Medicare Program; Certain Changes to the Low-Volume Hospital Payment Adjustment Under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment Systems (IPPS) for Acute Care Hospitals for Fiscal Years 2011 Through 2017, 42596-42600 [2018-18271]
Download as PDF
42596
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 164 / Thursday, August 23, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: August 16, 2018.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart CC—Nebraska
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as set forth below:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
2. Amend § 52.1420(c) by revising the
entry for citation ‘‘129–20’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.1420
*
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c)* * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED NEBRASKA REGULATIONS
Nebraska citation
State effective
date
Title
EPA Approval date
Explanation
STATE OF NEBRASKA
Department of Environmental Quality
Title 129—Nebraska Air Quality Regulations
*
129–20 ............
*
*
Particulate Emissions; Limitations
and Standards.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Part 412
RIN 0938–ZB49
Medicare Program; Certain Changes to
the Low-Volume Hospital Payment
Adjustment Under the Hospital
Inpatient Prospective Payment
Systems (IPPS) for Acute Care
Hospitals for Fiscal Years 2011
Through 2017
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Application of a payment
adjustment.
AGENCY:
*
*
*
*
*
Jkt 244001
On March 23, 2018 the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub. L. 115–
141) was enacted. Section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
makes certain changes to the payment
adjustment for low-volume hospitals for
fiscal years (FYs) 2011 through 2017
relating to the application of the mileage
criterion for Indian Health Service and
non-Indian Health Service facilities.
II. Provisions of the Document
This document announces
changes to the payment adjustment for
low-volume hospitals under the hospital
inpatient prospective payment systems
(IPPS) for acute care hospitals for fiscal
years (FYs) 2011 through 2017 in
accordance with section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018.
DATES: Effective date: August 22, 2018.
SUMMARY:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
*
I. Background
[CMS–1709–N]
16:16 Aug 22, 2018
*
*
8/23/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation].
Applicability date: The provisions
described in this document are
applicable for discharges on or after
October 1, 2010, and on or before
September 30, 2017, in accordance with
section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michele Hudson, (410) 786–5490.; Mark
Luxton, (410) 786–4530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
*
[FR Doc. 2018–18103 Filed 8–22–18; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
5/13/2014
A. Changes to the Payment Adjustment
for Low-Volume Hospitals in FYs 2011
Through 2017
1. Background
Section 1886(d)(12) of the Act
provides for an additional payment to
each qualifying low-volume hospital
under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective
Payment Systems (IPPS) for Acute Care
Hospitals beginning in FY 2005. CMS
implemented this provision in the
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regulations at 42 CFR 412.101. The
payment adjustment to a low-volume
hospital provided for under section
1886(d)(12) of the Act is ‘‘[i]n addition
to any payment calculated under this
section.’’ Therefore, meaning the
payment adjustment is based on the per
discharge amount paid to the qualifying
hospital under section 1886 of the Act.
In other words, the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment is based on total
per discharge payments made under
section 1886 of the Act, including
capital, disproportionate share hospital
(DSH), indirect medical education
(IME), and outlier payments. For sole
community hospitals (SCHs) and
Medicare-dependent hospitals (MDHs),
the low-volume hospital payment
adjustment is based in part on either the
Federal rate or the hospital-specific rate,
whichever results in a greater operating
IPPS payment.
The Affordable Care Act amended
section 1886(d)(12) of the Act by
modifying the definition of a lowvolume hospital and the methodology
for calculating the payment adjustment
for low-volume hospitals, effective only
for discharges occurring during FYs
2011 and 2012, and subsequent
legislation extended those temporary
modifications through FY 2018. (The
most recent statutory extension of those
temporary changes to the low-volume
hospital payment policy was for FY
2018 and is discussed in a document
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 164 / Thursday, August 23, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
(CMS 1677–N) that appeared in the
April 26, 2018 Federal Register (83 FR
18301).) Specifically, those provisions
amended the qualifying criteria for low
volume hospitals under section
1886(d)(12)(C)(i) of the Act to specify
that, for FYs 2011 through 2018, a
subsection (d) hospital qualifies as a
low-volume hospital if it is more than
15 road miles from another subsection
(d) hospital and has less than 1,600
discharges of individuals entitled to, or
enrolled for, benefits under Part A
during the fiscal year. In addition, these
provisions amended section
1886(d)(12)(D) of the Act to provide that
for FYs 2011 through 2018, the lowvolume hospital payment adjustment
(that is, the percentage increase) is to be
determined using a continuous linear
sliding scale ranging from 25 percent for
low-volume hospitals with 200 or fewer
discharges of individuals entitled to, or
enrolled for, benefits under Part A in the
fiscal year to zero percent for lowvolume hospitals with greater than
1,600 discharges of such individuals in
the fiscal year. (We note that under
§ 412.101(b)(2)(ii), for FYs 2011 through
2017, a hospital’s Medicare discharges
from the most recently available
MedPAR data, as determined by CMS,
are used to determine whether the
hospital meets the discharge criterion to
receive the low volume hospital
payment adjustment in the applicable
fiscal year. In the FY 2019 IPPS/LTCH
PPS final rule, we finalized conforming
changes to this provision to reflect that
the low-volume hospital payment
adjustment policy in effect for FY 2018
is the same low-volume hospital
payment adjustment policy in effect for
FYs 2011 through 2017 (83 FR 41144,
August 17, 2018).
2. Treatment of Indian Health Service
and Non-Indian Health Service
Facilities
Section 1886(d)(12)(C) of the Act
requires that, in order to qualify for the
low volume hospital payment
adjustment, a hospital must be located
more than a specified number of miles
from the nearest subsection (d) hospital
(referred to as the mileage criterion,
which is implemented at
§ 412.101(b)(2)). Since CMS considers
Indian Health Service (IHS) and Tribal
hospitals (collectively referred to here as
‘‘IHS hospitals’’) to be subsection (d)
hospitals, for the reasons discussed in
the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule
(82 FR 38188 through 38189), we
adopted a parallel adjustment at
§ 412.101(e) which specifies that, for
discharges occurring in FY 2018 and
subsequent years, only the distance
between IHS hospitals would be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Aug 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
considered when assessing whether an
IHS hospital meets the mileage criterion
under § 412.101(b)(2), and similarly,
only the distance between non-IHS
hospitals would be considered when
assessing whether a non-IHS hospital
meets the mileage criterion under
§ 412.101(b)(2).
While the policy finalized in the FY
2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule
addresses FY 2018 and subsequent
fiscal years, section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
amended section 1886(d)(12)(C) of the
Act by adding a new clause (iii)
specifying that for purposes of
determining whether an IHS or a nonIHS hospital meets the mileage criterion
under section 1886(d)(12)(C)(i) of the
Act with respect to FY 2011 or a
succeeding year, the Secretary shall
apply the policy described in the
regulations at § 412.101(e) (as in effect
on the date of enactment). In other
words, under this statutory change, the
special treatment with respect to the
proximities between IHS and non-IHS
hospitals as set forth in § 412.101(e) for
discharges occurring in FY 2018 and
subsequent fiscal years is now also
applicable for purposes of applying the
mileage criterion for the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment for FYs
2011 through 2017. Therefore, when
assessing the mileage criterion under
§ 412.101(b)(2) for FYs 2011 through
2017, an IHS hospital would be
considered to have met the mileage
criterion in the applicable year if it was
more than 15 road miles from the
nearest IHS hospital, and a non-IHS
hospital would be considered to have
met the mileage criterion in the
applicable year if it was more than 15
road miles from the nearest non-IHS
hospital.
B. Implementation of the Low-Volume
Hospital Payment Adjustment Under
Section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018
Section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 applies the
policy at § 412.101(e) to prior years, that
is, for discharges occurring during FYs
2011 through 2017. To implement these
changes, hospitals that qualify for the
low-volume hospital payment
adjustment under the provisions of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
may receive the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment as part of the cost
report settlement and reopening process
for each cost report that includes
discharges from one of the applicable
fiscal years (that is, from FYs 2011
through 2017). In the event a hospital,
having followed our process to request
the low-volume hospital payment
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
42597
adjustment as described in this
document, qualifies as a low-volume
hospital for discharges occurring in one
of the applicable fiscal years and those
discharges are in a cost report that has
been settled, the Medicare
Administrative Contractors (MAC) will
reopen such cost reports in accordance
with 42 CFR 405.1885 which allows for
the reopening of cost reports upon
request only if a request to reopen is
received by the MAC within 3 years of
the date of the determination or
decision that is the subject of the
reopening or if the cost report is the
subject of a pending jurisdictionally
proper appeal before the Provider
Reimbursement Review Board or CMS
Administrator. Therefore, the
application of the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment under the
provisions of section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
will only be applied to discharges
occurring in FYs 2011 through 2017 (as
applicable) that are in cost reports that
are either currently open or for which
the hospital requests reopening within
the 3-year reopening period by making
a request to the MAC with the
information described in this document.
In this document, we are explicitly
directing the MACs to reopen and revise
these matters, but only under the
circumstances and for the cost reporting
periods specified herein and subject to
the time limits specified both in 42 CFR
405.1885(b) and this document. (See 42
CFR 405.1885(c)(1).) If a hospital’s
reopening request is untimely or if a
hospital fails to provide adequate
written documentation as described in
this document, the MAC may deny the
reopening request.
We are directing a reopening here
under the circumstances described
solely in response to the amendment
made by section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018, which
changed the application of the mileage
criterion for purposes of the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment for FYs
2011 through 2017. We reiterate here
that, apart from the specific
circumstances, time periods, and cost
reporting periods for which we are
explicitly directing reopening in this
document, reopening denials by the
MAC in this and other contexts are
discretionary and unreviewable under
Your Home Visiting Nurse Servs., Inc. v.
Shalala, 525 U.S. 449 (1999) and related
precedent.
We note, any reopening under this
procedure shall be for the sole purpose
of making a low-volume hospital
payment adjustment under the
provisions of section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
42598
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 164 / Thursday, August 23, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
and for no other purpose. (For
additional information on the reopening
regulations at 42 CFR 405.1885, refer to
the following final rules published in
the Federal Register: (67 FR 50096), (73
FR 30230), and (78 FR 75162) as well as
sections 2931 through 2932 of chapter
29 of the Provider Reimbursement
Manual (PRM), Part 1.)
The changes to the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment under
section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 do not affect
the discharge criterion in place between
FYs 2011 and 2017. Thus, in accordance
with the existing regulations at
§ 412.101(b)(2)(ii) and consistent with
our implementation of the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment in FYs
2011 through 2017, the discharge data
source used to identify qualifying lowvolume hospitals and calculate the
payment adjustment in accordance with
the changes under section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
is the same discharge data source used
to identify qualifying low-volume
hospitals and calculate the payment
adjustment for discharges that occurred
in that fiscal year; that is, the most
recent data available at the time of the
development of the payment rates and
factors established in the corresponding
final rule. Under § 412.101(b)(2)(ii), for
FYs 2011 through 2017, a hospital’s
Medicare discharges from the most
recently available MedPAR data for the
applicable fiscal year, as determined by
CMS, are used to determine whether the
hospital meets the discharge criterion to
receive the low-volume payment
adjustment in the applicable year. The
applicable low-volume percentage
increase for FYs 2011 through 2017 is
determined using a continuous linear
sliding scale equation that results in a
low-volume adjustment ranging from an
additional 25 percent for hospitals with
200 or fewer Medicare discharges to a
zero percent additional payment
adjustment for hospitals with 1,600 or
more Medicare discharges
(§ 412.101(c)(2)).
For the discharge data source used to
identify qualifying low-volume
hospitals and to calculate the payment
adjustment for FY 2011, refer to the
chart in the FY 2011 IPPS/LTCH PPS
final rule (75 FR 50242 through 50274)
or the ‘Medicare Discharge Count for FY
2011 Low Volume Adjustment’ file on
the ‘‘Files for FY 2011 Final Rule and
Correction Notice’’ home page (https://
www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Feefor-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatient
PPS/Acute-Inpatient-Files-forDownload-Items/CMS1255464.html).
For FYs 2012 through 2017, Table 14 of
each year’s respective IPPS/LTCH PPS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Aug 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
final rule (which is available through
the internet on the CMS website at
https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/
Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/
AcuteInpatientPPS/ under
‘‘Acute Inpatient—Files for Download’’
for the respective year) lists the
‘‘subsection (d)’’ hospitals with fewer
than 1,600 Medicare discharges based
on the applicable data source and their
payment adjustment for that fiscal year
(if eligible).
These discharges and corresponding
payment adjustment are based on the
most recent data available at the time of
the development of that year’s payment
rates and factors established in the
corresponding final rule. (For additional
details on the discharge data source
used to identify qualifying low-volume
hospitals and calculate the payment
adjustment for FYs 2011 through 2017,
refer to the following FY 2011 (75 FR
50241 through 50275); FY 2012 (76 FR
51679 through 51680); FY 2013 (78 FR
14689 through 14691); FY 2014 ((79 FR
15022 through 15025) and (79 FR 34444
through 34446)); FY 2015 ((80 FR 49998
through 49999) and Change Request
9197 (Transmittal 3281; June 5, 2015));
FY 2016 (80 FR 49595 through 49597);
and FY 2017 (81 FR 56941 through
56943).) The list of hospitals with fewer
than 1,600 Medicare discharges for each
of FYs 2011 through 2017 (previously
described) does not reflect whether or
not the hospital meets the mileage
criterion. In addition to meeting the
discharge criterion, an IHS hospital
would be eligible for the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment for an
applicable fiscal year under the
provisions of section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
if, in the applicable fiscal year, it was
located more than 15 road miles from
the nearest IHS hospital. Likewise, a
non-IHS hospital meeting the discharge
requirement would be eligible for the
low-volume hospital payment
adjustment for an applicable fiscal year
under the provisions of section 429 of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018 if, in the applicable fiscal year, it
was located more than 15 road miles
from the nearest non-IHS hospital.
We are using the following procedure
for a hospital to request the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment for any
applicable fiscal years between FYs
2011 and 2017 under the provisions of
section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018. In order for
the applicable low-volume hospital
payment adjustment to be applied for an
applicable fiscal year’s discharges in an
open or reopenable cost report(s), a
hospital must notify and provide
documentation to its MAC in writing
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that it meets the mileage criterion under
the provisions of section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
in the applicable fiscal year (as
described in this document). In the case
of a reopenable cost report, the hospital
must request a reopening when
submitting its written notification and
documentation to its MAC. We note, for
a hospital to receive the low-volume
payment adjustment in FYs 2011
through 2017 under the provisions of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018, the hospital must have been
unable to meet the mileage criterion for
that fiscal year prior to the enactment of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018 (that is, the provisions of section
429 of the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2018 do not affect hospitals which
met the mileage criterion without regard
to this provision). Specifically, for an
IHS hospital to be eligible to receive the
low-volume hospital payment
adjustment in FYs 2011 through 2017
under section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018, that IHS
hospital must not have been able to
meet the mileage criterion in the
applicable fiscal year based on its
proximity to a non-IHS hospital.
Similarly, for an non-IHS hospital to be
eligible to receive the low-volume
payment adjustment in FYs 2011
through 2017 under section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018,
that non-IHS hospital must not have
been able to meet the mileage criterion
in the applicable fiscal year based on its
proximity to an IHS hospital. We
encourage hospitals to notify their MAC
as soon as possible because, as
previously noted, under 42 CFR
405.1885, reopening a cost report is
limited to 3 years after cost report
settlement. In other words, the
application of the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment under the
provisions of section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
is limited to discharges occurring in FYs
2011 through 2017 (as applicable) that
are in cost reports that are either
currently open or within the 3-year
reopening period. Therefore, to receive
the low-volume payment adjustment for
discharges in FYs 2011 through 2017,
the written request must be received by
the MAC prior to the close of the 3-year
period for the cost report that includes
such discharges.
The use of a Web-based mapping tool
as part of documenting that the hospital
meets the mileage criterion for lowvolume hospitals in the applicable fiscal
year is acceptable. The MAC will
determine if the information submitted
by the hospital, such as the name and
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 164 / Thursday, August 23, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
street address of the nearest hospitals,
location on a map, and distance (in road
miles, as defined in the regulations at
§ 412.101(a)) from the hospital
requesting low-volume hospital status,
is sufficient to document that the
hospital requesting low-volume hospital
status meets the mileage criterion in the
applicable fiscal year (and had
previously been unable to meet the
mileage criterion in that fiscal year as
described in this document). The MAC
may follow up with the hospital to
obtain additional necessary information
to determine whether or not the hospital
meets the low-volume mileage criterion
for any applicable fiscal year. In
addition, the MAC will refer to the
hospital’s Medicare discharge data
determined by CMS for the applicable
fiscal year(s) to determine whether or
not the hospital met the discharge
criterion in that fiscal year, and the
amount of the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment for such year(s),
once it is determined that the mileage
criterion has been met. (The applicable
Medicare discharge data for each of FYs
2011 through 2017 is previously
described.) In addition, in order to
receive the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment, sufficient
documentation in the written request to
the MAC must include the following to
demonstrate that the hospital was
unable to meet the mileage criterion for
that fiscal year prior to the enactment of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018. For each applicable fiscal year, an
IHS hospital must provide
documentation to its MAC that it was
not able to meet the mileage criterion in
the applicable fiscal year based on its
proximity to a non-IHS hospital.
Similarly, a non-IHS hospital must
provide documentation to its MAC that
it was not able to meet the mileage
criterion in the applicable fiscal year
based on its proximity to an IHS
hospital.
Program guidance on the
implementation of this provision,
including instructions for cost report
settlement and reopening as applicable,
will be announced in an upcoming
transmittal. We intend to make any
conforming changes to the regulations
text at 42 CFR 412.101 to reflect the
changes to the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment policy in
accordance with the amendments made
by section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 as described
in this document in future rulemaking.
III. Collection of Information
Requirements
This document does not impose
information collection and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Aug 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
recordkeeping requirements.
Consequently, it need not be reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget under the authority of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 35).
IV. Regulatory Impact Statement
A. Statement of Need
This document is necessary to update
the low-volume hospital payment
adjustment policy for FYs 2011 through
2017 to reflect changes provided by
section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018. Section 429
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018 makes certain changes to the
payment adjustment for low-volume
hospitals for FYs 2011 through 2017
relating to the application of the mileage
criterion for IHS and non-IHS hospitals.
B. Overall Impact Statement
We have examined the impacts of this
document 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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
42599
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 regulatory actions
with economically significant effects
($100 million or more in any 1 year).
Although we do not consider this
document to constitute a substantive
rule or regulatory action, the monetary
impact of the changes announced in this
document is approximately a $40
million increase in low-volume hospital
payments total for FYs 2011 through
2017 relative to the estimates included
in the respective FY IPPS/LTCH PPS
final rules.
C. Anticipated Effects
The RFA requires agencies to analyze
options for regulatory relief of small
businesses, 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
government jurisdictions. We estimate
that most hospitals and most other
providers and suppliers are small
entities as that term is used in the RFA.
The great majority of hospitals and most
other health care providers and
suppliers are small entities, either by
being nonprofit organizations or by
meeting the SBA definition of a small
business (having revenues of less than
$7.5 to $34.5 million in any 1 year). (For
details on the latest standard for health
care providers, we refer readers to page
33 of the Table of Small Business Size
Standards for NAIC 622 at the Small
Business Administration’s website at
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/
files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf.) For
purposes of the RFA, all hospitals and
other providers and suppliers are
considered to be small entities.
Individuals and States are not included
in the definition of a small entity. We
note that we expect the effects of the
changes announced in this document to
impact only approximately 15
providers.
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. With the exception of hospitals
located in certain New England
counties, for purposes of section 1102(b)
of the Act, we now define a small rural
hospital as a hospital that is located
outside of an urban area and has fewer
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
42600
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 164 / Thursday, August 23, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
than 100 beds. Section 601(g) of the
Social Security Amendments of 1983
(Pub. L. 98–21) designated hospitals in
certain New England counties as
belonging to the adjacent urban area.
Thus, for purposes of the IPPS, we
continue to classify these hospitals as
urban hospitals. As noted previously,
we expect the effects of the changes
announced in this document to impact
only approximately 15 providers.
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(Pub. L. 104–4) 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 changes announced in this
document will not mandate any
requirements for State, local, or tribal
governments, nor will it affect private
sector costs.
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 changes announced in this
document will not have a substantial
effect on State and local governments.
Executive Order 13771, entitled
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,’’ was issued on
January 30, 2017, and requires that the
costs associated with significant new
regulations ‘‘shall, to the extent
permitted by law, be offset by the
elimination of existing costs associated
with at least two prior regulations.’’ It
has been determined that the provisions
announced in this document are actions
that primarily result in transfers, and
thus are not a regulatory or deregulatory
action for the purposes of Executive
Order 13771.
V. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and
Delay of Effective Date
We ordinarily publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register and invite public comment
prior to a rule taking effect in
accordance with section 553(b) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
and section 1871 of the Act. In addition,
in accordance with section 553(d) of the
APA and section 1871(e)(1)(B)(i) of the
Act, we ordinarily provide a 30 day
delay to a substantive rule’s effective
date. For substantive rules that
constitute major rules, in accordance
with 5 U.S.C. 801, we ordinarily provide
a 60-day delay in the effective date.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Aug 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
None of the processes or effective date
requirements apply, however, when the
rule in question is interpretive, a general
statement of policy, or a rule of agency
organization, procedure or practice.
They also do not apply when the statute
establishes rules that are to be applied,
leaving no discretion or gaps for an
agency to fill in through rulemaking.
In addition, an agency may waive
notice and comment rulemaking, as well
as any delay in effective date, when the
agency for good cause finds that notice
and public comment on the rule as well
the effective date delay are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest. In cases where an
agency finds good cause, the agency
must incorporate a statement of this
finding and its reasons in the rule
issued.
The policies being publicized in this
document do not constitute agency
rulemaking. Rather, the statute, as
amended by the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018, has already
required that the agency make these
changes, and we are simply notifying
the public of the changes to the payment
adjustment for low-volume hospitals for
FYs 2011 through 2017 relating to the
application of the mileage criterion for
IHS and non-IHS hospitals. As this
document merely informs the public of
these changes, it is not a rule and does
not require any notice and comment
rulemaking. To the extent any of the
policies articulated in this document
constitute interpretations of the statute’s
requirements or procedures that will be
used to implement the statute’s
directive, they are interpretive rules,
general statements of policy, and rules
of agency procedure or practice, which
are not subject to notice and comment
rulemaking or a delayed effective date.
However, to the extent that notice and
comment rulemaking, a delay in
effective date, or both would otherwise
apply, we find good cause to waive such
requirements. Specifically, we find it
unnecessary to undertake notice and
comment rulemaking in this instance as
this document does not propose to make
any substantive changes to the policies
or methodologies already in effect as a
matter of law, but simply applies
payment adjustments under the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
to these existing policies and
methodologies. As the changes outlined
in this document have already taken
effect, it would also be impracticable to
undertake notice and comment
rulemaking. For these reasons, we also
find that a waiver of any delay in
effective date, if it were otherwise
applicable, is necessary to comply with
the requirements of the Consolidated
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Appropriations Act, 2018. Therefore, we
find good cause to waive notice and
comment procedures as well as any
delay in effective date, if such
procedures or delays are required at all.
Dated: August 16, 2018.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 2018–18271 Filed 8–22–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 64
[Docket ID FEMA–2018–0002; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–8543]
Suspension of Community Eligibility
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This rule identifies
communities where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under
the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) that are scheduled for
suspension on the effective dates listed
within this rule because of
noncompliance with the floodplain
management requirements of the
program. If the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) receives
documentation that the community has
adopted the required floodplain
management measures prior to the
effective suspension date given in this
rule, the suspension will not occur and
a notice of this will be provided by
publication in the Federal Register on a
subsequent date. Also, information
identifying the current participation
status of a community can be obtained
from FEMA’s Community Status Book
(CSB). The CSB is available at https://
www.fema.gov/national-floodinsurance-program-community-statusbook.
SUMMARY:
The effective date of each
community’s scheduled suspension is
the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the
third column of the following tables.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you want to determine whether a
particular community was suspended
on the suspension date or for further
information, contact Adrienne L.
Sheldon, PE, CFM, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 400 C
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM
23AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 164 (Thursday, August 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42596-42600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18271]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
42 CFR Part 412
[CMS-1709-N]
RIN 0938-ZB49
Medicare Program; Certain Changes to the Low-Volume Hospital
Payment Adjustment Under the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment
Systems (IPPS) for Acute Care Hospitals for Fiscal Years 2011 Through
2017
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Application of a payment adjustment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces changes to the payment adjustment for
low-volume hospitals under the hospital inpatient prospective payment
systems (IPPS) for acute care hospitals for fiscal years (FYs) 2011
through 2017 in accordance with section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018.
DATES: Effective date: August 22, 2018.
Applicability date: The provisions described in this document are
applicable for discharges on or after October 1, 2010, and on or before
September 30, 2017, in accordance with section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Hudson, (410) 786-5490.; Mark
Luxton, (410) 786-4530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On March 23, 2018 the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub.
L. 115-141) was enacted. Section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2018 makes certain changes to the payment adjustment for low-
volume hospitals for fiscal years (FYs) 2011 through 2017 relating to
the application of the mileage criterion for Indian Health Service and
non-Indian Health Service facilities.
II. Provisions of the Document
A. Changes to the Payment Adjustment for Low-Volume Hospitals in FYs
2011 Through 2017
1. Background
Section 1886(d)(12) of the Act provides for an additional payment
to each qualifying low-volume hospital under the Hospital Inpatient
Prospective Payment Systems (IPPS) for Acute Care Hospitals beginning
in FY 2005. CMS implemented this provision in the regulations at 42 CFR
412.101. The payment adjustment to a low-volume hospital provided for
under section 1886(d)(12) of the Act is ``[i]n addition to any payment
calculated under this section.'' Therefore, meaning the payment
adjustment is based on the per discharge amount paid to the qualifying
hospital under section 1886 of the Act. In other words, the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment is based on total per discharge payments
made under section 1886 of the Act, including capital, disproportionate
share hospital (DSH), indirect medical education (IME), and outlier
payments. For sole community hospitals (SCHs) and Medicare-dependent
hospitals (MDHs), the low-volume hospital payment adjustment is based
in part on either the Federal rate or the hospital-specific rate,
whichever results in a greater operating IPPS payment.
The Affordable Care Act amended section 1886(d)(12) of the Act by
modifying the definition of a low-volume hospital and the methodology
for calculating the payment adjustment for low-volume hospitals,
effective only for discharges occurring during FYs 2011 and 2012, and
subsequent legislation extended those temporary modifications through
FY 2018. (The most recent statutory extension of those temporary
changes to the low-volume hospital payment policy was for FY 2018 and
is discussed in a document
[[Page 42597]]
(CMS 1677-N) that appeared in the April 26, 2018 Federal Register (83
FR 18301).) Specifically, those provisions amended the qualifying
criteria for low volume hospitals under section 1886(d)(12)(C)(i) of
the Act to specify that, for FYs 2011 through 2018, a subsection (d)
hospital qualifies as a low-volume hospital if it is more than 15 road
miles from another subsection (d) hospital and has less than 1,600
discharges of individuals entitled to, or enrolled for, benefits under
Part A during the fiscal year. In addition, these provisions amended
section 1886(d)(12)(D) of the Act to provide that for FYs 2011 through
2018, the low-volume hospital payment adjustment (that is, the
percentage increase) is to be determined using a continuous linear
sliding scale ranging from 25 percent for low-volume hospitals with 200
or fewer discharges of individuals entitled to, or enrolled for,
benefits under Part A in the fiscal year to zero percent for low-volume
hospitals with greater than 1,600 discharges of such individuals in the
fiscal year. (We note that under Sec. 412.101(b)(2)(ii), for FYs 2011
through 2017, a hospital's Medicare discharges from the most recently
available MedPAR data, as determined by CMS, are used to determine
whether the hospital meets the discharge criterion to receive the low
volume hospital payment adjustment in the applicable fiscal year. In
the FY 2019 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule, we finalized conforming changes
to this provision to reflect that the low-volume hospital payment
adjustment policy in effect for FY 2018 is the same low-volume hospital
payment adjustment policy in effect for FYs 2011 through 2017 (83 FR
41144, August 17, 2018).
2. Treatment of Indian Health Service and Non-Indian Health Service
Facilities
Section 1886(d)(12)(C) of the Act requires that, in order to
qualify for the low volume hospital payment adjustment, a hospital must
be located more than a specified number of miles from the nearest
subsection (d) hospital (referred to as the mileage criterion, which is
implemented at Sec. 412.101(b)(2)). Since CMS considers Indian Health
Service (IHS) and Tribal hospitals (collectively referred to here as
``IHS hospitals'') to be subsection (d) hospitals, for the reasons
discussed in the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (82 FR 38188 through
38189), we adopted a parallel adjustment at Sec. 412.101(e) which
specifies that, for discharges occurring in FY 2018 and subsequent
years, only the distance between IHS hospitals would be considered when
assessing whether an IHS hospital meets the mileage criterion under
Sec. 412.101(b)(2), and similarly, only the distance between non-IHS
hospitals would be considered when assessing whether a non-IHS hospital
meets the mileage criterion under Sec. 412.101(b)(2).
While the policy finalized in the FY 2018 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule
addresses FY 2018 and subsequent fiscal years, section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 amended section 1886(d)(12)(C) of
the Act by adding a new clause (iii) specifying that for purposes of
determining whether an IHS or a non-IHS hospital meets the mileage
criterion under section 1886(d)(12)(C)(i) of the Act with respect to FY
2011 or a succeeding year, the Secretary shall apply the policy
described in the regulations at Sec. 412.101(e) (as in effect on the
date of enactment). In other words, under this statutory change, the
special treatment with respect to the proximities between IHS and non-
IHS hospitals as set forth in Sec. 412.101(e) for discharges occurring
in FY 2018 and subsequent fiscal years is now also applicable for
purposes of applying the mileage criterion for the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment for FYs 2011 through 2017. Therefore, when assessing
the mileage criterion under Sec. 412.101(b)(2) for FYs 2011 through
2017, an IHS hospital would be considered to have met the mileage
criterion in the applicable year if it was more than 15 road miles from
the nearest IHS hospital, and a non-IHS hospital would be considered to
have met the mileage criterion in the applicable year if it was more
than 15 road miles from the nearest non-IHS hospital.
B. Implementation of the Low-Volume Hospital Payment Adjustment Under
Section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
Section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 applies
the policy at Sec. 412.101(e) to prior years, that is, for discharges
occurring during FYs 2011 through 2017. To implement these changes,
hospitals that qualify for the low-volume hospital payment adjustment
under the provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 may
receive the low-volume hospital payment adjustment as part of the cost
report settlement and reopening process for each cost report that
includes discharges from one of the applicable fiscal years (that is,
from FYs 2011 through 2017). In the event a hospital, having followed
our process to request the low-volume hospital payment adjustment as
described in this document, qualifies as a low-volume hospital for
discharges occurring in one of the applicable fiscal years and those
discharges are in a cost report that has been settled, the Medicare
Administrative Contractors (MAC) will reopen such cost reports in
accordance with 42 CFR 405.1885 which allows for the reopening of cost
reports upon request only if a request to reopen is received by the MAC
within 3 years of the date of the determination or decision that is the
subject of the reopening or if the cost report is the subject of a
pending jurisdictionally proper appeal before the Provider
Reimbursement Review Board or CMS Administrator. Therefore, the
application of the low-volume hospital payment adjustment under the
provisions of section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
will only be applied to discharges occurring in FYs 2011 through 2017
(as applicable) that are in cost reports that are either currently open
or for which the hospital requests reopening within the 3-year
reopening period by making a request to the MAC with the information
described in this document. In this document, we are explicitly
directing the MACs to reopen and revise these matters, but only under
the circumstances and for the cost reporting periods specified herein
and subject to the time limits specified both in 42 CFR 405.1885(b) and
this document. (See 42 CFR 405.1885(c)(1).) If a hospital's reopening
request is untimely or if a hospital fails to provide adequate written
documentation as described in this document, the MAC may deny the
reopening request.
We are directing a reopening here under the circumstances described
solely in response to the amendment made by section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, which changed the application of
the mileage criterion for purposes of the low-volume hospital payment
adjustment for FYs 2011 through 2017. We reiterate here that, apart
from the specific circumstances, time periods, and cost reporting
periods for which we are explicitly directing reopening in this
document, reopening denials by the MAC in this and other contexts are
discretionary and unreviewable under Your Home Visiting Nurse Servs.,
Inc. v. Shalala, 525 U.S. 449 (1999) and related precedent.
We note, any reopening under this procedure shall be for the sole
purpose of making a low-volume hospital payment adjustment under the
provisions of section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
[[Page 42598]]
and for no other purpose. (For additional information on the reopening
regulations at 42 CFR 405.1885, refer to the following final rules
published in the Federal Register: (67 FR 50096), (73 FR 30230), and
(78 FR 75162) as well as sections 2931 through 2932 of chapter 29 of
the Provider Reimbursement Manual (PRM), Part 1.)
The changes to the low-volume hospital payment adjustment under
section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 do not affect
the discharge criterion in place between FYs 2011 and 2017. Thus, in
accordance with the existing regulations at Sec. 412.101(b)(2)(ii) and
consistent with our implementation of the low-volume hospital payment
adjustment in FYs 2011 through 2017, the discharge data source used to
identify qualifying low-volume hospitals and calculate the payment
adjustment in accordance with the changes under section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 is the same discharge data source
used to identify qualifying low-volume hospitals and calculate the
payment adjustment for discharges that occurred in that fiscal year;
that is, the most recent data available at the time of the development
of the payment rates and factors established in the corresponding final
rule. Under Sec. 412.101(b)(2)(ii), for FYs 2011 through 2017, a
hospital's Medicare discharges from the most recently available MedPAR
data for the applicable fiscal year, as determined by CMS, are used to
determine whether the hospital meets the discharge criterion to receive
the low-volume payment adjustment in the applicable year. The
applicable low-volume percentage increase for FYs 2011 through 2017 is
determined using a continuous linear sliding scale equation that
results in a low-volume adjustment ranging from an additional 25
percent for hospitals with 200 or fewer Medicare discharges to a zero
percent additional payment adjustment for hospitals with 1,600 or more
Medicare discharges (Sec. 412.101(c)(2)).
For the discharge data source used to identify qualifying low-
volume hospitals and to calculate the payment adjustment for FY 2011,
refer to the chart in the FY 2011 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (75 FR 50242
through 50274) or the `Medicare Discharge Count for FY 2011 Low Volume
Adjustment' file on the ``Files for FY 2011 Final Rule and Correction
Notice'' home page (https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/Acute-Inpatient-Files-for-Download-Items/CMS1255464.html). For FYs 2012 through 2017, Table 14 of each
year's respective IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (which is available through
the internet on the CMS website at https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/ under
``Acute Inpatient--Files for Download'' for the respective year) lists
the ``subsection (d)'' hospitals with fewer than 1,600 Medicare
discharges based on the applicable data source and their payment
adjustment for that fiscal year (if eligible).
These discharges and corresponding payment adjustment are based on
the most recent data available at the time of the development of that
year's payment rates and factors established in the corresponding final
rule. (For additional details on the discharge data source used to
identify qualifying low-volume hospitals and calculate the payment
adjustment for FYs 2011 through 2017, refer to the following FY 2011
(75 FR 50241 through 50275); FY 2012 (76 FR 51679 through 51680); FY
2013 (78 FR 14689 through 14691); FY 2014 ((79 FR 15022 through 15025)
and (79 FR 34444 through 34446)); FY 2015 ((80 FR 49998 through 49999)
and Change Request 9197 (Transmittal 3281; June 5, 2015)); FY 2016 (80
FR 49595 through 49597); and FY 2017 (81 FR 56941 through 56943).) The
list of hospitals with fewer than 1,600 Medicare discharges for each of
FYs 2011 through 2017 (previously described) does not reflect whether
or not the hospital meets the mileage criterion. In addition to meeting
the discharge criterion, an IHS hospital would be eligible for the low-
volume hospital payment adjustment for an applicable fiscal year under
the provisions of section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2018 if, in the applicable fiscal year, it was located more than 15
road miles from the nearest IHS hospital. Likewise, a non-IHS hospital
meeting the discharge requirement would be eligible for the low-volume
hospital payment adjustment for an applicable fiscal year under the
provisions of section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
if, in the applicable fiscal year, it was located more than 15 road
miles from the nearest non-IHS hospital.
We are using the following procedure for a hospital to request the
low-volume hospital payment adjustment for any applicable fiscal years
between FYs 2011 and 2017 under the provisions of section 429 of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. In order for the applicable low-
volume hospital payment adjustment to be applied for an applicable
fiscal year's discharges in an open or reopenable cost report(s), a
hospital must notify and provide documentation to its MAC in writing
that it meets the mileage criterion under the provisions of section 429
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 in the applicable fiscal
year (as described in this document). In the case of a reopenable cost
report, the hospital must request a reopening when submitting its
written notification and documentation to its MAC. We note, for a
hospital to receive the low-volume payment adjustment in FYs 2011
through 2017 under the provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2018, the hospital must have been unable to meet the mileage
criterion for that fiscal year prior to the enactment of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (that is, the provisions of
section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 do not affect
hospitals which met the mileage criterion without regard to this
provision). Specifically, for an IHS hospital to be eligible to receive
the low-volume hospital payment adjustment in FYs 2011 through 2017
under section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, that
IHS hospital must not have been able to meet the mileage criterion in
the applicable fiscal year based on its proximity to a non-IHS
hospital. Similarly, for an non-IHS hospital to be eligible to receive
the low-volume payment adjustment in FYs 2011 through 2017 under
section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, that non-IHS
hospital must not have been able to meet the mileage criterion in the
applicable fiscal year based on its proximity to an IHS hospital. We
encourage hospitals to notify their MAC as soon as possible because, as
previously noted, under 42 CFR 405.1885, reopening a cost report is
limited to 3 years after cost report settlement. In other words, the
application of the low-volume hospital payment adjustment under the
provisions of section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018
is limited to discharges occurring in FYs 2011 through 2017 (as
applicable) that are in cost reports that are either currently open or
within the 3-year reopening period. Therefore, to receive the low-
volume payment adjustment for discharges in FYs 2011 through 2017, the
written request must be received by the MAC prior to the close of the
3-year period for the cost report that includes such discharges.
The use of a Web-based mapping tool as part of documenting that the
hospital meets the mileage criterion for low-volume hospitals in the
applicable fiscal year is acceptable. The MAC will determine if the
information submitted by the hospital, such as the name and
[[Page 42599]]
street address of the nearest hospitals, location on a map, and
distance (in road miles, as defined in the regulations at Sec.
412.101(a)) from the hospital requesting low-volume hospital status, is
sufficient to document that the hospital requesting low-volume hospital
status meets the mileage criterion in the applicable fiscal year (and
had previously been unable to meet the mileage criterion in that fiscal
year as described in this document). The MAC may follow up with the
hospital to obtain additional necessary information to determine
whether or not the hospital meets the low-volume mileage criterion for
any applicable fiscal year. In addition, the MAC will refer to the
hospital's Medicare discharge data determined by CMS for the applicable
fiscal year(s) to determine whether or not the hospital met the
discharge criterion in that fiscal year, and the amount of the low-
volume hospital payment adjustment for such year(s), once it is
determined that the mileage criterion has been met. (The applicable
Medicare discharge data for each of FYs 2011 through 2017 is previously
described.) In addition, in order to receive the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment, sufficient documentation in the written request to
the MAC must include the following to demonstrate that the hospital was
unable to meet the mileage criterion for that fiscal year prior to the
enactment of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. For each
applicable fiscal year, an IHS hospital must provide documentation to
its MAC that it was not able to meet the mileage criterion in the
applicable fiscal year based on its proximity to a non-IHS hospital.
Similarly, a non-IHS hospital must provide documentation to its MAC
that it was not able to meet the mileage criterion in the applicable
fiscal year based on its proximity to an IHS hospital.
Program guidance on the implementation of this provision, including
instructions for cost report settlement and reopening as applicable,
will be announced in an upcoming transmittal. We intend to make any
conforming changes to the regulations text at 42 CFR 412.101 to reflect
the changes to the low-volume hospital payment adjustment policy in
accordance with the amendments made by section 429 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 as described in this document in future
rulemaking.
III. Collection of Information Requirements
This document does not impose information collection and
recordkeeping requirements. Consequently, it need not be reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 35).
IV. Regulatory Impact Statement
A. Statement of Need
This document is necessary to update the low-volume hospital
payment adjustment policy for FYs 2011 through 2017 to reflect changes
provided by section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018.
Section 429 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 makes certain
changes to the payment adjustment for low-volume hospitals for FYs 2011
through 2017 relating to the application of the mileage criterion for
IHS and non-IHS hospitals.
B. Overall Impact Statement
We have examined the impacts of this document 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 regulatory
actions with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in
any 1 year). Although we do not consider this document to constitute a
substantive rule or regulatory action, the monetary impact of the
changes announced in this document is approximately a $40 million
increase in low-volume hospital payments total for FYs 2011 through
2017 relative to the estimates included in the respective FY IPPS/LTCH
PPS final rules.
C. Anticipated Effects
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief
of small businesses, 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
government jurisdictions. We estimate that most hospitals and most
other providers and suppliers are small entities as that term is used
in the RFA. The great majority of hospitals and most other health care
providers and suppliers are small entities, either by being nonprofit
organizations or by meeting the SBA definition of a small business
(having revenues of less than $7.5 to $34.5 million in any 1 year).
(For details on the latest standard for health care providers, we refer
readers to page 33 of the Table of Small Business Size Standards for
NAIC 622 at the Small Business Administration's website at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf.) For
purposes of the RFA, all hospitals and other providers and suppliers
are considered to be small entities. Individuals and States are not
included in the definition of a small entity. We note that we expect
the effects of the changes announced in this document to impact only
approximately 15 providers.
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. With
the exception of hospitals located in certain New England counties, for
purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we now define a small rural
hospital as a hospital that is located outside of an urban area and has
fewer
[[Page 42600]]
than 100 beds. Section 601(g) of the Social Security Amendments of 1983
(Pub. L. 98-21) designated hospitals in certain New England counties as
belonging to the adjacent urban area. Thus, for purposes of the IPPS,
we continue to classify these hospitals as urban hospitals. As noted
previously, we expect the effects of the changes announced in this
document to impact only approximately 15 providers.
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
(Pub. L. 104-4) 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
changes announced in this document will not mandate any requirements
for State, local, or tribal governments, nor will it affect private
sector costs.
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 changes announced in this document will not have a
substantial effect on State and local governments.
Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs,'' was issued on January 30, 2017, and
requires that the costs associated with significant new regulations
``shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination
of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations.'' It
has been determined that the provisions announced in this document are
actions that primarily result in transfers, and thus are not a
regulatory or deregulatory action for the purposes of Executive Order
13771.
V. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and Delay of Effective Date
We ordinarily publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register and invite public comment prior to a rule taking
effect in accordance with section 553(b) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) and section 1871 of the Act. In addition, in
accordance with section 553(d) of the APA and section 1871(e)(1)(B)(i)
of the Act, we ordinarily provide a 30 day delay to a substantive
rule's effective date. For substantive rules that constitute major
rules, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 801, we ordinarily provide a 60-day
delay in the effective date.
None of the processes or effective date requirements apply,
however, when the rule in question is interpretive, a general statement
of policy, or a rule of agency organization, procedure or practice.
They also do not apply when the statute establishes rules that are to
be applied, leaving no discretion or gaps for an agency to fill in
through rulemaking.
In addition, an agency may waive notice and comment rulemaking, as
well as any delay in effective date, when the agency for good cause
finds that notice and public comment on the rule as well the effective
date delay are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest. In cases where an agency finds good cause, the agency must
incorporate a statement of this finding and its reasons in the rule
issued.
The policies being publicized in this document do not constitute
agency rulemaking. Rather, the statute, as amended by the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018, has already required that the agency make
these changes, and we are simply notifying the public of the changes to
the payment adjustment for low-volume hospitals for FYs 2011 through
2017 relating to the application of the mileage criterion for IHS and
non-IHS hospitals. As this document merely informs the public of these
changes, it is not a rule and does not require any notice and comment
rulemaking. To the extent any of the policies articulated in this
document constitute interpretations of the statute's requirements or
procedures that will be used to implement the statute's directive, they
are interpretive rules, general statements of policy, and rules of
agency procedure or practice, which are not subject to notice and
comment rulemaking or a delayed effective date.
However, to the extent that notice and comment rulemaking, a delay
in effective date, or both would otherwise apply, we find good cause to
waive such requirements. Specifically, we find it unnecessary to
undertake notice and comment rulemaking in this instance as this
document does not propose to make any substantive changes to the
policies or methodologies already in effect as a matter of law, but
simply applies payment adjustments under the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 to these existing policies and methodologies.
As the changes outlined in this document have already taken effect, it
would also be impracticable to undertake notice and comment rulemaking.
For these reasons, we also find that a waiver of any delay in effective
date, if it were otherwise applicable, is necessary to comply with the
requirements of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. Therefore,
we find good cause to waive notice and comment procedures as well as
any delay in effective date, if such procedures or delays are required
at all.
Dated: August 16, 2018.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 2018-18271 Filed 8-22-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P