Medicare, Medicaid, and CLIA Programs; Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 Exemption of Laboratories Licensed by the State of Washington, 51591-51594 [2019-21062]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
invited to send comments regarding our
burden estimates or any other aspect of
this collection of information, including
the necessity and utility of the proposed
information collection for the proper
performance of the agency’s functions,
the accuracy of the estimated burden,
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected, and the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology to minimize the
information collection burden.
DATES: Comments must be received by
November 29, 2019.
ADDRESSES: When commenting, please
reference the document identifier or
OMB control number. To be assured
consideration, comments and
recommendations must be submitted in
any one of the following ways:
1. Electronically. You may send your
comments electronically to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for ‘‘Comment or
Submission’’ or ‘‘More Search Options’’
to find the information collection
document(s) that are accepting
comments.
2. By regular mail. You may mail
written comments to the following
address: CMS, Office of Strategic
Operations and Regulatory Affairs,
Division of Regulations Development,
Attention: Document Identifier/OMB
Control Number l, Room C4–26–05,
7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore,
Maryland 21244–1850.
To obtain copies of a supporting
statement and any related forms for the
proposed collection(s) summarized in
this notice, you may make your request
using one of following:
1. Access CMS’ website address at
website address at https://www.cms.gov/
Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/
PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRAListing.html.
2. Email your request, including your
address, phone number, OMB number,
and CMS document identifier, to
Paperwork@cms.hhs.gov.
3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at
(410) 786–1326.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William N. Parham at (410) 786–4669.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Contents
This notice sets out a summary of the
use and burden associated with the
following information collections. More
detailed information can be found in
each collection’s supporting statement
and associated materials (see
ADDRESSES).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:16 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
CMS–10709 Hospital Survey for
Specified Covered Outpatient Drugs
(SCODs)
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520), federal agencies must obtain
approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for each collection of
information they conduct or sponsor.
The term ‘‘collection of information’’ is
defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes agency requests
or requirements that members of the
public submit reports, keep records, or
provide information to a third party.
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA
requires federal agencies to publish a
60-day notice in the Federal Register
concerning each proposed collection of
information, including each proposed
extension or reinstatement of an existing
collection of information, before
submitting the collection to OMB for
approval. To comply with this
requirement, CMS is publishing this
notice.
Information Collection
1. Type of Information Collection
Request: New collection (Request for a
new OMB control number); Title of
Information Collection: Hospital Survey
for Specified Covered Outpatient Drugs
(SCODs); Use: In the CY 2018 OPPS/
ASC payment system final rule with
comment period, CMS finalized a policy
to adjust payment for separately payable
outpatient drugs acquired by eligible
hospitals at discounted rates under
HRSA’s 340B program from Average
Sales Price (ASP) plus 6 percent to ASP
minus 22.5 percent. According to 42
U.S.C. 256b, eligible hospitals include
those with a Medicare Disproportionate
Share Hospital adjustment of greater
than 11.75 percent, Children’s
Hospitals, Critical Access Hospitals,
Cancer Hospitals, Rural Referral Centers
and Sole Community Hospitals. The
340B program sets a ceiling on the price
that covered entities pay for outpatient
drugs. The 340B ceiling price refers to
the maximum amount that a
manufacturer can charge a covered
entity for the purchase of a 340B
covered outpatient drug. The 340B
ceiling price is statutorily defined as the
Average Manufacturer Price (AMP)
reduced by the rebate percentage, which
is commonly referred to as the Unit
Rebate Amount (URA).
On December 27, 2018, the United
States District Court for the District of
Columbia ruled that the Secretary of the
Department of Health & Human Services
exceeded his statutory authority to
adjust payment rates under the Hospital
Outpatient Prospective Payment System
(OPPS) for separately payable, 340B-
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51591
acquired drugs. See American Hospital
Ass’n v. Azar, 348 F. Supp. 3d 62, 82–
83 (D.D.C. 2018), appeal pending, Nos.
19–5048 & 19–5198 (D.C. Cir.). The
Court reasoned, in part, that the
Secretary had not collected the
necessary data to set payment rates
based on acquisition costs. The
government disagrees with that ruling
and has appealed. Nonetheless, in the
event that the ruling is affirmed, CMS
believes that it is important to begin
obtaining acquisition costs for specified
covered outpatient drugs to set payment
rates based on cost for 340B-acquired
drugs when they are furnished by
certain covered entity hospitals.
The acquisition cost data hospitals
submit in response to this survey will be
used to help determine payment
amounts for drugs acquired under the
340B program. We want to ensure that
the Medicare program pays for specified
covered outpatient drugs purchased
under the 340B program at amounts that
approximate what hospitals actually pay
to acquire the drugs. This will ensure
that the Medicare program uses taxpayer
dollars prudently while maintaining
beneficiary access to these drugs and
allowing beneficiary cost-sharing to be
based on the amounts hospitals actually
pay to acquire the drugs. Form Number:
CMS–10709 (OMB control number:
0938–New); Frequency: Occasionally;
Affected Public: Business or other forprofits and Not-for-profits, State, Local,
or Tribal Governments; Number of
Respondents: 761; Total Annual
Responses: 46,610,448; Total Annual
Hours: 33,484. (For policy questions
regarding this collection contact Steven
Johnson at 410–786–3332.)
Dated: September 25, 2019.
William N. Parham, III,
Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office
of Strategic Operations and Regulatory
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019–21120 Filed 9–26–19; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
[CMS–3383–N]
Medicare, Medicaid, and CLIA
Programs; Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments of 1988
Exemption of Laboratories Licensed
by the State of Washington
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
51592
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Notices
This notice announces that
laboratories located in and licensed by
the State of Washington that possess a
valid license under the Medical Test
Site law, Chapter 70.42 of the Revised
Code of Washington, are exempt from
the requirements of the Clinical
Laboratory Improvement Amendments
of 1988 (CLIA) for a period of 4 years.
DATES: The exemption takes effect on
September 30, 2019 to October 2, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Cajigas, (410) 786–0783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
I. Background and Legislative
Authority
Section 353 of the Public Health
Service Act (PHSA), as amended by the
Clinical Laboratory Improvement
Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) (Pub. L.
100–578), which was enacted on
October 31, 1988, generally provides
that no laboratory may perform tests on
human specimens for the diagnosis,
prevention or treatment of any disease
or impairment of, or assessment of the
health of, human beings unless it has a
certificate to perform that category of
tests issued by the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). Under section
1861(s)(17)(A) of the Social Security Act
(the Act), the Medicare program will
only pay for laboratory services if the
laboratory has an appropriate CLIA
certificate for the testing they conduct.
Under section 1902(a)(9)(C) of the Act,
state Medicaid plans will generally only
pay for laboratory services furnished by
CLIA-certified laboratories. Thus,
although subject to specified
exemptions and exceptions, laboratories
generally must have a current and valid
CLIA certificate to test human
specimens for the purposes noted above
to be eligible for payment for those tests
by the Medicare or Medicaid programs.
Regulations implementing section 353
of the PHSA are contained in 42 CFR
part 493.
Section 353(p) of the PHSA provides
for the exemption of laboratories from
CLIA requirements in states that enact
legal requirements that are equal to or
more stringent than CLIA’s statutory
and regulatory requirements. Section
353(p) of the PHSA is implemented in
subpart E of our regulations at 42 CFR
part 493. Sections 493.551(b) and
493.553 provide that we may exempt
from CLIA requirements, for a period
not to exceed 6 years, all state-licensed
or state-approved laboratories in a state
if the state licensure program meets the
specified conditions. Section 493.559
provides that we will publish a notice
in the Federal Register when we grant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:16 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
an exemption to an approved state
licensure program. It also provides that
the notice will include the following:
• The basis for granting the
exemption.
• A description of how the laboratory
requirements are equal to or more
stringent than those of CLIA.
• The term of approval, not to exceed
6 years.
A. State of Washington’s Application for
CLIA Exemption of Its Laboratories
The State of Washington has applied
for exemption of its laboratories from
CLIA program requirements. The State
of Washington submitted all of the
applicable information and attestations
required by §§ 493.551(a), 493.553, and
493.557(b) for state licensure programs
seeking exemption of their licensed
laboratories from CLIA program
requirements. Examples of documents
and information submitted include: A
comparison of its laboratory licensure
requirements with comparable CLIA
condition-level requirements (that is, a
crosswalk); and a description of the
following: Its inspection process; its
proficiency testing (PT) monitoring
process; its data management and
analysis system; its investigative and
response procedures for complaints
received against laboratories; and its
policy regarding announced and
unannounced inspections.
B. CMS Analysis of Washington’s
Application and Supporting
Documentation
To determine whether we should
grant a CLIA exemption to laboratories
licensed by a state, we review the
application and additional
documentation that the state submits to
us and conduct a detailed and in-depth
comparison of the state licensure
program and CLIA’s statutory and
regulatory requirements to determine
whether the state program meets the
requirements at subpart E of part 493.
In summary, the state generally must
demonstrate that:
• It has state laws in effect that
provide for a state licensure program
that has requirements that are equal to
or more stringent than CLIA conditionlevel requirements for laboratories.
• It has implemented a state licensure
program with requirements that are
equal to or more stringent than the CLIA
condition-level requirements such that a
laboratory licensed by the state program
would meet the CLIA condition-level
requirements if it were inspected against
those requirements.
• The requirements under that state
licensure program meet or exceed the
requirements of §§ 493.553, 493.555,
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and 493.557(b) and are suitable for
approval by us under § 493.551(a). For
example, among other things, the
program would need to:
++ Demonstrate that it has
enforcement authority and
administrative structures and resources
adequate to enforce its laboratory
requirements.
++ Permit us or our agents to inspect
laboratories within the state.
++ Require laboratories within the
state to submit to inspections by us or
our agents as a condition of licensure.
++ Agree to pay any costs associated
with our activities to validate its state
licensure program as well as the state’s
pro rata share of the general overhead to
develop and implement CLIA as
specified in §§ 493.645(a), 493.646(b),
and 493.557(b).
++ Take appropriate enforcement
action against laboratories found by us
or our agents out of compliance with
requirements comparable to CLIA
condition-level requirements, as
specified in § 493.557(b).
As specified in our regulations at
§ 493.555 and § 493.557(b), our review
of a state licensure program includes
(but is not necessarily limited to) an
evaluation of the following:
• Whether the state’s requirements for
laboratories are equal to or more
stringent than the CLIA condition-level
requirements.
• The state’s inspection process
requirements to determine the
following:
++ The comparability of the full
inspection and complaint inspection
procedures to those of CMS.
++ The state’s enforcement
procedures for laboratories found to be
out of compliance with its requirements.
• The ability of the state to provide us
with electronic data and reports with
the adverse or corrective actions
resulting from PT results that constitute
unsuccessful participation in CMSapproved PT programs and with other
data we determine to be necessary for
validation review and assessment of the
state’s inspection process requirements.
• The state’s agreement with us to
ensure that the agreement obligates the
state to do the following:
++ Notify us within 30 days of the
action taken against any CLIA-exempt
laboratory that has had its licensure or
approval withdrawn or revoked or been
in any way sanctioned.
++ Notify us within 10 days of any
deficiency identified in a CLIA-exempt
laboratory in cases when the deficiency
poses an immediate jeopardy to the
laboratory’s patients or a hazard to the
general public.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Notices
++ Notify each laboratory licensed by
the state under its approved state
licensure program within 10 days of a
withdrawal of our approval of the state’s
licensure program, and the resulting
loss of the laboratory’s exemption from
CLIA based on its licensure under that
program.
++ Provide us with written
notification of any changes in the state’s
licensure (or approval) and inspection
requirements.
++ Disclose to us or our agent any
laboratory’s PT results in accordance
with the state’s confidentiality
requirements.
++ Take appropriate enforcement
action against laboratories that we or
our agents find to be out of compliance
with CLIA condition-level requirements
in a validation survey, and report these
enforcement actions to us.
++ Notify us of all newly licensed
laboratories, and any changes in the
specialties and subspecialties for which
any laboratory performs testing, within
30 days.
++ Provide us, as requested,
inspection schedules for validation
purposes.
In keeping with the process described
above, we evaluated the application and
supporting materials that were
submitted by Washington State to verify
that the laboratories licensed through its
program will meet or exceed the
requirements of the following subparts
of part 493: Subpart H, Participation in
Proficiency Testing for Laboratories
Performing Nonwaived Testing; Subpart
J, Facility Administration for
Nonwaived Testing; Subpart K, Quality
Systems for Nonwaived Testing,
Subpart M, Personnel for Nonwaived
Testing; Subpart Q, Inspection; and
Subpart R, Enforcement Procedures.
We found that Washington State’s
laboratory licensure program
requirements are equivalent to all the
CLIA condition-level requirements. The
state licensure program’s inspection
process and PT monitoring processes
were adequate. Other materials that
were submitted demonstrated
compliance with the other abovereferenced requirements of subpart E of
part 493. As a result, we concluded that
the submitted documents supported
exempting laboratories licensed under
that program from the CLIA program
requirements.
The federal validation inspections of
CLIA-exempt laboratories, as specified
in § 493.563, were conducted on a
representative sample basis, as well as
in response to any substantial
allegations of noncompliance
(complaint inspections). The outcome of
those validation inspections has been,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:16 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
and will continue to be our principal
tool for verifying that the laboratories
located in, and licensed by the state are
in compliance with CLIA requirements.
We have conducted validation
inspections of a representative sample
(approximately 5 percent) of the
laboratories inspected by the
Washington State Office of Laboratory
Quality Assurance (LQA). The
validation inspections were primarily of
the concurrent type; that is, our
surveyors accompanied Washington
State’s inspectors, each inspecting
against his or her agency’s respective
regulations. Analysis of the validation
data revealed no significant differences
between the state and federal findings.
The validation surveys verified that the
State of Washington inspection process
covers all CLIA conditions applicable to
each laboratory being inspected and also
verified that the state laboratory
licensure requirements meet or exceed
CLIA condition-level requirements. Our
validation surveys found the state
inspectors highly skilled and qualified.
The LQA inspected laboratories in a
timely fashion; that is, all laboratories
were inspected within the required 24month cycle. All parameters monitored
by our regional office in Seattle,
Washington, to date, indicate that the
State of Washington is meeting all
requirements for approval of CLIA
exemption. This federal monitoring will
continue as an on-going process.
C. Conclusion
Based on review of the documents
submitted by the Washington state
licensure program under the
requirements of subpart E of part 493, as
well as the outcome of the validation
inspections conducted by our regional
office in Seattle, Washington, we find
that the State of Washington’s licensure
program meets the requirements of
§ 493.551(a), and that, as a result, we
may exempt from CLIA program
requirements all state-licensed
laboratories.
Approval of the CLIA exemption for
laboratories located within and licensed
by the State of Washington laboratory
licensure program is subject to removal
if we determine that the outcome of a
comparability review or a validation
review inspection is not acceptable, as
described under §§ 493.573 and
493.575, or if the State of Washington
fails to pay the required fee every 2
years as required under § 493.646(b).
D. Laboratory Data
In accordance with our regulations at
§ 493.557(b)(8), the approval of this
exemption for laboratories located
within and licensed by the State of
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51593
Washington is conditioned on the State
of Washington’s continued compliance
with the assertions made in its
application, especially the provision of
information to us about changes to a
laboratory’s specialties or subspecialties
based on the state’s survey, and changes
to a laboratory’s certification status.
E. Required Administrative Actions
CLIA is a user-fee funded program.
The registration fee paid by laboratories
is intended to cover the cost of the
development and administration of the
program. However, when a state’s
application for exemption is approved,
we do not charge a fee to laboratories in
the state. The state’s share of the costs
associated with CLIA must be collected
from the state, as specified in
§ 493.645(a).
The State of Washington must pay for
the following:
• Costs of federal inspections of
laboratories in the state to verify that
Washington State’s laboratory licensure
program requirements are equivalent to
or more stringent than those in the CLIA
program, and that they are enforced in
an appropriate manner. The average
federal hourly rate is multiplied by the
total hours required to perform federal
validation surveys within the state.
• Costs incurred for federal surveys,
including investigations of complaints
that are substantiated. We will bill the
State of Washington on a semiannual
basis.
• The State of Washington’s
proportionate share of the costs
associated with establishing,
maintaining, and improving the CLIA
computer system, based on the portion
of those services from which the State
of Washington received direct benefit or
which contributed to the CLIA program
in the state. Thus, the State of
Washington is being charged for a
portion of our direct and indirect costs
of administering the CLIA program.
Such costs will be incurred by CMS, the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and contractors
working on behalf of these respective
agencies.
To estimate the State of Washington’s
proportionate share of the general
overhead costs to develop and
implement CLIA, we determined the
ratio of laboratories in the state to the
total number of laboratories nationally.
Approximately 1.6 percent of the
registered laboratories are in the State of
Washington. We determined that a
corresponding percentage of the
applicable CMS, CDC, FDA, and their
respective contractor costs should be
borne by the State of Washington.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
51594
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Notices
The State of Washington has agreed to
pay the state’s pro rata share of the
anticipated overhead costs and costs of
actual validation (including complaint
investigation surveys). A final
reconciliation for all laboratories and all
expenses will be made. We will
reimburse the state for any overpayment
or bill it for any balance.
II. Approval
In light of the foregoing, we grant
approval of the State of Washington’s
laboratory licensure program under
subpart E. All laboratories located in
and licensed by the State of Washington
under the Medical Test Site law,
Chapter 70.42 of the Revised Code of
Washington, are CLIA-exempt for all
specialties and subspecialties until
October 2, 2023.
III. 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.).
Dated: September 12, 2019.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
rating. In addition, the PRB will review
and recommend executive performance
bonuses and pay increases.
5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4) requires the
appointment of board members to be
published in the Federal Register. The
following persons comprise a standing
roster to serve as members of the SES
PRB for the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services:
Jennifer Main, Chief Operating Officer
(serves as the Chair)
Kimberly Brandt, Principal Deputy
Administrator for Policy and
Operations
Scott Giberson, Acting Director, Office
of Human Capital
Nancy O’Connor, Acting Consortium
Administrator, Consortium for
Medicare Health Plans Operations
Randy Pate, Deputy Administrator and
Director, Center for Consumer
Information and Insurance Oversight
Elizabeth Richter, Deputy Center
Director, Center for Medicare
Arrah Tabe-Bedward, Deputy Director,
Center for Medicare and Medicaid
Innovation
Jeffrey, Deputy Director for Operations,
Center for Consumer Information and
Insurance Oversight
Dated: September 5, 2019.
Jennifer Main,
Chief Operating Officer.
[FR Doc. 2019–21061 Filed 9–27–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
[FR Doc. 2019–21062 Filed 9–27–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2019–D–3361]
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
Eligibility Criteria for Expanded
Conditional Approval of New Animal
Drugs; Draft Guidance for Industry;
Availability
Performance Review Board
Membership
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of Performance Review
Board Membership.
AGENCY:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathy Vaughn, 410–786–1050 or
katherine.vaughn@cms.hhs.gov.
5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1) through (5)
requires each agency to establish, in
accordance with regulations prescribed
by the Office of Personnel Management,
one or more Senior Executive Service
(SES) Performance Review Boards.
The PRB shall review and evaluate
the initial summary rating of a senior
executive’s performance, the executive’s
response, and the higher-level official’s
comments on the initial summary
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:16 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice of availability.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or Agency) is
announcing the availability of a draft
guidance for industry (GFI) #261
entitled ‘‘Eligibility Criteria for
Expanded Conditional Approval of New
Animal Drugs.’’ This draft guidance is
intended for persons interested in
pursuing conditional approval of new
animal drugs for certain major uses in
major species. Eligibility for conditional
approval has been expanded beyond
minor uses in major species and minor
species to include certain major uses.
The Center for Veterinary Medicine
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(CVM) refers to the process for
conditionally approving new animal
drugs that are not minor use and minor
species (MUMS) drugs as ‘‘expanded
conditional approval.’’ The purpose of
expanded conditional approval is to
incentivize development of new animal
drugs for serious or life-threatening
conditions or unmet animal or human
health needs under circumstances
where a demonstration of effectiveness
would require a complex or particularly
difficult study or studies. This draft
guidance defines certain terms, clarifies
the eligibility criteria for expanded
conditional approval, and describes the
criteria CVM intends to consider when
determining expanded conditional
approval eligibility.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments on the draft guidance
by January 28, 2020 to ensure that the
Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on
the final version of the guidance.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on any guidance at any time as follows:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments submitted electronically,
including attachments, to https://
www.regulations.gov will be posted to
the docket unchanged. Because your
comment will be made public, you are
solely responsible for ensuring that your
comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a
third party may not wish to be posted,
such as medical information, your or
anyone else’s Social Security number, or
confidential business information, such
as a manufacturing process. Please note
that if you include your name, contact
information, or other information that
identifies you in the body of your
comments, that information will be
posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
• If you want to submit a comment
with confidential information that you
do not wish to be made available to the
public, submit the comment as a
written/paper submission and in the
manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper
Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’).
Written/Paper Submissions
Submit written/paper submissions as
follows:
• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for
written/paper submissions): Dockets
Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 189 (Monday, September 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51591-51594]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21062]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
[CMS-3383-N]
Medicare, Medicaid, and CLIA Programs; Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments of 1988 Exemption of Laboratories Licensed by
the State of Washington
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 51592]]
SUMMARY: This notice announces that laboratories located in and
licensed by the State of Washington that possess a valid license under
the Medical Test Site law, Chapter 70.42 of the Revised Code of
Washington, are exempt from the requirements of the Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) for a period of 4 years.
DATES: The exemption takes effect on September 30, 2019 to October 2,
2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Cajigas, (410) 786-0783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Legislative Authority
Section 353 of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), as amended by
the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) (Pub. L.
100-578), which was enacted on October 31, 1988, generally provides
that no laboratory may perform tests on human specimens for the
diagnosis, prevention or treatment of any disease or impairment of, or
assessment of the health of, human beings unless it has a certificate
to perform that category of tests issued by the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Under section
1861(s)(17)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act), the Medicare
program will only pay for laboratory services if the laboratory has an
appropriate CLIA certificate for the testing they conduct. Under
section 1902(a)(9)(C) of the Act, state Medicaid plans will generally
only pay for laboratory services furnished by CLIA-certified
laboratories. Thus, although subject to specified exemptions and
exceptions, laboratories generally must have a current and valid CLIA
certificate to test human specimens for the purposes noted above to be
eligible for payment for those tests by the Medicare or Medicaid
programs. Regulations implementing section 353 of the PHSA are
contained in 42 CFR part 493.
Section 353(p) of the PHSA provides for the exemption of
laboratories from CLIA requirements in states that enact legal
requirements that are equal to or more stringent than CLIA's statutory
and regulatory requirements. Section 353(p) of the PHSA is implemented
in subpart E of our regulations at 42 CFR part 493. Sections 493.551(b)
and 493.553 provide that we may exempt from CLIA requirements, for a
period not to exceed 6 years, all state-licensed or state-approved
laboratories in a state if the state licensure program meets the
specified conditions. Section 493.559 provides that we will publish a
notice in the Federal Register when we grant an exemption to an
approved state licensure program. It also provides that the notice will
include the following:
The basis for granting the exemption.
A description of how the laboratory requirements are equal
to or more stringent than those of CLIA.
The term of approval, not to exceed 6 years.
A. State of Washington's Application for CLIA Exemption of Its
Laboratories
The State of Washington has applied for exemption of its
laboratories from CLIA program requirements. The State of Washington
submitted all of the applicable information and attestations required
by Sec. Sec. 493.551(a), 493.553, and 493.557(b) for state licensure
programs seeking exemption of their licensed laboratories from CLIA
program requirements. Examples of documents and information submitted
include: A comparison of its laboratory licensure requirements with
comparable CLIA condition-level requirements (that is, a crosswalk);
and a description of the following: Its inspection process; its
proficiency testing (PT) monitoring process; its data management and
analysis system; its investigative and response procedures for
complaints received against laboratories; and its policy regarding
announced and unannounced inspections.
B. CMS Analysis of Washington's Application and Supporting
Documentation
To determine whether we should grant a CLIA exemption to
laboratories licensed by a state, we review the application and
additional documentation that the state submits to us and conduct a
detailed and in-depth comparison of the state licensure program and
CLIA's statutory and regulatory requirements to determine whether the
state program meets the requirements at subpart E of part 493.
In summary, the state generally must demonstrate that:
It has state laws in effect that provide for a state
licensure program that has requirements that are equal to or more
stringent than CLIA condition-level requirements for laboratories.
It has implemented a state licensure program with
requirements that are equal to or more stringent than the CLIA
condition-level requirements such that a laboratory licensed by the
state program would meet the CLIA condition-level requirements if it
were inspected against those requirements.
The requirements under that state licensure program meet
or exceed the requirements of Sec. Sec. 493.553, 493.555, and
493.557(b) and are suitable for approval by us under Sec. 493.551(a).
For example, among other things, the program would need to:
++ Demonstrate that it has enforcement authority and administrative
structures and resources adequate to enforce its laboratory
requirements.
++ Permit us or our agents to inspect laboratories within the
state.
++ Require laboratories within the state to submit to inspections
by us or our agents as a condition of licensure.
++ Agree to pay any costs associated with our activities to
validate its state licensure program as well as the state's pro rata
share of the general overhead to develop and implement CLIA as
specified in Sec. Sec. 493.645(a), 493.646(b), and 493.557(b).
++ Take appropriate enforcement action against laboratories found
by us or our agents out of compliance with requirements comparable to
CLIA condition-level requirements, as specified in Sec. 493.557(b).
As specified in our regulations at Sec. 493.555 and Sec.
493.557(b), our review of a state licensure program includes (but is
not necessarily limited to) an evaluation of the following:
Whether the state's requirements for laboratories are
equal to or more stringent than the CLIA condition-level requirements.
The state's inspection process requirements to determine
the following:
++ The comparability of the full inspection and complaint
inspection procedures to those of CMS.
++ The state's enforcement procedures for laboratories found to be
out of compliance with its requirements.
The ability of the state to provide us with electronic
data and reports with the adverse or corrective actions resulting from
PT results that constitute unsuccessful participation in CMS-approved
PT programs and with other data we determine to be necessary for
validation review and assessment of the state's inspection process
requirements.
The state's agreement with us to ensure that the agreement
obligates the state to do the following:
++ Notify us within 30 days of the action taken against any CLIA-
exempt laboratory that has had its licensure or approval withdrawn or
revoked or been in any way sanctioned.
++ Notify us within 10 days of any deficiency identified in a CLIA-
exempt laboratory in cases when the deficiency poses an immediate
jeopardy to the laboratory's patients or a hazard to the general
public.
[[Page 51593]]
++ Notify each laboratory licensed by the state under its approved
state licensure program within 10 days of a withdrawal of our approval
of the state's licensure program, and the resulting loss of the
laboratory's exemption from CLIA based on its licensure under that
program.
++ Provide us with written notification of any changes in the
state's licensure (or approval) and inspection requirements.
++ Disclose to us or our agent any laboratory's PT results in
accordance with the state's confidentiality requirements.
++ Take appropriate enforcement action against laboratories that we
or our agents find to be out of compliance with CLIA condition-level
requirements in a validation survey, and report these enforcement
actions to us.
++ Notify us of all newly licensed laboratories, and any changes in
the specialties and subspecialties for which any laboratory performs
testing, within 30 days.
++ Provide us, as requested, inspection schedules for validation
purposes.
In keeping with the process described above, we evaluated the
application and supporting materials that were submitted by Washington
State to verify that the laboratories licensed through its program will
meet or exceed the requirements of the following subparts of part 493:
Subpart H, Participation in Proficiency Testing for Laboratories
Performing Nonwaived Testing; Subpart J, Facility Administration for
Nonwaived Testing; Subpart K, Quality Systems for Nonwaived Testing,
Subpart M, Personnel for Nonwaived Testing; Subpart Q, Inspection; and
Subpart R, Enforcement Procedures.
We found that Washington State's laboratory licensure program
requirements are equivalent to all the CLIA condition-level
requirements. The state licensure program's inspection process and PT
monitoring processes were adequate. Other materials that were submitted
demonstrated compliance with the other above-referenced requirements of
subpart E of part 493. As a result, we concluded that the submitted
documents supported exempting laboratories licensed under that program
from the CLIA program requirements.
The federal validation inspections of CLIA-exempt laboratories, as
specified in Sec. 493.563, were conducted on a representative sample
basis, as well as in response to any substantial allegations of
noncompliance (complaint inspections). The outcome of those validation
inspections has been, and will continue to be our principal tool for
verifying that the laboratories located in, and licensed by the state
are in compliance with CLIA requirements.
We have conducted validation inspections of a representative sample
(approximately 5 percent) of the laboratories inspected by the
Washington State Office of Laboratory Quality Assurance (LQA). The
validation inspections were primarily of the concurrent type; that is,
our surveyors accompanied Washington State's inspectors, each
inspecting against his or her agency's respective regulations. Analysis
of the validation data revealed no significant differences between the
state and federal findings. The validation surveys verified that the
State of Washington inspection process covers all CLIA conditions
applicable to each laboratory being inspected and also verified that
the state laboratory licensure requirements meet or exceed CLIA
condition-level requirements. Our validation surveys found the state
inspectors highly skilled and qualified. The LQA inspected laboratories
in a timely fashion; that is, all laboratories were inspected within
the required 24-month cycle. All parameters monitored by our regional
office in Seattle, Washington, to date, indicate that the State of
Washington is meeting all requirements for approval of CLIA exemption.
This federal monitoring will continue as an on-going process.
C. Conclusion
Based on review of the documents submitted by the Washington state
licensure program under the requirements of subpart E of part 493, as
well as the outcome of the validation inspections conducted by our
regional office in Seattle, Washington, we find that the State of
Washington's licensure program meets the requirements of Sec.
493.551(a), and that, as a result, we may exempt from CLIA program
requirements all state-licensed laboratories.
Approval of the CLIA exemption for laboratories located within and
licensed by the State of Washington laboratory licensure program is
subject to removal if we determine that the outcome of a comparability
review or a validation review inspection is not acceptable, as
described under Sec. Sec. 493.573 and 493.575, or if the State of
Washington fails to pay the required fee every 2 years as required
under Sec. 493.646(b).
D. Laboratory Data
In accordance with our regulations at Sec. 493.557(b)(8), the
approval of this exemption for laboratories located within and licensed
by the State of Washington is conditioned on the State of Washington's
continued compliance with the assertions made in its application,
especially the provision of information to us about changes to a
laboratory's specialties or subspecialties based on the state's survey,
and changes to a laboratory's certification status.
E. Required Administrative Actions
CLIA is a user-fee funded program. The registration fee paid by
laboratories is intended to cover the cost of the development and
administration of the program. However, when a state's application for
exemption is approved, we do not charge a fee to laboratories in the
state. The state's share of the costs associated with CLIA must be
collected from the state, as specified in Sec. 493.645(a).
The State of Washington must pay for the following:
Costs of federal inspections of laboratories in the state
to verify that Washington State's laboratory licensure program
requirements are equivalent to or more stringent than those in the CLIA
program, and that they are enforced in an appropriate manner. The
average federal hourly rate is multiplied by the total hours required
to perform federal validation surveys within the state.
Costs incurred for federal surveys, including
investigations of complaints that are substantiated. We will bill the
State of Washington on a semiannual basis.
The State of Washington's proportionate share of the costs
associated with establishing, maintaining, and improving the CLIA
computer system, based on the portion of those services from which the
State of Washington received direct benefit or which contributed to the
CLIA program in the state. Thus, the State of Washington is being
charged for a portion of our direct and indirect costs of administering
the CLIA program. Such costs will be incurred by CMS, the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) and contractors working on behalf of these respective agencies.
To estimate the State of Washington's proportionate share of the
general overhead costs to develop and implement CLIA, we determined the
ratio of laboratories in the state to the total number of laboratories
nationally. Approximately 1.6 percent of the registered laboratories
are in the State of Washington. We determined that a corresponding
percentage of the applicable CMS, CDC, FDA, and their respective
contractor costs should be borne by the State of Washington.
[[Page 51594]]
The State of Washington has agreed to pay the state's pro rata
share of the anticipated overhead costs and costs of actual validation
(including complaint investigation surveys). A final reconciliation for
all laboratories and all expenses will be made. We will reimburse the
state for any overpayment or bill it for any balance.
II. Approval
In light of the foregoing, we grant approval of the State of
Washington's laboratory licensure program under subpart E. All
laboratories located in and licensed by the State of Washington under
the Medical Test Site law, Chapter 70.42 of the Revised Code of
Washington, are CLIA-exempt for all specialties and subspecialties
until October 2, 2023.
III. 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.).
Dated: September 12, 2019.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 2019-21062 Filed 9-27-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P