competitive Bidding Program (CBP)
A. Background for Payment Revisions for Durable Medical
Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS)
1. Fee Schedule Payment Basis for Certain DMEPOS
2. DMEPOS CBP
a. Payment Basis
b. Geographic Areas Designated Under the DMEPOS CBPs
B. Background on the Methodology for Adjusting Payment Amounts
for Certain DMEPOS Using Information From DMEPOS CBPs
C. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee Schedule Adjustments
1. Statutory Mandate To Reconsider Fee Schedule Adjustments
2. Fee Schedule Adjustment Impact Monitoring Data
3. Restoring Transitional Blended Fee Schedule Rates in Rural
Areas and Non-Contiguous Areas
D. Fee Schedule Amounts for Accessories Used With Group 3
Complex Rehabilitative Power Wheelchairs
E. Technical Changes To Conform the Regulation to Section
5004(b) of the 21st Century Cures Act (the Cures Act): Exclusion of
DME Infusion Drugs Under CBPs
III. Provisions of the Interim Final Rule With Comment Period
A. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee Schedule Adjustments
B. Technical Changes To Conform the Regulation to Section
5004(b) of the Cures Act: Exclusion of DME Infusion Drugs Under CBPs
IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking
V. Collection of Information Requirements
VI. Response to Comments
VII. Economic Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Introduction
2. Statement of Need
3. Overall Impact
B. Detailed Economic Analysis
a. Effects on the Medicare Program and Beneficiaries
[[Page 21913]]
b. Impact on Beneficiaries and Other Payers
c. Alternatives Considered
d. Regulatory Familiarization Costs
C. Accounting Statement
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis
X. Federalism Analysis
XI. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
XII. Congressional Review Act
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
This interim final rule with comment period amends the regulation
at 42 CFR 414.210(g)(9) to reflect the extension of the transition
period for phasing in fee schedule adjustments for certain durable
medical equipment (DME) and enteral nutrition paid in areas not subject
to the Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies
(DMEPOS) Competitive Bidding Program (CBP) through December 31, 2016,
mandated by section 16007(a) of the 21st Century Cures Act (the Cures
Act) (Pub. L. 114-255). In addition, in light of information, the
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has gathered in
accordance with section 16008 of the Cures Act, this interim final rule
with comment period resumes the transition period for phasing in
adjusted fee schedule rates for DME items and services furnished in
rural areas and non-contiguous areas (Alaska, Hawaii, and United States
(U.S.) territories) not subject to the CBP from June 1, 2018 through
December 31, 2018. It also makes technical amendments to existing
regulations for DMEPOS items and services to reflect the exclusion of
infusion drugs used with DME from the DMEPOS CBP, as required by
section 5004(b) of the Cures Act.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
Transition Period for Phase in of Adjustments to Fee
Schedule Amounts: We are amending Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(i) to reflect the
extension of the transition period to December 31, 2016 for phasing in
adjustments to the fee schedule amounts for certain items based on
information from the DMEPOS CBP that was required by section 16007(a)
of the Cures Act. In addition, we are adding Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(iii)
to resume the fee schedule adjustment transition period in rural areas
and non-contiguous areas effective June 1, 2018, in light of concerns
regarding the impact of the full fee schedule adjustments in rural and
non-contiguous areas, so that the 50/50 blended fee schedule rates will
apply for certain items and services furnished in rural and non-
contiguous areas from June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. We are
also amending Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(ii) to reflect that for items and
services furnished with dates of service from January 1, 2017 to May
31, 2018, and on or after January 1, 2019, the fee schedule amount for
the area is equal to 100 percent of the adjusted payment amount. We are
soliciting comments on the resumption of the transition period for the
phase in of fee schedule adjustments.
Technical Change Excluding DME Infusion Drugs From the
DMEPOS CBP: Section 5004(b) of the Cures Act amends section
1847(a)(2)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act) to exclude drugs and
biologicals described in section 1842(o)(1)(D) of the Act from the
DMEPOS CBP. We are making conforming changes to the regulation to
reflect the exclusion of infusion drugs, described in section
1842(o)(1)(D) of Act, from items subject to the DMEPOS CBP.
C. Summary of Costs and Benefits
This interim final rule with comment period resumes the blended
adjusted Medicare fee schedule amounts during the transition period for
certain items and services that are furnished in rural and non-
contiguous areas not subject to the CBP beginning June 1, 2018. It is
estimated that these adjustments will cost $290 million in Medicare
benefit payments and $70 million in Medicare beneficiary cost sharing
for the period beginning June 1, 2018 and ending December 31, 2018.
We are unable to quantify the benefits of this interim final rule
with comment period at this time; however, the goal of this interim
final rule is to preserve beneficiary access to DME items and services
in rural and non-contiguous areas not subject to the CBP during a
transition period in which CMS will continue to study the impact of the
change in payment rates on access to items and services in these areas.
The alternative to this interim final rule with comment period would
have been to allow the full phase in of fee schedule adjustments based
on competitive bidding prices to continue in all non-competitive
bidding areas (non-CBAs). We believe that resuming the fee schedule
adjustment transition period in rural and non-contiguous areas promotes
stability in the DMEPOS market in these areas, and enables CMS to work
with stakeholders to preserve beneficiary access to DMEPOS.
II. Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics Supplies (DMEPOS)
Fee Schedule and Competitive Bidding Program (CBP)
A. Background for Payment Revisions for Durable Medical Equipment,
Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS)
1. Fee Schedule Payment Basis for Certain DMEPOS
Section 1834(a) of the Act governs payment for DME covered under
Part B and under Part A for a home health agency and provides for the
implementation of a fee schedule payment methodology for DME furnished
on or after January 1, 1989. Sections 1834(a)(2) through (a)(7) of the
Act set forth separate payment categories of DME and describe how the
fee schedule for each of the following categories are established:
Inexpensive or other routinely purchased items.
Items requiring frequent and substantial servicing.
Customized items.
Oxygen and oxygen equipment.
Other covered items (other than DME).
Other items of DME (capped rental items).
Section 1834(h) of the Act governs payment for prosthetic devices,
prosthetics, and orthotics (P&O) and sets forth fee schedule payment
rules for P&O. Effective for items furnished on or after January 1,
2002, payment is also made on a national fee schedule basis for
parenteral and enteral nutrition (PEN) in accordance with the authority
under section 1842(s) of the Act. The term ``enteral nutrition'' will
be used throughout this document to describe enteral nutrients,
supplies and equipment covered under the Part B benefit for prosthetic
devices defined at section 1861(s)(8) of the Act. The Medicare allowed
amount for DMEPOS items and services paid on a fee schedule basis is
equal to the lower of the supplier's actual charge or the fee schedule
amount. We refer readers to the November 6, 2014 calendar year (CY)
2015 ESRD PPS final rule entitled ``Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal
Disease Prospective Payment System, Quality Incentive Program, and
Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies'' (79
FR 66223 through 66233) for additional background discussion about
DMEPOS items subject to section 1834 of the Act, rules for calculating
reasonable charges, and fee schedule payment methodologies for PEN and
for DME prosthetic devices, prosthetics, orthotics, and surgical
dressings.
[[Page 21914]]
2. DMEPOS CBP
a. Payment Basis
The DMEPOS CBP is mandated by section 1847(a) of the Act and
requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services
(the Secretary) to establish and implement CBPs in competitive bidding
areas (CBAs) throughout the U.S for contract award purposes for the
furnishing of certain competitively priced DMEPOS items and services.
Section 1847(a)(2) of the Act describes the items and services subject
to the DMEPOS CBP:
Off-the-shelf (OTS) orthotics for which payment would
otherwise be made under section 1834(h) of the Act.
Enteral nutrients, equipment and supplies described in
section 1842(s)(2)(D) of the Act.
Certain DME and medical supplies, which are covered items
(as defined in section 1834(a)(13) of the Act) for which payment would
otherwise be made under section 1834(a) of the Act.
The DME and medical supplies category includes items used in
infusion and drugs (other than inhalation drugs) and supplies used in
conjunction with DME, but excludes devices that have been classified in
class III under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and Group 3 or
higher complex rehabilitative power wheelchairs and related accessories
when furnished in connection with such wheelchairs. Although initially
identified in section 1847(a)(2) of the Act, infusion drugs were
excluded from the DMEPOS CBP by section 5004(b) of the Cures Act.
Sections 1847(a) and (b) of the Act specify certain requirements and
conditions for implementation of the Medicare DMEPOS CBP.
Under the DMEPOS CBP, Medicare sets single payment amounts (SPAs)
for selected DMEPOS items and services furnished to beneficiaries in
CBAs based on the median of bids submitted by winning suppliers and
accepted by Medicare for each individual item and service. For
competitively bid items and services furnished in a CBA, the SPAs
replace the Medicare allowed amounts established using the lower of the
supplier's actual charge or the payment amount recognized under
sections 1834(a)(2) through (7) of the Act. Section 1847(b)(5) of the
Act provides that Medicare payment for competitively bid items and
services is made on an assignment-related basis, and is equal to 80
percent of the applicable SPA, less any unmet Part B deductible
described in section 1833(b) of the Act.
B. Background on the Methodology for Adjusting Payment Amounts for
Certain DMEPOS Using Information From DMEPOS CBPs
For DME furnished on or after January 1, 2016, section
1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) of the Act requires the Secretary to use information
on the payment determined under the DMEPOS CBP to adjust the fee
schedule amounts for DME items and services furnished in all non-CBAs.
Section 1834(a)(1)(F)(iii) of the Act requires the Secretary to
continue to make these adjustments as additional covered items are
phased in or information is updated as new CBP contracts are awarded.
Similarly, sections 1842(s)(3)(B) and 1834(h)(1)(H)(ii) of the Act
authorize the Secretary to use payment information from the DMEPOS CBP
to adjust the fee schedule amounts for enteral nutrition and OTS
orthotics, respectively, furnished in all non-CBAs. Section
1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act requires that in promulgating the methodology
used in making these adjustments to the fee schedule amounts, the
Secretary consider the costs of items and services in areas in which
the adjustments would be applied compared to the payment rates for such
items and services in the CBAs.
On February 26, 2014, we published an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register entitled, ``Medicare
Program; Methodology for Adjusting Payment Amounts for Certain Durable
Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Using
Information from Competitive Bidding Programs'' (79 FR 10754). In that
ANPRM, we solicited stakeholder input on several factors including
whether the costs of furnishing various DMEPOS items and services vary
based on the geographic area in which they are furnished in relation to
developing a payment methodology to adjust DMEPOS fee schedule amounts
or other payment amounts in non-CBAs based on DMEPOS competitive
bidding payment information.
We received approximately 185 comments from suppliers,
manufacturers, professional, state and national trade associations,
physicians, physical therapists, beneficiaries and their caregivers,
and one state government office. Commenters generally stated that costs
do vary by geographic region and that costs in rural and non-contiguous
areas of the U.S. (Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, etc.) are significantly
higher than costs in urban areas and contiguous areas of the U.S. One
commenter representing many manufacturers and suppliers listed several
key variables or factors that influence the cost of furnishing items
and services in different areas that should be considered. This
commenter stated that information on all bids submitted under the CBP
should be considered and not just the bids of winning suppliers. Some
commenters expressed concern that the SPAs assume a significant
increase in volume to offset lower payment amounts. Commenters also
recommended phasing in the adjusted fee schedule amounts, allowing for
adjustments in fees if access issues arise, and annual inflation
updates to adjusted fee schedule amounts.
On July 11, 2014, we published the CY 2015 ESRD PPS proposed rule
in the Federal Register entitled ``Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal
Disease Prospective Payment System, Quality Incentive Program, and
Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies;'' (79
FR 40208) as required by section 1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act, to establish
methodologies for using information from the CBP to adjust the fee
schedule amounts for items and services furnished in non-CBAs in
accordance with sections 1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) and 1834(h)(1)(H)(ii) of the
Act. We also proposed making adjustments to the payment amounts for
enteral nutrition as authorized by section 1842(s)(3)(B) of the Act.
We received 89 public comments on the proposed rule, including
comments from patient organizations, patients, manufacturers, health
care systems, and DME suppliers. We made changes to the proposed
methodologies based on these comments and finalized a method for paying
higher amounts for certain items furnished in areas defined as rural
areas. In addition, we provided a 6-month fee schedule adjustment phase
in period from January through June of 2016, during which the fee
schedule amounts would be based on 50 percent of the unadjusted fees
and 50 percent of the adjusted fees to allow time for suppliers to
adjust to the new payment rates and to monitor the impact of the change
in payment rates on access to items and services. On November 6, 2014,
we published the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66223 through
66265) to finalize the methodologies at Sec. 414.210(g) based on
public comments received on the CY 2015 ESRD PPS proposed rule (79 FR
40208). A summary of the methodologies are provided below.
In order to delineate geographic areas to which adjusted fee
schedule amounts for certain DMEPOS items are applied, we set forth a
methodology to identify geographic areas using zip codes into 3
[[Page 21915]]
categories of rural, non-rural, and non-contiguous. We promulgated
Sec. 414.202 to define a rural area to mean, for the purpose of
implementing Sec. 414.210(g), a geographic area represented by a
postal zip code if at least 50 percent of the total geographic area of
the area included in the zip code is estimated to be outside any
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (79 FR 66228). A rural area also
includes a geographic area represented by a postal zip code that is a
low population density area excluded from a CBA in accordance with
section 1847(a)(3)(A) of the Act at the time the rules in Sec.
414.210(g) are applied.
In accordance with Sec. 414.210(g)(1)(i) through (v), CMS first
determines regional adjustments to the fee schedule amounts using the 8
regions of the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Also, the regional prices
are determined and limited by a national ceiling (110 percent of the
average of regional prices) and floor (90 percent of the average of
regional prices). In addition, adjusted fee schedules for non-
contiguous areas are based on the higher of the average of the SPAs for
CBAs in areas outside the contiguous U.S. or the national ceiling
amount in accordance with our regulations at Sec. 414.210(g)(2)(i)
through (ii). Also, Sec. 414.210(g)(3) specifies adjustments for low
volume items (that is, bid in only 10 or fewer competitive bidding
programs) are based on 110 percent of the average of the SPAs. In
addition, adjustments for items and services included in CBPs no longer
in effect is set forth at Sec. 414.210(g)(4). In cases where the SPAs
from the DMEPOS CBP that are no longer in effect are used to adjust fee
schedule amounts, Sec. 414.210(g)(4) provides that the SPAs be updated
by an inflation adjustment factor for each year from the last year when
the SPAs were in effect to the year in which the adjustment would go
into effect (for example, 2016) and for each subsequent year (for
example, 2017 and 2018). Furthermore, Sec. 414.210(g)(5) establishes
adjustments for accessories used with different types of base equipment
in situations where a Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS)
code describing an item used with different types of base equipment is
included in more than one product category in a CBA under the CBP; a
weighted average of the SPAs for the code is computed for each CBA
prior to applying the other payment adjustment methodologies in Sec.
414.210(g). Finally, in accordance with Sec. 414.210(g)(6),
adjustments are made to the SPAs for certain items due to price
inversions under the DMEPOS CBP (for example, the SPA for a walker
without wheels is higher than the SPA for a walker with wheels) before
the SPAs are used to adjust fee schedule amounts. For groupings of
similar items (for example, walkers) where price inversions have
occurred, the SPAs for the items in the grouping are all adjusted to
equal the weighted average of the SPAs for all of the items in the
grouping. Price inversions are situations where the higher weighted and
higher priced item at the time of competition becomes the lower priced
item in the CBP following the competition. For a discussion regarding
adjustments to SPAs to address price inversions, see the CY 2017 ESRD
PPS proposed rule published in the Federal Register on June 30, 2016
entitled ``Medicare Program; End-Stage Renal Disease Prospective
Payment System, Coverage and Payment for Renal Dialysis Services
Furnished to Individuals with Acute Kidney Injury, End-Stage Renal
Disease Quality Incentive Program, Durable Medical Equipment,
Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies Competitive Bidding Program Bid
Surety Bonds, State Licensure and Appeals Process for Breach of
Contract Actions, Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics,
and Supplies Competitive Bidding Program and Fee Schedule Adjustments,
Access to Care Issues for Durable Medical Equipment, and the
Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care Model'' (81 FR 42851).
In order to update the adjusted fee schedule amounts based on new
competitions and provide for a transitional phase-in period of the fee
schedule adjustments, we established Sec. 414.210(g)(8) and (g)(9) in
the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66263). In Sec. 414.210(g)(8),
the adjusted fee schedule amounts are updated when an SPA for an item
or service is updated following one or more new DMEPOS CBP competitions
and as other items are added to DMEPOS CBP. The fee schedule amounts
that are adjusted using SPAs are not subject to the annual DMEPOS
covered item update and are only updated when SPAs from the DMEPOS CBP
are updated. Updates to the SPAs may occur as contracts are recompeted.
Section 414.210(g)(9)(i), specifies that the fee schedule adjustments
were phased in for items and services furnished with dates of service
from January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2016, so that each fee schedule
amount was adjusted based on a blend of 50 percent of the fee schedule
amount if not adjusted based on information from the CBP, and 50
percent of the adjusted fee schedule amount. Section 414.210(g)(9)(ii)
specifies that for items and services furnished with dates of service
on or after July 1, 2016, the fee schedule amounts would be equal to
100 percent of the adjusted fee schedule amounts. Commenters
recommended CMS phase in the fee schedule adjustments to give suppliers
time to adjust to the change in payment amounts (79 FR 66228). Some
commenters recommended a 4-year phase-in of the adjusted fees. CMS
agreed that phasing in the adjustments to the fee schedule amounts
would allow time for suppliers to adjust to the new payment rates and
would allow time to monitor the impact of the change in payment rates
on access to items and services. We decided 6 months was enough time to
monitor access and health outcomes to determine if the fee schedule
adjustments created a negative impact on access to items and services.
Therefore, we finalized a 6-month phase-in period of the blended rates
(79 FR 66228 through 66229).
We finalized the 6-month transition period from January 1 through
June 30, 2016 in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66223) that was
published in the Federal Register on November 6, 2014. The Cures Act
was enacted on December 13, 2016, and section 16007(a) of the Cures Act
extended the transition period for the phase-in of fee schedule
adjustments at Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(i) by 6 additional months so that
fee schedule amounts were based on a blend of 50 percent of the
adjusted fee schedule amount and 50 percent of the unadjusted fee
schedule amount until December 31, 2016 (with full implementation of
the fee schedule adjustments applying to items and services furnished
with dates of service on or after January 1, 2017).
C. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee Schedule Adjustments
We have determined that the transitional period for the phase-in of
adjustments to fee schedule amounts should be resumed in non-CBA rural
and non-contiguous areas in order to ensure access to necessary items
and services in these areas. This interim final rule with comment
period amends Sec. 414.210(g)(9) to change the end date for the
initial transition period for the phase-in of adjustments to fee
schedule amounts for certain items based on information from the DMEPOS
CBP from June 30, 2016 to December 31, 2016, to reflect the extension
that was mandated by section 16007(a) of the Cures Act. This interim
final rule with comment period also amends Sec. 414.210(g)(9) to
resume the transition period for the phase-in of adjustments to
[[Page 21916]]
fee schedule amounts for certain items furnished in non-CBA rural and
non-contiguous areas from June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018, for
the reasons discussed in this preamble.
1. Statutory Mandate To Reconsider Fee Schedule Adjustments
After we established the fee schedule adjustment methodology under
Sec. 414.210(g), Congress amended section 1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act to
require that CMS take certain steps and factors into consideration
regarding the fee schedule adjustments for items and services furnished
on or after January 1, 2019, to ensure that the rates take into account
certain aspects of providing services in non-CBAs. Specifically,
section 16008 of the Cures Act amended section 1834(a)(1)(G) of the Act
to require in the case of items and services furnished on or after
January 1, 2019, that in making any adjustments to the fee schedule
amounts in accordance with sections 1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) and (iii) of the
Act, the Secretary shall: (1) Solicit and take into account stakeholder
input; and (2) take into account the highest bid by a winning supplier
in a CBA and a comparison of each of the following factors with respect
to non-CBAs and CBAs:
The average travel distance and cost associated with
furnishing items and services in the area.
The average volume of items and services furnished by
suppliers in the area.
The number of suppliers in the area.
On March 23, 2017, CMS hosted a national provider call to solicit
stakeholder input regarding adjustments to fee schedule amounts using
information from the DMEPOS CBP. The national provider call was
announced on March 3, 2017, and we requested written comments by April
6, 2017. We received 125 written comments from stakeholders. More than
330 participants called into our national provider call, with 23
participants providing oral comments during the call. In general, the
commenters were mostly suppliers, but also included manufacturers,
trade organizations, and healthcare providers such as physical and
occupational therapists. These stakeholders expressed concerns that the
level of the adjusted payment amounts constrains suppliers from
furnishing items and services to rural areas. Stakeholders requested an
increase to the adjusted payment amounts for these areas. The written
comments generally echoed the oral comments from the call held on March
23, 2017, whereby stakeholders claimed that the adjusted fees are not
sufficient to cover the costs of furnishing items and services in rural
and non-contiguous areas and that this is having an impact on access to
items and services in these areas.
The oral and written comments are organized into the following
categories:
Inadequacy of Adjusted Fee Schedule Amounts: Commenters claim the
adjusted fee schedule amounts do not cover the cost of furnishing the
items and are not sustainable. Many commenters opposed the current
adjusted payment amounts as insufficient to sustain the current cost of
doing business. Some commenters stated that current reimbursement
levels are below the cost of doing business. Many commenters stated
they were billing non-assigned for items, or were considering billing
non-assigned in the future.
Travel Distance: Commenters claim the average travel distance and
cost for suppliers serving rural areas are greater than the average
travel distance and cost for suppliers serving CBAs. Many commenters
described farther travel distances in rural areas than in non-rural
areas. For the purpose of implementing the fee schedule adjustment
methodologies at Sec. 414.210(g), the term ``rural area'' is defined
at Sec. 414.202 and essentially includes any areas outside an MSA or
excluded from a CBA.
Volume of Services: Many commenters asserted that the average
volume of services furnished by suppliers, when serving non-CBAs, are
lower than the average volume of services furnished by suppliers, when
serving CBAs. Many commenters stated that they do not get the same
increase in volume that suppliers who obtain competitive bidding
contracts get, which does not allow them to have economies of scale and
obtain products at lower costs. Claims data for 2016 and 2017 indicates
that the average volume of allowed services for suppliers serving CBAs
is significantly higher than the average volume of allowed services for
suppliers serving non-CBAs, particularly rural and non-contiguous
areas.
Beneficiary Access: Many commenters stated that the adjusted fees
have reduced the number of suppliers in the area, and that this has
caused or will cause beneficiary access issues. Some commenters
explained that they were the only supplier in the area. Claims data
indicates that the number of supplier locations furnishing items and
services subject to the fee schedule adjustments changed from 13,535 in
2015 to 12,617 in 2016.
Adverse Beneficiary Health Outcomes: Commenters stated that
beneficiaries are going without items and this is causing adverse
health outcomes. Commenters stated that hospital readmissions and
lengths of stay, falls, and fractures are increasing as a result of the
fee schedule reductions.
Delivery Expenses: A few commenters provided an estimate of how
much their delivery expenses cost, their estimated service radius, and
the average distance traveled. Several commenters stated that they have
reduced the size of their service area due to the level of
reimbursement that they are receiving.
Costs in Rural and Non-Contiguous Areas: Many commenters stated
rural areas have unique costs, costs that are higher than non-rural
areas. Similar to comments received on our CY 2015 ESRD PPS proposed
rule (79 FR 40275 through 40315) and discussed in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS
final rule (79 FR 66223 through 66265), some commenters stated that a
10 percent payment increase in rural areas is not enough to cover costs
in rural areas. One commenter stated that non-contiguous areas, such as
Alaska and Hawaii, face unique and greater costs due to higher shipping
costs, a smaller amount of suppliers, and more logistical challenges
related to delivery. Some commenters stated specific costs, as well as
data sources, that CMS should take into account when adjusting fees in
non-CBAs. These included the following: Geographic wage index factors,
gas, taxes, employee wages and benefits, wear and tear of vehicle,
average per capita income, training, delivery, set up, historical
Medicare home placement volume, proximity to nearby CBAs, employing a
respiratory therapist, electricity charges, freight charges, 24/7
service, documentation requirements, average per patient cost,
licensing accreditation, surety bonds, audits, population density,
miles and time between points of service, regulatory costs, vehicle
insurance, and liability insurance.
Two commenters pointed to the Ambulance Fee Schedule and one
commenter pointed to the Bureau of Labor Statistic Consumer Expenditure
Survey as evidence that health care costs in rural areas are higher
than in urban areas. Another commenter mentioned the Internal Revenue
Service Mileage Rate, the minimum wage, AAA Gallon of Gasoline prices,
and the price of a loaf of white bread, to highlight how the prices of
such items have increased over the years, while reimbursement for DME
has not.
[[Page 21917]]
Using the Highest Winning Bids for the Adjusted Fee Schedule
Methodology: Five commenters suggested that the adjusted fee schedule
amounts be based on maximum winning bids in CBAs rather than the median
of winning bids in CBAs. One commenter suggested that the maximum
winning bids should be the starting point for the adjustments and that
additional payment should be added on to these amounts to pay for the
higher costs of furnishing items and services in non-CBAs.
One of the factors CMS must consider when making fee schedule
adjustments for items and services furnished on or after January 1,
2019, in accordance with section 16008 of the Cures Act, is the average
volume of items and services furnished by suppliers in an area. A
supplier recoups costs through the payments made for the items they
furnish. In the case of overhead costs such as rent, utilities,
salaries, and employee benefits, the more items a supplier furnishes,
the more the supplier is able to recoup these overhead costs. Data for
items furnished in 2016 and 2017 shows that the average volume of items
furnished by suppliers in CBAs exceeds the average volume of items
furnished by suppliers in rural and non-contiguous areas. The fact that
the volume of items furnished per supplier in rural and non-contiguous
areas is less than the volume furnished in CBAs indicates that the cost
per item in rural and non-contiguous areas may be higher than the cost
per item in CBAs. Because there are fewer suppliers in CBAs furnishing
a higher volume of items and services, these suppliers likely have
lower costs per item because they can make up their overhead costs over
more items. In addition, the higher the volume of items a supplier
furnishes, the larger the volume purchasing discount is likely to be
when purchasing equipment from a manufacturer. This supports
stakeholder input that the suppliers in rural and non-contiguous areas
have an average volume of business less than that of their counterparts
in CBAs, and that this difference may make it more difficult for
suppliers in rural and non-contiguous areas to meet their expenses.
In addition, the adjusted fee schedule amounts for stationary
oxygen equipment in non-contiguous, non-CBAs are lower than the SPA for
stationary oxygen equipment in the Honolulu, Hawaii, CBA and the
adjusted fee schedule amounts for stationary oxygen equipment in some
rural areas are lower than the SPAs in CBAs within the same state. This
is due to the combination of the fee schedule adjustments and the
budget neutrality offset that CMS applies to stationary oxygen
equipment and contents due to the separate oxygen class for oxygen
generating portable equipment (OGPE). In 2006, CMS established a
separate payment class for OGPE (which are portable concentrators with
transfilling equipment), through notice and comment rulemaking (71 FR
65884). The authority to add this payment class, located at section
1834(a)(9)(D) of the Act, only allows CMS to establish new classes of
oxygen and oxygen equipment if such classes are budget neutral, which
means that the establishment of new oxygen payment classes does not
result in oxygen and oxygen equipment expenditures for any year that
are more or less than the expenditures that would have been made had
the new classes not been established. In accordance with Sec.
414.226(c)(6), CMS reduces the fee schedule amounts for stationary
oxygen equipment in non-CBAs in order to make the payment classes for
oxygen and oxygen equipment budget neutral as required by section
1834(a)(9)(D) of the Act. Due to the combination of the fee schedule
adjustment and the budget neutrality offset, the adjusted fee schedule
amounts for stationary oxygen equipment in non-contiguous non-CBAs and
some rural areas are lower than the SPAs in Honolulu, Hawaii, and CBAs
within the same state, respectively. This is significant because the
current methodology at 42 CFR 414.210(g) attempts to ensure that the
adjusted fee schedule amounts for items and services furnished in rural
areas within a state are no lower than the adjusted fee schedule
amounts for non-rural areas within the same state. CBAs are areas where
payment for certain DME items and services is based on SPAs established
under the CBP rather than adjusted fee schedule amounts. It is worth
noting that CBAs tend to have higher population densities and typically
correspond with urban census tracts.
The establishment of the payment class for OGPE resulted in an
increase in Medicare payments for these items and services. Therefore,
each year, a budget neutrality offset is applied to the monthly payment
amount for stationary oxygen equipment to ensure that the OGPE payment
class does not result in oxygen and oxygen equipment expenditures that
would be more or less than the expenditures that would have been made
without the OGPE class. As more beneficiaries shift to using OGPE, the
budget neutrality offset that is applied to the stationary oxygen
equipment payment rate increases. The budget neutrality requirement
does not apply under the DMEPOS CBP because under section 1847(a) of
the Act, the payment amounts for oxygen and oxygen equipment are
established based on bids submitted and accepted by winning suppliers
under the program, and not based on the payment rules under section
1834(a) of the Act. The budget neutrality offset has resulted in
payment amounts for stationary oxygen equipment in CBAs being higher
than the adjusted fee schedule amounts in some cases. Restoring the
blended fee schedule rates paid in rural and non-contiguous non-CBAs
during the transition period would result in fee schedule amounts for
oxygen and oxygen equipment in these areas being higher than the SPAs
paid in all of the CBAs. Therefore, payment at the blended rates would
avoid situations where payment for furnishing oxygen in a rural or non-
contiguous, non-CBA is lower than payment for furnishing oxygen in a
CBA.
2. Fee Schedule Adjustment Impact Monitoring Data
Regarding adverse health beneficiary outcomes, we have been
monitoring claims data from non-CBAs, some of which pre-dates the
implementation of the fully adjusted fee schedule amounts. To the
extent that this data pre-dates the implementation of the fully
adjusted fees, it is less likely to demonstrate any adverse impacts.
The data does not show any observable trends indicating an increase in
adverse health outcomes such as mortality, hospital and nursing home
admission rates, monthly hospital and nursing home days, physician
visit rates, or emergency room visits in 2016 or 2017 compared to 2015
in the non-CBAs, overall. In addition, we have been monitoring data on
the rate of assignment in non-CBAs, which reflects when suppliers are
accepting Medicare payment as payment in full and not balance billing
beneficiaries for the cost of the DME. More importantly, the monitoring
data does not indicate the extent to which suppliers that have not
already exited the Medicare program are struggling to maintain current
service levels or individual cases where access or health outcomes may
have been affected. We are soliciting comments on ways to improve our
fee schedule adjustment impact monitoring data.
3. Resuming Transitional Blended Fee Schedule Rates in Rural and Non-
Contiguous Areas
The monitoring data described in section II.C.2 of this interim
final rule with comment is retrospective claims data for payment of
items already
[[Page 21918]]
furnished. Stakeholders state that this data is of limited utility in
assessing the development of adverse trends in access to items and
services, or that the health of beneficiaries is being negatively
affected by the fully adjusted fee schedule amounts. Claims data does
not capture all of the challenges experienced by beneficiaries and
suppliers, such as suppliers going out of business or timely delivery
of items. Further, this claims data is also limited to a retrospective
view to address potential future problems. In other words, it does not
serve as a tool that can guard against the negative outcomes raised by
stakeholders, as discussed elsewhere in the preamble. In fact, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) acknowledged challenges
associated with the monitoring of DMEPOS and the CBP in its review of
the first year of the DMEPOS CBP Round 1 Rebid, stating that the
monitoring methods used by CMS in assessing the impact of competitive
bidding did not directly show whether beneficiaries received the DME
they needed on time.\1\ We do note, however, that the Office of
Inspector General (OIG) has found that the implementation of Round 2
Competitive Bidding did not appear to disrupt beneficiary access to
CPAP/RAD equipment.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Government Accountability Office. Medicare: Review of
the First Year of CMS's Durable Medical Equipment Competitive
Bidding Program's Round 1 Rebid, May 2012 (GAO-12-693), https://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590712.pdf (accessed 4 November 2015), page
42.
\2\ Office of Inspector General. U.S. Department of Health &
Human Services. Round 2 Competitive Bidding for CPAP/RAD: Disrupted
Access Unlikely for Devices, Inconclusive for Supplies, June 2017
(OEI-01-15-00040).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximately 85 percent of the DME industry are considered small
businesses according to the Small Business Administration's size
standards. According to Medicare claims data, the number of supplier
locations furnishing DME items and services subject to the fee schedule
adjustments decreased by 22 percent from 2013 to 2016. In 2016 alone
there was a 7 percent decline from the previous year in the number of
DME supplier locations furnishing items and services subject to the fee
schedule adjustments. The magnitude of this decline in DME supplier
locations, from 13,535 (2015) to 12,617 (2016),\3\ indicates that the
number of DME supplier locations serving these areas continues to
decline. Based on partial year data, there was a further reduction in
supplier locations of 9 percent in 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Medicare claims process through November 3, 2017
\4\ There were 12,537 supplier locations furnishing items
subject to the fee reductions in 2016, based on claims processed
through April 6, 2017, and 11,384 supplier locations furnishing
items subject to the fee reductions in 2017, based on claims
processed through April 7, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are additional factors that section 16008 of the Cures Act
requires us to take into account in making adjustments to the fee
schedule amounts for items and services furnished beginning in 2019. We
know that the average volume of items and services furnished per
supplier in non-CBAs is significantly less than the average volume of
items and services furnished per supplier in CBAs. Additionally, the
number of suppliers in general has been steadily decreasing over time
and this trend is not abating. As the number of suppliers serving non-
CBAs continues to decline, the volume of items and services furnished
by the remaining suppliers is increasing. However, we do not know if
the suppliers that remain will have the financial ability to continue
expanding their businesses to continue to satisfy market demand. We
also do not know if large suppliers serving both urban and rural areas
will continue to serve the rural areas representing a much smaller
percentage of their business than urban areas. We specifically address
the stakeholder comments and concerns below.
Based on the stakeholder comments and decrease in the number of
supplier locations, there is an immediate need to resume the
transitional, blended fee schedule amounts in rural and non-contiguous
areas. Resuming these transitional blended rates will preserve
beneficiary access to needed DME items and services in a contracting
supplier marketplace, while allowing CMS to address the adequacy of the
fee schedule adjustment methodology, as required by section 16008 of
the Cures Act. We recognize that reduced access to DME may put
beneficiaries at risk of poor health outcomes or increase the length of
hospital stays.
Suppliers have noted that they have struggled under the fully
adjusted fee schedule and that they do not believe they can continue to
furnish the items and services at the current rates. Stakeholders
overwhelmingly have stated that the fully adjusted fee schedule amounts
are not sufficient to cover supplier costs for furnishing items and
services in rural and non-contiguous areas and the number of suppliers
furnishing items in these areas continues to decline. Further, section
16008 of the Cures Act mandates that we consider stakeholder input and
additional information in making fee schedule adjustments based on
information from the DMEPOS CBP for items and services furnished
beginning in 2019. The information we have collected, however, includes
input from many stakeholders indicating that the fully adjusted fee
schedule amounts are too low and that this is having an adverse impact
on beneficiary access to items and services, particularly in rural and
non-contiguous areas. Given the strong stakeholder concern about the
continued viability of many DMEPOS suppliers, coupled with the Cures
Act mandate to consider additional information material to setting fee
schedule adjustments, it would be unwise to continue with the fully
adjusted fee schedule rates in the vulnerable rural and non-contiguous
areas for 7 months. Any adverse impacts on beneficiary health outcomes,
or on small businesses exiting the market, could be irreversible. It is
in the best interest of the beneficiaries living in these areas to
maintain a blend of the historic unadjusted fee schedule amounts and
fee schedule amounts adjusted using SPAs established under the DMEPOS
CBP to prevent suppliers that might be on the verge of closing from
closing, as they may be the only option for beneficiaries in these
areas. While our systematic monitoring in these areas has not shown
problematic trends to this point, that monitoring by its nature looks
backward and reflects other limitations, as discussed in section II.C.2
of this interim final rule with comment. Given the rapid changes in
health care delivery that may disproportionately impact rural and more
isolated geographic areas, there is concern that the continued decline
of the fees and the number of suppliers in such areas may impact
beneficiary access to items and services. These adjustments would
maintain a balance between the higher historic rates and rates adjusted
based on bidding in larger metropolitan areas where suppliers furnish a
much larger volume of DMEPOS items and services and support continued
access to services. In order to safeguard beneficiaries' access to
necessary items and services, we should immediately resume the
transition period for the phase-in of fee schedule adjustments in these
areas that was in place during CY 2016. Therefore, we are revising
Sec. 414.210(g)(9) to resume the fee schedule adjustment transition
rates for items and services furnished in rural and non-contiguous
areas from June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018, while we further
analyze this issue. During this extended
[[Page 21919]]
transition period, CMS will take into account the information required
by section 16008 of the Cures Act in determining whether changes to the
methodology for adjusting fee schedule amounts for items furnished on
or after January 1, 2019, are necessary.
D. Fee Schedule Amounts for Accessories Used With Group 3 Complex
Rehabilitative Power Wheelchairs
In the CY 2010 final rule (75 FR 73390) published in the Federal
Register on November 29, 2010, entitled ``Medicare Program; Payment
Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to Part B
for CY 2011,'' we reviewed the HCPCS coding for power wheelchairs that
were updated in 2006 in response to the release of the Power Mobility
Device Coding Guidelines published by the DME Medicare Administrative
Contractors. Codes were added to the HCPCS for various types of power
wheelchair bases, differentiated based on level of performance, with
group 1 being the lowest and group 3 being the highest level covered by
Medicare, and the ability to accommodate complex rehabilitative power
options such as power seating systems or a specialty interface, such as
sip and puff controls. Codes were established at both the group 2 and 3
performance level for ``complex rehabilitative'' power wheelchair
bases.
Section 154(a)(1)(B) of the Medicare Improvements for Patients and
Providers Act (MIPPA) of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-275), amended section
1847(a)(2)(A) of the Act to exclude group 3 or higher complex
rehabilitative power wheelchairs and related accessories when furnished
in connection with such wheelchairs from competitive bidding. At the
same time, section 154(a)(1)(A) of MIPPA amended section 1847(a)(1) of
the Act to add paragraph (D) which terminated Round 1 and required
rebidding Round 1 for the same items and services and the same areas
with some changes. Since we included group 2 complex rehabilitative
power wheelchairs and related accessories (including seating systems)
and seat and back cushions, under Round 1 of the DMEPOS CBP, we were
required to include those wheelchairs and accessories in the Round 1
Rebid of the DMEPOS CBP. The accessories (including seating systems)
and cushions furnished in connection with group 2 complex
rehabilitative power wheelchairs (HCPCS codes K0835 through K0843) are
the same items furnished in connection with group 3 complex
rehabilitative power wheelchairs (HCPCS codes K0848 through K0864).
Single payment amounts were implemented on January 1, 2011, in the
nine Round 1 Rebid areas, for group 1 and 2 standard power wheelchair
bases, group 2 complex rehabilitative power wheelchair bases, and the
interchangeable accessories used with the different bases (for example,
batteries used with all power wheelchairs and power seating systems
used with both group 2 and 3 complex rehabilitative power wheelchairs).
As noted above, these items are competitively bid under section 1847 of
the Act, and we did not competitively bid group 3 wheelchairs or use
competitively bid prices for related accessories when used with a group
3 wheelchair in the Round 1 Rebid of the DMEPOS CBP.
Section 1834(a)(1)(F)(ii) of the Act mandates the adjustment of fee
schedule amounts for items that are furnished in non-CBAs based on
information from the CBPs beginning on January 1, 2016. We established
a policy under Sec. 414.210(g)(5) for adjusting the fee schedule
amounts for accessories used with different types of base equipment
that are included in one or more product categories under competitive
bidding in the CY 2015 ESRD PPS final rule (79 FR 66223 through 66233).
In that rulemaking, we stated the Agency's belief that it would be
unnecessarily burdensome to have different fee schedule amounts for the
same item (HCPCS code) when it is used with similar, but different
types of base equipment, and that the costs of furnishing the accessory
should not vary significantly based on the type of base equipment it is
used with (79 FR 66230). We finalized Sec. 414.210(g)(5) to adjust the
fee schedule amount for a HCPCS code for an accessory for use with all
types of base equipment using pricing information for the item when it
is included in one or more product categories under competitive
bidding. The adjusted fee schedule amounts for these common accessories
became effective on January 1, 2016.
Section 2 of the Patient Access and Medicare Protection Act of 2015
(Pub. L. 114-115) delayed the adjustments to the fee schedule amounts
for accessories (including seating systems) and seat and back cushions
when furnished in connection with group 3 complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs until January 1, 2017. Subsequently, section 16005 of the
Cures Act extended this delay in the DME fee schedule adjustments based
on competitive bidding information for certain wheelchair accessories
used with group 3 complex rehabilitative power wheelchairs from January
1, 2017 until July 1, 2017. Since the Congress has acted twice to
address the issue, these legislative actions highlight a general
concern regarding access to this specialized equipment by the
vulnerable patient population that depends on this equipment and
technology.
Complex rehabilitative power wheelchairs are used by patients
needing functionality, such as head or sip and puff controls, power
tilt or recline seating, or ventilators mounted to the wheelchair,
which are not available on standard power wheelchairs. The ability and
performance of the wheelchair in meeting the patients' specialized
needs is critical, and most patients use wheelchair bases with group 3
level performance to meet these needs. Far fewer use group 2 wheelchair
bases, which are the bases that the accessories were included with
under Round 1 of the DMEPOS CBP.
Section 1847(a)(2)(A) of the Act provides the categories of items
that are subject to the CBP and excludes certain complex rehabilitative
power wheelchairs recognized by the Secretary as classified within
group 3 or higher (and related accessories when furnished in connection
with such wheelchairs). This statutory exclusion should inform our
implementation of section 1834(a)(1)(F) of the Act such that the fee
schedule amounts for wheelchair accessories and back and seat cushions
used in conjunction with group 3 complex rehabilitative power
wheelchairs should not be adjusted based on the methodologies set forth
in Sec. 414.210(g)(5). Therefore, as we have announced in guidance
available on the CMS website in June (located at: https://www.cms.gov/Center/Provider-Type/Durable-Medical-Equipment-DME-Center.html) the fee
schedule amounts for wheelchair accessories and back and seat cushions
used in conjunction with group 3 power wheelchairs continue to be based
on the unadjusted fee schedule amounts updated by the covered item
update specified in section 1834(a)(14) of the Act. The fee schedule
amounts for all other accessories used with different types of base
equipment continue to be calculated in accordance with the adjustment
methodology set forth in Sec. 414.210(g)(5) of our regulations.
E. Technical Changes To Conform the Regulations to Section 5004(b) of
the Cures Act: Exclusion of DME Infusion Drugs Under CBPs
Section 5004(b) of the Cures Act amends section 1847(a)(2)(A) of
the Act to exclude drugs and biologicals
[[Page 21920]]
described in section 1842(o)(1)(D) of the Act from the CBP. We are
making conforming technical changes to the regulations text consistent
with statutory requirements to exclude drugs and biologicals from the
CBP. We are amending 42 CFR 414.402 to reflect that infusion drugs are
not included in the CBP by revising the definition of ``Item'' in
paragraph (2) to add the words ``and infusion'' after the words ``other
than inhalation''. The sentence will read as follows: ``Supplies
necessary for the effective use of DME other than inhalation and
infusion drugs.'' We are also removing a reference to drugs being
included in the CBP by deleting the phrase ``or subpart I'' in Sec.
414.412(b)(2). The sentence will read as follows: ``The bids submitted
for each item in a product category cannot exceed the payment amount
that would otherwise apply to the item under subpart C of this part,
without the application of Sec. 414.210(g), or subpart D of this part,
without the application of Sec. 414.105. The bids submitted for items
in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section cannot exceed the
weighted average, weighted by total nationwide allowed services, as
defined in Sec. 414.202, of the payment amounts that would otherwise
apply to the grouping of similar items under subpart C of this part,
without the application of Sec. 414.210(g), or subpart D of this part,
without the application of Sec. 414.105.'' Similarly, we are making a
conforming technical change to Sec. 414.414(f) in the discussion of
``expected savings'' so that infusion drugs are not taken into account
by deleting the words ``or drug'' and the phrase ``or the same drug
under subpart I'' from Sec. 414.414(f). The ``expected savings'' text
will read as follows: ``A contract is not awarded under this subpart
unless CMS determines that the amounts to be paid to contract suppliers
for an item under a competitive bidding program are expected to be less
than the amounts that would otherwise be paid for the same item under
subpart C or subpart D.''
III. Provisions of the Interim Final Rule With Comment Period
A. Transition Period for Phase-In of Fee Schedule Adjustments
We are amending Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(i) to change the end date for
the initial transition period for the phase in of adjustments to fee
schedule amounts for certain items based on information from the DMEPOS
CBP from June 30, 2016 to December 31, 2016, as mandated by section
16007(a) of the Cures Act. We are also amending Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(ii)
to reflect that fully adjusted fee schedule amounts apply from January
1, 2017 through May 31, 2018, and then on or after January 1, 2019. We
are also adding Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(iii) to resume the transition
period for the phase in of adjustments to fee schedule amounts for
certain items furnished in rural and non-contiguous areas from June 1,
2018 through December 31, 2018. Finally, we are adding Sec.
414.210(g)(9)(iv) to reflect that fully adjusted fee schedule amounts
apply for certain items furnished in non-CBA areas other than rural and
non-contiguous areas from June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018.
As previously stated in section II.C.1 of this interim final rule
with comment, stakeholders overwhelmingly have stated that the fully
adjusted fee schedule amounts are not sufficient to cover supplier
costs for furnishing items and services in rural and non-contiguous
areas and are impacting beneficiary health outcomes. Section 16008 of
the Cures Act requires CMS to consider certain factors in making fee
schedule adjustments using information from the CBP for items and
services furnished in non-CBAs on or after January 1, 2019. Given the
limitations associated with our retrospective claims data prevent us
from detecting rapidly developing beneficiary access issues, we believe
we should immediately resume the blended fee schedule rates in rural
and non-contiguous areas that were in place during CY 2016, while we
further analyze this issue in order to safeguard beneficiaries' access
to necessary items and services in rural and non-contiguous areas.
Given that additional information and factors will be considered when
addressing the fee schedule adjustments for items and services
furnished on or after January 1, 2019, and that these factors include
differences in costs (yet to be quantified) associated with furnishing
items in heavier populated CBAs versus less populated or remote rural
and non-contiguous areas, we have concluded that we should adjust fee
schedule amounts based on competitive bidding information prior to
2019. The volume of items furnished per supplier in rural and non-
contiguous areas is far less than the volume of items furnished per
supplier in CBAs, indicating that the cost per item in these areas may
be higher than the cost per item in CBAs. Also, as noted earlier, our
systematic claims monitoring only looks backward in time and may not
detect rapidly emerging trends, particularly in isolated or rural
areas. We also referenced the GAO's acknowledgement that there are
challenges associated with the monitoring CBP. In its report regarding
the first year of the DMEPOS CBP Round 1 Rebid, the GAO stated that the
monitoring methods used by CMS in assessing the impact of competitive
bidding did not directly show whether beneficiaries received the DME
needed on time or whether adverse health outcomes were caused by
problems accessing DMEPOS. As the fee schedule amounts and the number
of suppliers continue to decline, we are concerned that DME access in
remote areas of the country may be negatively affected by significant
payment reductions put in place prior to a full analysis of the factors
affecting the cost of furnishing items and services in distinctly
different market areas. We are also concerned that national chain
suppliers may close locations in more remote areas if the rate they are
paid for furnishing items in a market where the volume of services is
low does not justify the overhead expenses of retaining the locations.
Finally, because this IFC will result in a change to the 2018 fee
schedule amounts for the various classes of oxygen and oxygen
equipment, the annual budget neutrality adjustment for 2018, mandated
by regulations at Sec. 414.226(c)(6), will need to be recomputed. This
annual adjustment to the monthly payment amount for stationary oxygen
equipment and oxygen contents is mandated by section 1834(a)(9)(D)(ii)
of the Act as a condition for maintaining the higher portable oxygen
equipment add-on payment for portable concentrators and transfilling
equipment.
B. Technical Changes To Conform the Regulations to Section 5004(b) of
the Cures Act: Exclusion of DME Infusion Drugs Under CBPs
We are making conforming technical changes to the regulations text
consistent with statutory requirements to exclude drugs and biologicals
from the CBP. Specifically, we are amending Sec. 414.402 to reflect
that infusion drugs are not included in the CBP by revising the
definition of ``Item'' in paragraph (2) to add the words ``and
infusion'' after the words ``other than inhalation''. We are also
removing a reference to drugs being included in the CBP by deleting the
phrase ``or subpart I'' in Sec. 414.412(b)(2). Similarly, we are
making a conforming technical change to the regulations text on
``expected savings'' so that infusion drugs are not taken into account
in Sec. 414.414(f) by deleting the words ``or drug'' and the phrase
``or the same drug under subpart I''.
[[Page 21921]]
IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking
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 5 U.S.C.
553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and section 1871 of
the Act. Specifically, section 553(b) of the APA requires the agency to
publish a notice of the proposed rule in the Federal Register that
includes a reference to the legal authority under which the rule is
proposed, and the terms and substances of the proposed rule or a
description of the subjects and issues involved. Section 553(c) of the
APA further requires the agency to give interested parties the
opportunity to participate in the rulemaking through public comment
before the provisions of the rule take effect. Similarly, section
1871(b)(1) of the Act requires the Secretary to provide for notice of
the proposed rule in the Federal Register and provide a period of not
less than 60 days for public comment. Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the APA
and section 1871(b)(2)(C) of the Act authorize an agency to waive these
procedures, however, if an agency finds good cause that a notice-and-
comment procedure is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest and incorporates a statement of the finding and its
reasons in the rule issued. Section 553(d) of the APA ordinarily
requires a 30-day delay in the effective date of a final rule from the
date of its publication in the Federal Register. This 30-day delay in
effective date can be waived, however, if an agency finds good cause to
support an earlier effective date. Section 1871(e)(1)(B)(i) of the Act
also prohibits a rule from taking effect before the end of the 30-day
period that begins the date that the rule is issued or published.
However, section 1871(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act permits a substantive
rule to take effect before 30 days if the Secretary finds that a waiver
of the 30-day period is necessary to comply with statutory requirements
or that the 30-day delay would be contrary to the public interest. In
addition, the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801(a)(3)), requires a
60-day delayed effective date for major rules. However, we can waive
the delay in effective date of the rule if the Secretary finds, for
good cause, that notice and public procedure is impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, and incorporates a
statement of the finding and the reasons in the rule issued (5 U.S.C.
808(2)).
As discussed below, and for reasons cited throughout this interim
final rule with comment period, we find good cause to waive notice-and-
comment rulemaking and issue this interim final rule with comment
period to address fee schedule adjustments based on information from
the CBP in rural and non-contiguous areas because we believe it is
contrary to the public interest to go through notice-and-comment
rulemaking for this provision. We also find good cause to waive the 30-
day delay in effective date of this interim final rule with comment
period as a delay in effective date would also be contrary to the
public interest. The full fee schedule adjustments took effect on
January 1, 2017, and we understand from stakeholders that some DMEPOS
suppliers cannot exist at the current fully adjusted fee levels and
have already had to drop out of Medicare, and even close down. Delaying
the effective date of this interim final rule with comment period by 30
days could result in a further decline in the number of DMEPOS
suppliers, and would pose an unnecessary risk of harm to beneficiaries
in certain areas of the country that rely on one or a few suppliers to
access to items and services and these suppliers are no longer able to
furnish the items and services at the fully adjusted fee schedule
amounts. We also note that in this interim final rule with comment
period, CMS is reverting to a prior transitional payment policy that
was in place from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016, to allow
time for further engagement with stakeholders, through future notice
and comment rulemaking, in the development of a long-term, more
sustainable fee schedule adjustment methodology for items and services
furnished in rural and non-contiguous areas.
We also find it unnecessary to undertake notice-and-comment
rulemaking to make technical changes to conform the regulations to the
statutory requirement under section 5004(b) of the Cures Act that
infusion drugs used with DME be excluded from the DMEPOS CBP. We also
find good cause to waive the delay in the effective date for this
interim final rule with comment period because it would be contrary to
the public interest to further delay updating the regulations to be
consistent with the statute and avoid possible confusion that infusion
drugs are still subject to competitive bidding, particularly given that
the statutory exclusion is self-implementing and already effective.
Although we did not formally publish a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register, we have solicited stakeholder input
regarding the impact of the fee schedule adjustments as required by
section 16008 of the Cures Act, through a national provider call on
March 23, 2017, as well as through an accompanying written comment
period. We sought feedback on section 16008 of the Cures Act, which
mandates stakeholder input on the methodology for using information
from the DMEPOS CBP for adjusting Medicare fee schedule amounts paid in
non-CBAs.
We received numerous comments from stakeholders, such as comments
that expressed how the current adjusted fee schedule is not enough to
cover a DME supplier's costs of running a business and that many
suppliers are not able to sustain reductions in payment of up to 60
percent on average that resulted from the full fee schedule
adjustments, resulting in a number of suppliers leaving the business
and many more considering leaving the business in the near future. Such
a result would negatively impact beneficiaries' access to critical
items and services necessary for their care. Some stakeholders
commented that some of the more remote, high cost areas are served by
only one or a few suppliers. In 2016, there was a 7 percent decline in
the number of supplier locations furnishing items and services subject
to the fee schedule adjustments in non-CBAs. The magnitude of this
decline in supplier locations from 13,535 to 12,617 indicates that the
number of supplier locations serving these areas continues to decline
at the same time that stakeholders are indicating their expectations of
additional supplier exits. In situations where there may only be one
supplier serving an area, if the supplier were to stop furnishing items
(for example oxygen), the beneficiaries in this area could be harmed
significantly if there are no suppliers left to deliver replacement of
necessary oxygen. We are concerned that national chain suppliers of
oxygen may close locations in more remote areas if the rate they are
paid for furnishing items in a market where the volume of services is
low does not justify the overhead expenses of retaining the locations.
Due to the inherent limitation associated with using retrospective
claims data, our systematic monitoring in these areas has not been able
to reflect problematic trends identified by numerous stakeholders. As
noted, the GAO has also acknowledged challenges associated with the
monitoring of DMEPOS and the CBP, stating that the monitoring methods
used by CMS in
[[Page 21922]]
assessing the impact of competitive bidding did not directly show
whether beneficiaries received the DME they needed on time or whether
adverse health outcomes were caused by problems accessing DMEPOS. Given
the rapid changes in health care delivery that may disproportionately
impact rural and more isolated geographic areas, we are concerned that
the continued decline of the fees and the number of suppliers in such
areas may exacerbate the already emergent access concerns faced by
beneficiaries. In general, we are concerned that beneficiaries in
certain areas of the country could lose access to items and services if
they rely on one or a few suppliers to furnish these items and services
and these suppliers are no longer able to furnish the items and
services at the fully adjusted fee schedule amounts.
Our monitoring data, by its very nature, would not alert us to the
present and imminent threats to beneficiary access that stakeholders
have raised in recent months. If CMS continues to pay the fully
adjusted payment rates in rural and non-contiguous areas, it could
further jeopardize the infrastructure of suppliers that beneficiaries
rely on for access to necessary items and services in remote areas of
the country. Smaller suppliers that serve remote areas may not be able
to sustain larger reductions in payment because they have a limited
number of ways to reduce costs. If they only have one location and a
few employees to begin with, they cannot close locations or lay off
employees to reduce costs. Larger suppliers that serve both remote,
rural areas and urban areas may elect to close locations in the remote
areas where volume of services are significantly lower because the
overhead expense of maintaining the location may no longer justify
retaining these locations. Therefore, we believe it is necessary to
prevent future, potential access problems and adverse health outcomes
for beneficiaries by resuming the fee schedule adjustment transition
period in rural and non-contiguous areas. Immediately restoring the
blended rates in rural and non-contiguous areas, which will cut the
magnitude of the full adjustments in half, can prevent potential
erosion of the supplier infrastructure that could potentially be on the
verge of impacting access and health outcomes in rural and non-
contiguous areas. By restoring the transition period in rural and non-
contiguous areas effective June 1, 2018, this in essence extends the
fee schedule adjustment phase in period by an additional 7 months and
leaves a gap of 17 months from January 1, 2017 through May 31, 2018,
during which suppliers have been subject to the full fee schedule
adjustments in rural and non-contiguous areas. This extended phase-in
period would end on December 31, 2018, since section 16008 of the Cures
Act mandates that CMS consider certain factors and information in
making fee schedule adjustments for items and services furnished on or
after January 1, 2019. This gives suppliers serving rural and non-
contiguous areas more time to adjust their businesses and may prevent
the imminent closure of some supplier locations, thereby safeguarding
beneficiary access to necessary items and services in rural and non-
contiguous areas. It also prevents irreparable harm to businesses in
rural and non-contiguous areas that would not be able to adjust to the
full payment reductions, but might be able to adjust to smaller
reductions in payments during an interim period until additional cost
information is examined more closely by CMS to provide a more accurate
reflection of the unique costs of furnishing items and services in
market areas that are distinctly different from CBAs. This also allows
time for CMS to receive supplier feedback and analyze the costs of
furnishing DME items in rural and non-contiguous areas and other
factors identified in section 16008 of the Cures Act. Resuming the fee
schedule adjustment transition period for an additional 7 months in
rural and non-contiguous areas seems reasonable during this interim
period to allow for the more in depth analysis of the factors and
information to be considered in accordance with section 16008 of the
Cures Act.
In light of these concerns, while we consider broader changes to
the fee schedule adjustment methodology as required by section 16008 of
the Cures Act, we believe there is good cause to issue this interim
final rule with comment period to revise Sec. 414.210(g)(9) to
immediately restore the fee schedule adjustment transition period in
rural and non-contiguous areas. Resuming the transition period and
blended rates based on adjusted and unadjusted fee schedule amounts for
items and services furnished in rural and non-contiguous areas from
June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018, will allow additional time for
suppliers serving rural and non-contiguous areas to adjust their
businesses, prevent suppliers that beneficiaries may rely on for access
to items and services in rural and non-contiguous areas from exiting
the business, and allow additional time for CMS to monitor the impact
of the blended rates. We believe it is contrary to the public interest
to go through notice and comment rulemaking because of the stakeholder
input we have already solicited that supports this change and because
any further delay in implementation risks impeding beneficiary access
to DME in rural and non-contiguous areas. To further delay restoring
the transitional fee schedule rates in rural and non-contiguous areas
for additional months raises the access concerns described earlier in
the preamble. As such, in Sec. 414.210(g)(9)(iii), for items and
services furnished in rural and non-contiguous areas on or after June
1, 2018, the payment adjustments will be based on a blend of 50 percent
of the unadjusted fee schedule amount and 50 percent of the adjusted
payment amount established in accordance with the methodologies in
Sec. 414.210(g)(1) through (8). We are also amending Sec.
414.210(g)(9)(ii) to reflect that for items and services furnished with
dates of service from January 1, 2017 to May 31, 2018, the fee schedule
amount for the area is equal to 100 percent of the adjusted payment
amount.
We note that this rule is urgent to preserve beneficiary access to
DME items and services in rural and non-contiguous areas during this
transition period, that CMS is continuing to study the impact of the
change in payment rates on access to items and services in these areas,
and that we intend to undertake subsequent notice-and-comment
rulemaking for CY 2019.
Section 5004(b) of the Cures Act further amends section
1847(a)(2)(A) of the Act to exclude drugs and biologicals described in
section 1842(o)(1)(D) of the Act. We are finalizing conforming
regulatory changes to reflect our interpretation of these statutory
requirements to exclude infusion drugs, described in section
1842(o)(1)(D) of the Act, as a covered item that could be subject to
the DMEPOS CBPs. Because this is just a minor technical change to
conform the language in the regulations to the statute, we believe that
a notice and comment period for this change is unnecessary.
Therefore, as noted above, we find good cause to waive the notice
of proposed rulemaking to address fee schedule adjustments in rural and
non-contiguous areas based on information from the CBP, and to make
technical changes to the regulations so they conform to the statutory
requirement under section 5004(b) of the Cures Act that infusion drugs
used with DME be excluded from the DMEPOS CBP. We also find good cause
to waive the delay in effective date and issue this interim
[[Page 21923]]
final rule with comment period with an effective date of June 1, 2018.
We are providing a 60-day public comment period.
V. Collection of Information Requirements
This document does not impose information collection requirements,
that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure
requirements. Consequently, there is no need for review by the Office
of Management and Budget under the authority of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
VI. Response to Comments
Because of the large number of public comments we normally receive
on Federal Register documents, we are not able to acknowledge or
respond to them individually. We will consider all comments we receive
by the date and time specified in the DATES section of this preamble,
and, when we proceed with a subsequent document, we will respond to the
comments in the preamble to that document.
VII. Economic Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Introduction
We have examined the impacts of this interim final rule with
comment period as required by Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory
Planning and Review (September 30, 1993), Executive Order 13563 on
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (January 18, 2011), 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), the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)), and Executive Order 13771 on Reducing Regulation
and Controlling Regulatory Costs (January 30, 2017).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct 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). Section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a ``significant regulatory
action'' as an action that is likely to result in a rule: (1) Having an
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more in any 1 year, or
adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or state, local or tribal governments or communities (also
referred to as ``economically significant''); (2) creating a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned
by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of
entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for major rules
with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1
year). We estimate that this rulemaking is ``economically significant''
as measured by the $100 million threshold, and hence also a major rule
under the Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that the actions are
significant within the meaning of section 3(f)(4) of the Executive
Order. Accordingly, we have prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis that
to the best of our ability presents the costs and benefits of the
rulemaking. Therefore, OMB has reviewed this interim final rule with
comment period, and the Departments have provided the following
assessment of their impact. We solicit comments on the regulatory
impact analysis provided.
2. Statement of Need
This interim final rule with comment period amends the regulation
to revise the date that the initial fee schedule adjustment transition
period ended and resumes the fee schedule adjustment transition period
for certain DME items and services and enteral nutrition furnished in
rural and non-contiguous areas not subject to the DMEPOS CBP from June
1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. This interim final rule with comment
period also makes technical amendments to existing regulations for
DMEPOS items and services to note the exclusion of infusion drugs used
with DME from the DMEPOS CBP.
3. Overall Impact
The interim final rule with comment period resumes the transitional
adjusted Medicare fee schedule amounts for certain items and services
that are furnished in rural and non-contiguous areas beginning June 1,
2018 until December 31, 2018. It is estimated that these fee schedule
adjustments will cost over $290 million in Medicare Part B benefit
payments and $70 million in Medicare beneficiary cost sharing. For dual
eligible beneficiaries Medicaid pays the cost sharing. The Medicaid
payment is split between a Federal portion and the states' portion,
which for this rule is $10 million and $10 million, respectively.
B. Detailed Economic Analysis
a. Effects on the Medicare Program and Beneficiaries
This interim final rule with comment period resumes transitional
adjusted Medicare fee schedule amounts for certain items and services
furnished in rural and non-contiguous areas beginning June 1, 2018
until December 31, 2018. It is estimated that these adjustments will
cost over $290 million in Medicare Part B benefit payments and $70
million in beneficiary cost sharing. The suppliers will get increased
revenue from the increased fee schedule amounts. See Table 1.
Table 1--Cash Impact of Resuming the Adjusted Fee Schedule Transition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact on the benefit payments Impact on beneficiary cost
FY in dollars (to the nearer 10 sharing in dollars (to the Federal share of States' share of
million) \1\ nearer 10 million) \2\ Medicaid \3\ Medicaid \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018............................................ 170 40 5 5
2019............................................ 120 30 5 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include premium offset.
\2\ Includes Medicaid payments.
\3\ Copayments made for dual eligible Medicare beneficiaries.
[[Page 21924]]
b. Impact on Beneficiaries and Other Payers
In order to preserve beneficiary access to DME items and services,
this rule, as indicated above, will result in a $70 million dollar
Medicare cost sharing increase to the beneficiaries. For those
beneficiaries who have supplemental insurance, this increase may be
covered by supplemental insurance programs (for example, Medigap). This
is a temporary time-limited extension of the fee schedule adjustment
transition period.
For dual eligible beneficiaries, Medicaid pays the cost sharing.
The Medicaid payment is split between a Federal portion and the states'
portion, which for this rule is $10 million and $10 million,
respectively.
Beneficiaries who do not have supplemental insurance or who are not
dual eligible will have increased cost sharing as a result of this
interim final rule with comment period.
c. Alternatives Considered
One alternative considered to address concerns about access to
items and services in non-CBAs would be to apply the 50/50 blended
rates in all non-CBAs, since stakeholders commented regarding problems
related to access to necessary items and services in all non-CBAs. This
would cost $570 million in Medicare Part B benefit payments and $140
million in beneficiary cost sharing. Of the $140 million in beneficiary
cost sharing, $45 million is the Medicaid impact for dual eligibles, of
which $25 million is the Federal portion, and $20 million is the state
portion. A second alternative would be to apply the blended rates in
all non-CBAs, but change the blend from 50 percent unadjusted fee and
50 percent adjusted fee to 25 percent unadjusted fee and 75 percent
adjusted fee. This would cost $290 million in Medicare Part B benefit
payments and $70 million in beneficiary cost sharing. Of the $70
million in beneficiary cost sharing, $20 million is the Medicaid impact
for dual eligibles, of which $10 million is the Federal portion, and
$10 million is the state portion. Table 2 compared the annual costs of
these alternative rules to the annual costs of the interim final rule
with comment period.
Table 2--Comparison of the Costs of Alternative Rules With the Interim Final Rule With Comment Period
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50/50 Blend in all 25/75 Blend in all
FY Interim final rule non-CBAs non-CBAs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018................................................ 170 330 170
2019................................................ 120 240 120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We did not elect either of these alternatives and chose to apply
the 50/50 blended rates in rural and non-contiguous areas only to
ensure access to items and services for Medicare beneficiaries in these
areas.
Public comments are requested on these and any other related
alternatives.
d. Regulatory Familiarization Costs
If regulations impose administrative costs on private entities,
such as the time needed to read and interpret this interim final rule
with comment period, we should estimate the cost associated with
regulatory review. Due to the uncertainty involved with accurately
quantifying the number of entities that will review the rule, we assume
that the number of reviewers of this final rule is about the same
number of commenters on similar, past rules. We acknowledge that this
assumption may understate or overstate the costs of reviewing this
interim final rule with comment period. Using the wage information from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for medical and health service
managers (Code 11-9111), we estimate that the cost of reviewing this
interim final rule with comment period is $105.16 per hour, including
overhead and fringe benefits (https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm). Assuming an average reading speed, we estimate that it
will take approximately 2 hours for the staff to review this interim
final rule with comment period. For each entity that reviews this
interim final rule with comment period, the estimated cost is $210.32
(2 hours x $105.16). Therefore, we estimate that the total cost of
reviewing this interim final rule with comment period is $21,320
($210.32 x 100 reviewers).
C. Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A-4 (available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a004_a-4), in Table 3, we have
prepared an accounting statement showing the classification of the
transfers and costs associated with the various provisions of this
interim final rule with comment period.
Table 3--Accounting Statement: Classification of Estimated Transfers and
Costs/Savings, With Annualization Period 2018-2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DME provisions
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Transfers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Monetized Transfers......... $146 million (7%) or $145
million (3%).
From Whom to Whom...................... Federal government to Medicare
providers.
Increased Beneficiary Co-insurance $35 million (7%) or 35 million
Payments. (3%).
From Whom to Whom...................... Beneficiaries to Medicare
providers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this
rule was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96-354)
(RFA) requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief of
small entities, if a rule has a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. For purposes of the RFA, small entities
include small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
[[Page 21925]]
Approximately 85 percent of the DME industry are considered small
businesses according to the Small Business Administration's size
standards with total revenues of $6.5 million or less in any 1 year and
a small percentage are nonprofit organizations. Individuals and states
are not included in the definition of a small entity. We expect the
interim final rule with comment period DME provisions will have a
significant impact on small suppliers. A substantial number of small
suppliers will benefit from the increased fee schedule amounts.
Although not legally required, this interim final rule with comment
period will increase payments to small suppliers such that the
beneficiaries should have improved access to items.
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 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 and has fewer than 100 beds. Our data indicates that
only around 6.9 percent of small rural hospitals are organizationally
linked to a DME supplier with paid claims in 2017. Thus, we do not
believe this interim final rule with comment period will have a
significant impact on operations of a substantial number of small rural
hospitals.
IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 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 2018, that
threshold is approximately $150 million. The Secretary has determined
that UMRA does not apply to this rule in that this rule does not
contain mandates that impose spending costs on state, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate.
X. Federalism Analysis
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. The Secretary has determined that this rule does not
impose substantial direct requirement costs on state or local
governments, preempt states, or otherwise have a Federalism
implication.
XI. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
Executive Order 13771, titled Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs, was issued on January 30, 2017. This interim final
rule with comment period is not subject to the requirements of
Executive Order 13771 because it is estimated to result in no more than
de minimis costs.
XII. Congressional Review Act
This rule is subject to the Congressional Review Act provisions of
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) and has been transmitted to the Congress and the
Comptroller General for review.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 414
Administrative practice and procedure, Health facilities, Health
professions, Kidney diseases, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR Chapter IV as set forth below:
PART 414--PAYMENT FOR PART B MEDICAL AND OTHER HEALTH SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 414 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 1102, 1871, and 1881(b)(l) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1395hh, and 1395rr(b)(l)).
0
2. Section 414.210 is amended by revising paragraph (g)(9) to read as
follows.
Sec. 414.210 General payment rules.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(9) Transition rules. The payment adjustments described above are
phased in as follows:
(i) For applicable items and services furnished with dates of
service from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016, based on the
fee schedule amount for the area is equal to 50 percent of the adjusted
payment amount established under this section and 50 percent of the
unadjusted fee schedule amount.
(ii) For items and services furnished with dates of service from
January 1, 2017, through May 31, 2018, and on or after January 1, 2019,
the fee schedule amount for the area is equal to 100 percent of the
adjusted payment amount established under this section.
(iii) For items and services furnished in rural areas and non-
contiguous areas (Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories) with dates of
service from June 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018, based on the fee
schedule amount for the area is equal to 50 percent of the adjusted
payment amount established under this section and 50 percent of the
unadjusted fee schedule amount.
(iv) For items and services furnished in areas other than rural or
non-contiguous areas with dates of service from June 1, 2018 through
December 31, 2018, based on the fee schedule amount for the area is
equal to 100 percent of the adjusted payment amount established under
this section.
Sec. 414.402 [Amended]
0
3. Section 414.402 is amended in paragraph (2) of the definition of
``Item'' by removing the words ``inhalation drugs'' and by adding in
their place ``inhalation and infusion drugs''.
Sec. 414.412 [Amended]
0
4. Section 414.412(b)(2) is amended by removing the phrase ``, or
subpart I of this part''.
Sec. 414.414 [Amended]
0
5. Section 414.414(f) is amended by removing the words ``or drug'' and
the phrase ``or the same drug under subpart I''.
Dated: May 7, 2018.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
Dated: May 7, 2018.
Alex M. Azar II,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2018-10084 Filed 5-9-18; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P