Billing and Collection by VA for Medical Care and Services, 57668-57677 [2019-22972]
Download as PDF
57668
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, visit https://
www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
Documents mentioned in this NPRM
as being available in the docket, and all
public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov
and can be viewed by following that
website’s instructions. Additionally, if
you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified
when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T08–0820 to read as
follows:
■
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 165.T08–0820 Safety zone; Ohio River,
Owensboro, KY.
(a) Location. All navigable waters of
the Ohio River between mile marker
(MM) 756.4 to MM 757.4 in Owensboro,
KY.
(b) Period of enforcement. This
section will be enforced from 10 p.m.
through 11 p.m. on January 18, 2020.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23, entry
into this zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of
the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) or
a designated representative. Persons or
vessels desiring to enter into or pass
through the zone must request
permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. They may be
contacted on VHF–FM radio channel 16
or phone at 1–800–253–7465.
(2) Persons and vessels permitted to
enter this safety zone must transit at the
slowest safe speed and comply with all
lawful directions issued by the COTP or
a designated representative.
(d) Informational broadcasts. The
COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public through
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
Broadcast Notices to Mariners and the
Local Notice to Mariners of the
enforcement period for the temporary
safety zone as well as any changes in the
planned schedule.
A.M. Beach,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sector Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2019–23479 Filed 10–25–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AQ69
Billing and Collection by VA for
Medical Care and Services
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
regulations concerning collection and
recovery by VA for medical care and
services provided to an individual for
treatment of a nonservice-connected
disability. Specifically, this rulemaking
would revise the provisions of VA
regulations that determine the charges
VA will bill third-party payers for nonVA care provided at VA expense, would
include a time limit for which thirdparty payers can request a refund, and
would clarify that third-party payers
cannot reduce or refuse payment
because of the billing methodology used
to determine the charge. These revisions
would clarify VA billing practices,
result in more equitable charges to
third-party payers, and ensure that VA
collects payments timely and
effectively. Additionally, this
rulemaking would make certain
technical corrections to the existing
regulations, and amend associated
definitions.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
VA on or before December 27, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be
submitted through https://
www.Regulations.gov, by mail or handdelivery to Director, Office of Regulation
Policy and Management (00REG),
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Avenue NW, Room 1064,
Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to
(202) 273–9026. (This is not a toll-free
number.) Comments should indicate
that they are submitted in response to
‘‘RIN 2900–AQ69, Billing and
Collection by VA for Medical Care and
Services.’’ Copies of comments received
will be available for public inspection in
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the Office of Regulation Policy and
Management, Room 1064, between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday (except
holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 for
an appointment. (This is not a toll-free
number.) In addition, during the
comment period, comments may be
viewed online through the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) at
https://www.Regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Duran, Director of Policy and
Planning, Office of Community Care
(10D), Ptarmigan at Cherry Creek
Denver, CO 80209, Joseph.Duran2@
va.gov or (303) 372–4629. (This is not a
toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under
section 1729 of Title 38, United States
Code (U.S.C.), VA has the right to
recover or collect reasonable charges for
medical care or services from a third
party to the extent that the veteran or
the provider of the care or services
would be eligible to receive payment
from the third party for: A nonserviceconnected disability for which the
veteran is entitled to care (or the
payment of expenses of care) under a
health plan contract; a nonserviceconnected disability incurred incident
to the veteran’s employment and
covered under a worker’s compensation
law or plan that provides
reimbursement or indemnification for
such care and services; or a nonserviceconnected disability incurred as a result
of a motor vehicle accident in a State
that requires automobile accident
reparations (no-fault) insurance. This
proposed rule would revise two of VA’s
regulations (i.e., sections 17.101 and
17.106 of title 38, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR)) that implement 38
U.S.C. 1729.
In this proposed rule, we would
revise 38 CFR 17.101, which establishes
the instances when VA will collect and
recover for medical care and services
and the methodology used to determine
the reasonable charges VA can bill for
medical care and services. In this
rulemaking, we propose to amend the
amount VA will bill a third party when
the medical care was provided at a nonVA facility at VA expense. We also
propose to make several technical
amendments to 38 CFR 17.101, to
correct clerical errors and update office
and data source names. Additionally,
we propose to add two new definitions
and remove one current definition to be
consistent with the proposed technical
amendments.
In addition to revising § 17.101, this
rulemaking would also revise § 17.106.
Section 1729 of 38 U.S.C. authorizes VA
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
to collect the reasonable charges for
medical care and services from a thirdparty payer and to compromise, settle,
or waive a claim (such as a refund).
Additionally, section 1729 prohibits any
contract or other agreement operating to
prevent recovery or collection by the
United States.
Current 38 CFR 17.106 implements 38
U.S.C. 1729 by describing VA’s rules for
recovery and collection of reasonable
charges from a third-party payer for
medical care and services provided for
a nonservice-connected disability in or
through any VA facility to a veteran
who is a beneficiary under a thirtyparty’s plan. This section also explains
that a third-party payer may not,
without consent of the U.S.
Government, offset or reduce any
payment due under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or
part 17 of 38 CFR in the instance that
the third-party payer considers itself
due a refund; and requires that any
request for a refund be submitted in
writing. Section 17.106 describes those
conditions under which a third-party
payer may not reduce, offset, or request
a refund for payments made pursuant to
38 U.S.C. 1729. In this rulemaking, we
propose to amend 38 CFR 17.106 to
clarify the timeframe for submitting a
written request for a refund for claims
under part 17 or 38 U.S.C. 1729, and
would explain that VA would not
provide a refund for any reason, to
include if a retroactive serviceconnection determination is made more
than 18 months after the date payment
is made by the third-party payer. We
also propose to add a new condition
under which a third-party payer could
not refuse or reduce their payment for
a claim under section 1729.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Changes to 17.101
As explained in more detail below,
we would amend current § 17.101 by
adding and removing definitions,
changing the amount VA will bill a
third party when the medical care was
provided at a non-VA facility at VA
expense, and making several technical
amendments.
§ 17.101(a)(5) Definitions
We would revise § 17.101(a)(5) which
defines certain terms used throughout
§ 17.101. We would add two new
definitions and remove a current
definition. In proposed § 17.101(a)(5),
we would remove the definition of
‘‘MDR.’’ MDR stands for Medical Data
Research, which is defined as a medical
charge database published by Ingenix,
Inc. It is referred to throughout § 17.101,
as it was a database used to calculate
charges. However, it is no longer used,
and has been replaced by FAIR Health.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
We would insert a definition for ‘‘FAIR
Health’’ immediately following the
definition of ‘‘DRG,’’ and define ‘‘FAIR
Health’’ in § 17.101(a)(5) to mean any of
the FAIR Health Charge Benchmarks
products developed by FAIR Health.
This would be consistent with changes
we propose to make throughout 17.101
to replace ‘‘MDR’’ with ‘‘FAIR Health.’’
This is explained in more detail later in
this rulemaking.
In proposed § 17.101(a)(5), we would
insert a definition of ‘‘MarketScan’’
immediately following the definition of
‘‘ICU.’’ We would define ‘‘MarketScan’’
to mean the MarketScan Commercial
Claims & Encounters Database
developed by Truven Health Analytics
LLC. MarketScan has replaced MedStat,
which is referenced throughout § 17.101
as it is a database used for billing
purposes. Since it has been replaced by
MarketScan, we would define it in
§ 17.101(a)(5). As explained in more
detail later this rulemaking, we also
would replace all references to MedStat
with MarketScan.
§ 17.101(a)(7)
Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 1729, VA is
authorized to collect reasonable charges
in certain circumstances, but the statute
does not define what reasonable charges
are. In current 38 CFR 17.101, VA
established the methodology it uses to
determine what constitutes reasonable
charges and directs when reasonable
charges will be charged to third-party
payers. Section 17.101 requires that VA
charge the higher of the amount
determined using the methodologies in
this section (reasonable charges) or the
amount VA actually paid to the provider
for the care. We propose to amend
§ 17.101(a)(7) to bill third-party payers
the reasonable charges rate that is
determined using the methodology in
§ 17.101, as if the care was provided at
a VA facility. In this regard, if an
individual received surgery at a non-VA
facility at VA expense, the charges
billed to the individual’s health
insurance (or other third-party payer)
would be the same as if the individual
received the surgery at a VA facility.
The current practice of charging the
higher of the amount determined using
the methodologies in § 17.101
(reasonable charges) or the amount VA
actually paid creates confusion in the
field and additional administrative
burdens when determining the
appropriate amount to bill payers.
Third-party payers have also indicated a
preference for being charged using the
same methodology regardless of
whether the care was provided at a VA
facility or at a non-VA facility at VA
expense.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57669
We believe that by removing the
portion of the current regulation that
requires VA to charge the higher of the
two rates and, instead, requiring VA to
bill the rate determined using the
methodologies set forth in this section,
it will provide greater clarity and
uniformity in VA’s billing practices. In
this regard, requiring VA to charge the
same rate regardless of whether the care
was provided at a VA facility or a nonVA facility at VA expense will cut down
on the administrative burden associated
with determining the charges. Currently,
the VA billing officials must first
determine that the care was provided at
a non-VA facility, then determine the
rates based on two different
methodologies. Finally, the billing
official must determine which is higher
and enter that cost into the billing
system. Under the proposed rule, VA
billing officials will merely determine
one rate using the same methodology
regardless of where the care was
furnished.
Additionally, we find that it is
equitable to charge the same rates
regardless of the facility in which the
individual sought treatment; the thirdparty payer should not be disadvantaged
and required to pay higher charges
because the individual sought care at a
non-VA facility. Moreover, the proposed
revision is beneficial to the third-party
payer as there is no scenario in which
the third-party payer would be charged
more under the proposed rule than they
are charged under the current rule.
Specifically, if the higher charge is the
charge determined according to this
section, the third-party payer will still
be charged the amount determined in
this section. However, if the higher
amount is the actual cost VA paid, the
third-party payer will be able to pay the
lower, reasonable charges rate that was
determined using the methodologies in
this section. We note that in the vast
majority of cases, the reasonable rates
are higher than that amount actually
paid and we do not think that this
would ultimately change the amount
that we are charging and collecting. This
is consistent with generally accepted
billing practices in the industry, as there
is typically one set of rates that all
health care providers charge. However,
some of the amount charged is written
off and the amount the payer ends up
paying is usually lower than the amount
billed.
Technical Amendments to § 17.101
We propose to make several technical
amendments to ensure the information
contained in § 17.101 is accurate and
reflects changes to VA’s organizational
structure, the names of companies and
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
57670
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
data source references. VA has not
updated the data sources and names
since 2003, and there have been several
changes to these since that time. See 68
FR 70714. However, in the annual
publication of the data sources used to
calculate charges, these changes have
been reflected. See https://www.va.gov/
COMMUNITYCARE/revenue_ops/
payer_rates.asp. We now propose to
update § 17.101 to reflect these changes.
Currently, § 17.101(a)(2) and (3)
jointly explain that the data for
calculating actual charge amounts based
on methodologies in § 17.101, the
specific editions of the data sources
used to calculate these amounts, and the
information on where these data sources
may be obtained will either be
published in a notice in the Federal
Register or will be posted on the
internet site of the Veterans Health
Administration (VHA) Chief Business
Office, currently at https://www.va.gov/
cbo, under ‘‘Charge Data.’’ Since the
promulgation of § 17.101, the name of
the responsible office for billing and
collection has changed from Chief
Business Office to Office of Community
Care. Relatedly, the website has changed
from https://www.va.gov/cbo to https://
www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE.
To ensure the correct VHA offices and
website are referenced in § 17.101, we
propose to replace all references in
§ 17.101(a)(2) and (a)(3) to ‘‘Chief
Business Office’’ with ‘‘Office of
Community Care,’’ and replace all
references in § 17.101(a)(2) and (a)(3) to
‘‘https://www.va.gov/cbo, under ‘Charge
Data’ ’’ with ‘‘https://www.va.gov/
COMMUNITYCARE, under ‘Payer Rates
and Charges.’’’ The relevant information
on the charges data is located under
‘‘Payer Rates and Charges’’ and we
would update § 17.101(a)(2) and (3) to
reflect that.
We would amend § 17.101 by
replacing all references to ‘‘Ingenix/St.
Anthony’s’’ with ‘‘Optum Essential.’’
Ingenix/St. Anthony’s was a data source
used to calculate charges under
§ 17.101. This data source was used to
calculate such charges as physician and
other professional charges (except for
anesthesia and certain dental services);
pathology and laboratory charges;
relative value units for durable medical
equipment (DME), drugs, injectables,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
and other medical services, items, and
supplies. This data source is referenced
in § 17.101(f)(2)(ii); (i)(2)(ii); and
(l)(2)(i)(A)–(B), (M). Optum Essential
has replaced Ingenix/St. Anthony’s, as
Ingenix went out of business more than
five years ago. We propose to revise
§ 17.101 to reference Optum Essential
instead of Ingenix/St. Anthony’s, and
we would want the regulation to be
consistent with this change to the data
source.
In § 17.101, we propose to replace all
references to ‘‘MDR’’ and add in its
place ‘‘FAIR Health’’ since FAIR Health
has replaced MDR. We would propose
to make these changes throughout
§ 17.101. MDR stands for Medical Data
Research, which was a medical charge
database published by Ingenix, Inc. It is
referred to throughout current § 17.101,
as it was a database used to calculate
charges, including outpatient facility
charges; physician and other
professional charges (except for certain
dental services; professional charges for
anesthesia services; pathology and
laboratory charges; and charges for
DME, drugs, injectables, and certain
other medical services, items, and
supplies. For example, it is referenced
in current § 17.101(e)(3)(ii), (e)(4),
(f)(2)(ii), (f)(3), (g)(3)(i), (i)(2)(i)–(ii),
(i)(3), (l)(2)(iii), (l)(3), and (l)(5)(ii).
However, Ingenix went out of business
over five years ago, and FAIR Health
became the successor company. MDR is
thus no longer used and has been
replaced by FAIR Health in calculating
charges under § 17.101. We would
update § 17.101 to reflect this change in
the name. We propose to replace all
references in § 17.101 to ‘‘MedStat’’
with ‘‘MarketScan’’ as the name of this
data source has changed from MedStat
to MarketScan. MedStat is referenced
throughout § 17.101 as it is a database
to calculate acute inpatient facility
charges and outpatient facility charges.
It is referenced in § 17.101(b)(2), (b)(3),
and (e)(3)(ii). Since it has been replaced
by MarketScan, we propose to replace
all references to MedStat with
MarketScan in § 17.101 to ensure this
regulation reflects this change and the
correct name of the data source.
Throughout § 17.101, we would
replace all references to ‘‘Milliman
USA, Inc.’’ and add in its place
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
‘‘Milliman, Inc.’’ since that is the correct
name of the company which has
changed since 2003. Milliman USA, Inc.
is referenced in current § 17.101(e)(4),
(f)(3), (g)(3)(i), (h)(3), (i)(3), (l)(3), and
(l)(5)(iii). In § 17.101, Milliman USA,
Inc. is referenced with regards to its
various health cost guidelines and data
sets. These guidelines and data sets
have been used to calculate outpatient
facility charges; physician and other
professional charges (including
anesthesia and dental services); and
charges for DME, drugs, injectables, and
other medical services, items, and
supplies. Because the name has
changed, we would update the
regulation to accurately reflect the name
of this company throughout § 17.101.
We note that Milliman USA, Inc.’s
Health Cost Guidelines fee survey
which is referenced in current
paragraphs (f)(3) and (i)(3) is no longer
used, and we propose to remove those
references to it in these paragraphs, as
explained later in this rulemaking.
We propose to amend § 17.101 by
replacing all references to ‘‘percent
Sample’’ with ‘‘Percent Sample’’ as
percent should be capitalized. ‘‘Percent
Sample’’ is included in several
paragraphs within § 17.101 (including
but not limited to § 17.101(d)(2), (e)(3)(i)
through (ii), and (g)(3)(i)) in reference to
the Medicare Standard Analytical File.
This Percent Sample is used to calculate
partial hospitalization facility charges,
outpatient facility charges, physician
and other professional charges except
for anesthesia services and certain
dental services, observation care facility
charges, and ambulance and other
emergency transportation charges. We
would update § 17.101 to ensure that
references to Percent Sample are
correctly capitalized.
We would amend § 17.101(e)(3)(i)(C)
by replacing the reference to ‘‘2.0’’ with
‘‘6.5’’, and replacing the references to
‘‘6.5’’ with ‘‘2.0’’. This specifically
relates to the minimum and maximum
80th percentile charge to Medicare
Ambulatory Payment Classification
payment amount ratios, which are used
to calculate outpatient facility charges
under § 17.101. This is a clerical error,
as 6.5 should be 2.0 and 2.0 should be
6.5. We now propose to correct this
error in proposed § 17.101(e)(3)(i)(C).
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
57671
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
For ease of reference, the following
chart explains these technical changes
to § 17.101 as discussed in the
preceding paragraphs:
Section
Propose to remove
17.101(a) ....................
17.101(a) ....................
Chief Business Office ...........................................................
https://www.va.gov/cbo, under ‘‘Charge Data.’’ .....................
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
17.101(e)(3)(i)(C) .......
17.101(e)(3)(i)(C) .......
Ingenix/St. Anthony’s ...........................................................
MDR .....................................................................................
MedStat ................................................................................
Milliman USA, Inc .................................................................
percent Sample ....................................................................
2.0 ........................................................................................
6.5 ........................................................................................
In addition to the changes proposed
above, we would amend paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) of § 17.101 by removing
obsolete references. Section
17.101(f)(2)(ii) describes the
methodology and data sources used to
calculate physician and other
professional charges except for
anesthesia services and certain dental
services. First, we would remove the
language that states that for any
remaining CPT/HCPCS codes, the
nationwide 80th percentile billed
charges are obtained, where statistically
credible, from the Prevailing Healthcare
Charges System nationwide commercial
insurance database. We would remove
this language from the paragraph as the
Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance
database is a data source that no longer
exists, and is no longer applicable or
used in calculating these charges (i.e.,
physician and other professional
charges except for anesthesia services
and certain dental services). There is no
replacement so we would remove this
language entirely from this paragraph.
Similarly, we would remove the word
‘‘three’’ in § 17.101(f)(2)(ii). In current
paragraph (f)(2)(ii), we reference the
number of databases used to determine
the total RVUs for Current Procedural
Terminology (CPT) and Healthcare
Common Procedure Coding System
(HCPCS) codes that do not have
Medicare Relative Value Units (RVUs)
and are not designated as unlisted
procedures. These three data sources are
the MDR database, the Part B
component of the Medicare Standard
Analytical File 5 Percent Sample, and
Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance
database. Because we are proposing to
remove reference to the Prevailing
Healthcare Charges System nationwide
commercial insurance database, as
explained in the preceding paragraph,
there will no longer be three data
sources used in this determination.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
Propose to add
Office of Community Care
https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE,
Rates and Charges.’’
Optum Essential.
FAIR Health.
MarketScan.
Milliman, Inc.
Percent Sample.
6.5.
2.0.
For the same reasons, we would
remove from the final sentence in this
paragraph the word ‘‘four’’ with regard
to the number of data sources used. The
data sources used to make this
determination under § 17.101(f)(2)(ii)
may vary. Thus, we would not list each
data source used and would also not
identify the specific number of data
sources used. We would include the
data source information on https://
www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE or in a
Federal Register notice (referenced in
proposed § 17.101(a)(3)) instead of
publishing them in regulation.
Therefore, the public will still be
informed of the sources used as that
information will continue to be located
on our websites or in a notice in the
Federal Register, and updated on an
annual basis. As explained previously,
we are also proposing to update the VA
website to reflect the correct web
address (https://www.va.gov/
COMMUNITYCARE). We note that the
most recent Federal Register notices
containing this information were
published on December 14, 2017 and
September 19, 2018. See 82 FR 59213
and 83 FR 47412.
We would also remove the word
‘‘untrended’’ from § 17.101(f)(2)(ii). This
relates to nationwide conversion factor
for the corresponding CPT/HCPCS code
group. However, this term should not
have been included in the original
regulation as it is not a word, and
removing it is merely a technical change
as its removal would have no impact on
our practices. We would continue to use
the nationwide conversion factor for the
corresponding CPT/HCPCS code group.
We propose to revise paragraphs (f)(3)
and (i)(3) of § 17.101, which reference
the Milliman USA, Inc., Health Cost
Guidelines fee survey in calculating
such charges as physician and other
professional charges except for
anesthesia and certain dental services
and pathology and laboratory charges,
respectively. We would remove this
language from paragraphs (f)(3) and
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
under
‘‘Payer
(i)(3), as this data source no longer
exists. We would not replace it with any
specific data source, as the data source
used can vary. As previously explained,
the data sources will be available to the
public at https://www.va.gov/
COMMUNITYCARE or in a Federal
Register notice (referenced in proposed
§ 17.101(a)(3)) instead of publishing
them in regulation.
Current § 17.101(h) describes the
methodology for calculating
professional charges for dental services
identified by HCPCS Level II codes.
Paragraph (h)(2) specifically explains
the three data sources used to determine
the 80th percentile charges for each
HCPCS dental code. The sources
referenced in this paragraph include
Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
database, National Dental Advisory
Service nationwide pricing index; and
the Dental UCR Module of the
Comprehensive Healthcare Payment
System. The Prevailing Healthcare
Charges System database no longer
exists. We would thus revise § 17.101
(h)(2) to remove the reference to that
data source. We would not replace it in
paragraph (h)(2) with another database
as that can vary. We propose to revise
the first sentence of paragraph (h)(2) to
state ‘‘various independent data
sources’’ instead of ‘‘three independent
data sources’’ to reflect the fact that the
data sources used can vary. Because of
this, we would not list every data source
used in this paragraph. As previously
mentioned, VA publishes the charges
and data sources (including the specific
editions of these data sources) used to
calculate the charges either through a
Federal Register notice or on https://
www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE as
referenced in proposed § 17.101(a)(3).
We would also revise the language in
this same paragraph that references
‘‘UCR Module of the Comprehensive
Healthcare Payment System, a release
from Ingenix from a nationwide
database of dental charges’’ and instead
insert ‘‘FAIR Health module’’ as the
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
57672
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
FAIR Health module replaced the UCR
Module of the Comprehensive
Healthcare Payment System. Ingenix,
which was the original creator of this
comprehensive health care payment
system, went out of business over five
years ago, and FAIR Health became the
successor company. The FAIR Health
module replaced the UCR Module of the
Comprehensive Healthcare Payment
System, and thus we would revise
paragraph (h)(2) accordingly.
We would then amend paragraph
(h)(2)(i), which explains the
methodology used to determine the
average charge for any particular HCPCS
dental code. This is done by computing
a preliminary mean average of the three
charges for each code. We would revise
§ 17.101(h)(2)(i) by removing the
language ‘‘average’’ in reference to
‘‘preliminary mean’’ in the first sentence
to correctly state how the charges are
calculated. The words ‘‘average’’ and
‘‘mean’’ are redundant as these two
words have the same meaning. We use
the preliminary mean and we would
update the paragraph (h)(2)(i) to reflect
this.
In that same sentence, we would also
remove ‘‘three’’ and add ‘‘available’’ in
reference to the charges for each code as
the number of charges for each code can
vary based on the number of sources
used. This paragraph references three
charges because three data sources are
reflected in paragraph (h)(2). However,
as mentioned previously, we are
proposing to revise paragraph (h)(2) to
reflect that one of these data sources
(Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
database) no longer exists, and the
number of data sources used to calculate
these charges under paragraph (h) can
vary. Instead of listing the data sources
and including the specific number of
data sources, this information would
continue to be made available to the
public either through a Federal Register
notice or on https://www.va.gov/
COMMUNITYCARE as referenced in
proposed § 17.101(a)(3).
In the second sentence in paragraph
(h)(2)(i), we propose to remove the
language ‘‘by testing whether any charge
differs from the preliminary mean
charge by more than 50 percent of the
preliminary mean charge. In such cases,
the charge most distant from the
preliminary mean is removed as an
outlier, and the average charge is
calculated as a mean of the two
remaining charges.’’ This language
refers to how statistical outliers are
identified and removed in calculating
the average charge and is based on using
three data sources. Because we propose
to update § 17.101(h)(2) to eliminate the
use of three data sources and because
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
the number of data sources can vary, we
would remove this language to correctly
state how charges are calculated and
allow for variability. Instead, this
sentence would simply state that
‘‘statistical outliers are identified and
removed.’’ There may not be more than
two data sources used, and thus there
may not be two remaining charges. This
paragraph would be updated to reflect
this potential reality.
The last sentence of paragraph
(h)(2)(i) explains that in cases where
none of the charges differ from the
preliminary mean charge by more than
50 percent of the preliminary mean
charge, the average charge is calculated
as a mean of all three reported charges.
As previously explained in the
preceding paragraphs, we would no
longer use three data sources and the
number of data sources can vary. We
propose to remove the language in this
last sentence of paragraph (h)(2)(i),
specifically ‘‘differ from the preliminary
mean charge by more than 50 percent of
the preliminary mean charge’’ and
replace that with ‘‘removed’’. We would
also remove ‘‘three’’ from the last
sentence in this paragraph to correctly
state how the charges are calculated and
to reflect that the average charge is no
longer based on three reported charges.
Thus, the proposed revised sentence
would explain that where none of the
charges are removed, the average charge
is calculated as a mean of all reported
charges.
In calculating professional charges for
dental services identified by HCPCS
Level II codes, paragraph (h)(3) of
§ 17.101 describes how each geographic
adjustment factor is determined using
Milliman USA, Inc., Dental Health Cost
Guidelines, and a normalized
geographic adjustment factors computed
from the Dental UCR Module of the
Comprehensive Payment System
compiled by Ingenix. FAIR Health
module has replaced ‘‘UCR Module of
the Comprehensive Healthcare Payment
System compiled by Ingenix.’’ As
previously mentioned, Ingenix was the
original creator of this Dental UCR
Module of the Comprehensive Payment
System and went out of business over
five years ago. FAIR Health became the
successor company, and the FAIR
Health module is used in place of the
Dental UCR Module of the
Comprehensive Payment System. Thus,
we propose to remove the reference to
this dental UCR module and replace it
with ‘‘FAIR Health module.’’
We would revise § 17.101(i)(2)(ii)
which describes the methodology and
data sources used to calculate pathology
and laboratory charges. Paragraph
(i)(2)(ii) specifically describes how total
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
RVUs for CPT/HCPCS codes that do not
have Medicare-based RVUs are
developed based on various charge data
sources (including the MDR database,
Part B component of the Medicare
Standard Analytical File 5 Percent
Sample, the Prevailing Healthcare
Charges System nationwide commercial
insurance database and Ingenix/St.
Anthony’s RBRVS). As explained
previously in this rulemaking, we note
that we propose to update the names of
several of these databases (i.e., from
MDR to FAIR Health, and from Ingenix/
St. Anthony’s to Optum Essentials). We
propose to remove the current language
that explains that for any remaining
CPT/HCPCS codes, the nationwide 80th
percentile billed charges are obtained,
where statistically credible, from the
Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance
database. We would also remove the
language that explains that for each of
these CPT/HCPCS codes, nationwide
total RVUs are obtained by taking the
nationwide 80th percentile billed
charges obtained using the preceding
three databases and dividing by the
untrended nationwide conversion factor
determined pursuant to paragraphs (i)(3)
and (i)(3)(i) of this section. We would
remove these sentences since the
Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance
database is no longer available and there
is no replacement.
We would revise the remaining
sentences in this same paragraph to
state that for any remaining CPT/HCPCS
codes that have not been assigned RVUs
using the preceding data sources (i.e.,
the FAIR Health database, Part B
component of the Medicare Standard
Analytical File 5 Percent Sample, the
Optum Essentials RBRVS will be used
in the calculation of nationwide total
RVUs; and that the resulting nationwide
total RVUs obtained using these data
sources (i.e., FAIR Health database and
Part B component of the Medicare
Standard Analytical File 5 Percent
Sample, and the Optum Essentials) will
be multiplied by the geographic area
adjustment factors determined pursuant
to paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of this section in
order to obtain the area-specific total
RVUs. We would make these changes to
the last two sentences in the paragraph
to accurately reflect the process for
determining total RVUs for CPT/HCPCS
codes that do not have Medicare-based
RVUs. This is because the Prevailing
Healthcare Charges System nationwide
commercial insurance database is no
longer available and there is no
replacement for that database. We
would also revise the final sentence to
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
reflect that we would use the data
sources in this paragraph to determine
RVUs. Because the data sources we use
to make this determination under
§ 17.101(i)(2)(ii) may vary, we would
not list each data source used and
would also not identify the specific
number of data sources used. Since the
data sources used can vary, we would
include the data source information on
https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE
or in a Federal Register notice
(referenced in proposed § 17.101(a)(3))
instead of publishing them in
regulation.
We would amend several paragraphs
in § 17.101(l) to correctly state how the
charges for DME, drugs, injectables, and
other medical services, items, and
supplies identified by HCPCS Level II
codes are calculated. Paragraph (l)(3)
explains how the 80th percentile
charges for each applicable HCPCS code
are extracted using three independent
data sources: The MDR database;
Medicare, as represented by the
combined Part B and DME components
of the Medicare Standard Analytical
File 5 Percent Sample; and Milliman
USA, Inc., Optimized HMO (Health
Maintenance Organization) Data Sets. In
paragraph (l)(3), we propose to remove
‘‘three’’ and ‘‘Milliman USA, Inc.,
Optimized HMO (Health Maintenance
Organization) Data Sets’’ in the first
sentence. We would make this change
because the ‘‘Milliman USA, Inc.
Optimized HMO Data Sets’’ no longer
exists and there is no replacement.
Thus, we now use two data sources
instead of three. As explained
previously in this rulemaking, we
would update the reference to the MDR
database to reflect that the FAIR Health
database has replaced this database.
MDR was a medical charge database
published by Ingenix, Inc. However, it
is no longer used, and has been replaced
by the FAIR Health database. We would
update § 17.101(l) to accurately reflect
these changes.
We would also amend paragraph
(l)(3)(ii) in § 17.101 to correctly state
how the average 80th percentile trended
charge for any particular HCPCS code is
calculated. Currently, this paragraph
explains that this average charge is
calculated by computing a preliminary
mean average of the three charges for
each HCPCS code and explains how
statistical outliers are identified and
removed. Additionally, it explains that
the average charge is calculated as a
mean of three reported charges in cases
where none of the charges differ from
the preliminary mean charge by more
than five times the preliminary mean
charge, or less than 0.2 times the
preliminary mean charge. We propose to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
revise this paragraph by removing from
the first sentence ‘‘average’’
immediately following ‘‘preliminary
mean’’, and replacing in the same
sentence ‘‘three’’ with ‘‘available.’’ The
words ‘‘average’’ and ‘‘mean’’ are
repetitive and redundant, as these two
words have meant the same to us in the
context of this methodology, and we
would thus remove the word ‘‘average’’
after ‘‘preliminary mean.’’
We would also remove ‘‘three’’ in the
first sentence of this same paragraph
and replace it with ‘‘available.’’ As
explained previously, Milliman USA,
Inc., Optimized HMO (Health
Maintenance Organization) Data Sets no
longer exists, and the number of data
sets used under paragraph (l)(3) is two
(FAIR Health database and the
combined Part B and DME components
of the Medicare Standard Analytical
File 5 Percent Sample). Because of this,
we would revise § 17.101(l)(3)(ii) to
reflect available charges instead of three
charges.
We propose to further revise the
language in paragraph (l)(3)(ii) that
describes how statistical outliers are
identified and removed. The paragraph
explains that the methodology used to
identify and remove statistical outliers
based on the charges from the three
databases which is done by testing
whether any charge differs from the
preliminary mean charge by more than
five times the preliminary mean charge,
or by less than 0.2 times the preliminary
mean charge. The remaining sentences
in this paragraph further explain that
the charge most distance from the
preliminary mean is removed as an
outlier, and that the average charge is
calculated as a mean of the two
remaining charges. The last sentence
further states that the average charge is
calculated as a mean of all three
reported charges where none of the
charges differ from the preliminary
mean charge by more than five times the
preliminary mean charge, or less than
0.2 times the preliminary mean charge.
As explained previously, because we
use two data sources now instead of
three, this language on how we would
determine the statistical outliers and the
average charge is no longer accurate.
There would no longer be two
remaining charges in identifying and
removing outliers. We would thus revise
this paragraph to correctly state how
charges are calculated. In addition to
those changes we would make to
paragraph (l)(3)(ii) as proposed in the
preceding paragraphs, after the first
sentence in this paragraph, we would
state that ‘‘statistical outliers are
identified and removed.’’ After this
sentence, we would remove the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57673
remaining subsequent text of the
paragraph and add a sentence to state
that where none of the charges are
removed, the average charge is
calculated as a mean of all reported
charges. This paragraph would be
updated to reflect how average charges
are determined under paragraph (l)(3) as
we explained previously.
§ 17.106 VA Collection Rules; ThirdParty Payers
As previously explained, section 1729
of 38 U.S.C. authorizes VA to collect the
reasonable charges for medical care and
services from a third-party payer and to
compromise, settle, or waive a claim
(such as a refund). Additionally, section
1729 prohibits any contract or other
agreement operating to prevent recovery
or collection by the United States. This
is implemented in 38 CFR 17.106 as
current § 17.106 authorizes VA to
collect from third-party payers.
Specifically, § 17.106(c)(4) directs that a
third-party payer may not, without the
consent of a U.S. Government official
authorized to take action under 38
U.S.C. 1729 and this part, offset or
reduce any payment due under 38
U.S.C. 1729 or this part on the grounds
that the payer considers itself due a
refund from a VA facility. A written
request for a refund must be submitted
and adjudicated separately from any
other claims submitted to the thirdparty payer under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or this
part.
Currently, third-party payers are
requesting refunds many months and
sometimes years after the original
payment was submitted and processed
by VA. This creates difficulty for VA
billing staff and makes it increasingly
more difficult to approximate the
funding needed to provide the refunds.
Therefore, in this rulemaking, we
propose to revise § 17.106(c)(4) to add a
time frame of 18 months from the time
the payer makes their original payment
to request a refund. We also propose to
add language to clarify that if a request
for a refund is not submitted within this
18-month time frame, VA will not
provide a refund to third-party payers
for a claim paid for any reason. VA
believes that adding a timeframe of 18
months provides ample time for the
third-party payer to request the refund
and also provides VA with greater
finality when determining the budget.
We also believe that we are able to
require such a timeframe for third-party
payer requests for these refunds as we
interpret the broad language in 38
U.S.C. 1729 to authorize us to do so. As
proposed in 38 CFR 17.106(c)(4), if a
third-party payer requests a refund
outside of the 18-month time frame, we
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
57674
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
would not provide a refund for a claim
paid for any reason. As previously
explained, we believe this is reasonable
as 18 months is ample time to request
a refund and would be consistent with
our authority in 38 U.S.C. 1729. We note
that if a retroactive service-connection
determination is made more than 18
months after the date payment is made
by the third-party payer, VA would not
provide a refund to the third-party payer
for a paid claim.
Section 1729(f) provides that no
provision of any third-party payer’s plan
having the effect of excluding from
coverage or limited payment for certain
care if that care is provided in or
through any VA facility shall operate to
prevent collection by the United States.
Pursuant to this authority, VA
promulgated § 17.106(f) which describes
the conditions under which a thirdparty payer may not reduce, offset, or
request a refund for payments made to
VA. Currently, paragraph (f)(2) contains
seven such conditions, and we now
propose to add an eighth condition. In
proposed paragraph (f)(2)(viii), we
would state that a provision in a thirdparty payer’s plan that directs payment
for care or services be refused or
lessened because the billing is not
presented in accordance with a
specified methodology (such as a line
item methodology) is not by itself a
permissible ground for refusing or
reducing third-party payment of the
charges billed by VA. Most private
sector hospitals in the United States
perform itemized billing, meaning they
bill for those ancillary services, room
and board, and supplies provided to the
patient and include charges for each
individual item or service that was
provided to the patient. VA does not use
itemized billing when determining
charges, and does not break down each
item or service provided and include
charges for such item or service. Instead,
VA uses a per diem methodology, under
which there are separate per diem
charges for room and board and for all
ancillary services. VA then sends the
third-party payer the bill using the per
diem methodology. However, as
mentioned, this does not break down
the charges by item or service, and
third-party payers have raised issues
with this methodology because they are
unable to determine the charge for each
individual item or service provided.
Because VA’s billing methodology does
not conform to some third-party payers’
line-item billing methodology, some
third-party payers have refused to pay
either the full charges or part of the
charges for VA care or medical services.
We believe revising § 17.106(f)(2) as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
proposed would be equitable to all
third-party payers by applying the same
standard to all third-party payers and
would require all third-party payers to
pay regardless of whether our billing
methodologies are the same as their
preferred method. In addition, upon
request from the payer, in accordance
with the instructions on the billing
document, VA would provide the
medical records that provided the basis
for the billing. This is not described in
the regulation, but is provided here to
explain that we provide these medical
records. Providing the medical records
would ensure that the third-party payer
would have an opportunity to review
the billing document alongside the
medical records to fully understand the
nature of the charges.
Effect of Rulemaking
The Code of Federal Regulations, as
proposed to be revised by this proposed
rulemaking, would represent the
exclusive legal authority on this subject.
No contrary rules or procedures would
be authorized. All VA guidance would
be read to conform with this proposed
rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance would be
superseded by this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Although this proposed rule contains
a provision constituting a collection of
information, at 38 CFR 17.101, under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3521), no proposed
new or modified collections of
information are associated with this
rule. The information collection
provision for § 17.101 is currently
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) and has been
assigned OMB control number 2900–
0606.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities as
they are defined in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. We
have not proposed any new
requirements that would have such an
effect. The changes being made to these
regulations are mostly technical in
nature, and conform to existing
statutory requirements and existing
practices in the program. Therefore,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this
amendment would be exempt from the
initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13771
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has
determined that this rule is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
VA’s impact analysis can be found as
a supporting document at https://
www.regulations.gov, usually within 48
hours after the rulemaking document is
published. Additionally, a copy of the
rulemaking and its impact analysis are
available on VA’s website at https://
www.va.gov/orpm/, by following the
link for VA Regulations Published from
FY2004 through FYTD. This rule is not
an E.O. 13771 regulatory action because
this rule is not significant under E.O.
12866.
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year. This proposed rule would
have no such effect on State, local, and
tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Numbers
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance numbers and titles for the
programs affected by this document are
64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care;
64.011, Veterans Dental Care; 64.012,
Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013,
Veterans Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014,
Veterans State Domiciliary Care; 64.015,
Veterans State Nursing Home Care;
64.029—Purchase Care Program;
64.033—VA Supportive Services for
Veteran Families Program; 64.034—VA
Grants for Adaptive Sports Programs for
Disabled Veterans and Disabled
Members of the Armed Forces; 64.035—
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Veterans Transportation Program;
64.039—CHAMPVA; 64.040—VHA
Inpatient Medicine; 64.041—VHA
Outpatient Specialty Care; 64.042—
VHA Inpatient Surgery; 64.043—VHA
Mental Health Residential; 64.044—
VHA Home Care; 64.045—VHA
Outpatient Ancillary Services; 64.046—
VHA Inpatient Psychiatry; 64.047—
VHA Primary Care; 64.048—VHA
Mental Health clinics; 64.049—VHA
Community Living Center; 64.050—
VHA Diagnostic Care.
■
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
*
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug
abuse, Foreign Relations, Government
contracts, Grant programs-health, Grant
programs-veterans, Health care, Health
facilities, Health professions, Health
records, Homeless, Medical and dental
schools, Medical devices, Medical
research, Mental health programs,
Nursing home care, Philippines,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Scholarships and fellows,
Travel, Transportation expenses,
Veterans.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs
approved this document and authorized
the undersigned to sign and submit the
document to the Office of the Federal
Register for publication electronically as
an official document of the Department
of Veterans Affairs. Robert L. Wilkie,
Secretary, Department of Veterans
Affairs, approved this document on May
6, 2019, for publication.
Consuela Benjamin,
Regulation Development Coordinator, Office
of Regulation Policy & Management, Office
of the Secretary, Department of Veterans
Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part
17 as follows:
PART 17—MEDICAL
1. The authority citation for part 17 is
revised to read as follows:
■
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in
specific sections.
*
*
*
*
*
Section 17.101 is also issued under 38
U.S.C. 101, 1701, 1705, 1710, 1721, 1722,
1729.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 2. Amend 17.101 by:
■ a. In paragraph (a)(5), removing the
definition of ‘‘MDR.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
b. In paragraph (a)(5), adding
alphabetically the definitions of ‘‘FAIR
Health’’ and ‘‘MarketScan’’.
■ c. Revising paragraphs (a)(7), (f)(2)(ii),
(f)(3), (h)(2) introductory text, (h)(2)(i),
(h)(2)(ii), (h)(3), (i)(2)(ii), (i)(3), (l)(3)
introductory text, and (l)(3)(ii).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
§ 17.101 Collection or recovery by VA for
medical care or services provided or
furnished to a veteran for a nonserviceconnected disability.
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(5) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
FAIR Health means any of the Fair
Health Charge Benchmarks products
developed by Fair Health.’’
*
*
*
*
*
MarketScan means the MarketScan
Commercial Claims & Encounters
Database developed by Truven Health
Analytics LLC.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) Charges for medical care or
services provided by non-VA providers
at VA expense. When medical care or
services are furnished at the expense of
the VA by non-VA providers, the
charges billed for such care or services
will be the charges determined
according to this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) RVUs for CPT/HCPCS codes that
do not have Medicare RVUs and are not
designated as unlisted procedures. For
CPT/HCPCS codes that are not assigned
RVUs in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(iii)
of this section, total RVUs are developed
based on various charge data sources.
For these CPT/HCPCS codes, that
nationwide 80th percentile billed
charges are obtained, where statistically
credible, from the FAIR Health database.
For any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes,
the nationwide 80th percentile billed
charges are obtained, where statistically
credible, from the Part B component of
the Medicare Standard Analytical File 5
Percent Sample. For each of these CPT/
HCPCS codes, nationwide total RVUs
are obtained by taking the nationwide
80th percentile billed charges obtained
using the preceding databases and
dividing by the nationwide conversion
factor for the corresponding CPT/
HCPCS code group determined pursuant
to paragraphs (f)(3) and (f)(3)(i) of this
section. For any remaining CPT/HCPCS
codes that have not been assigned RVUs
using the preceding data sources, the
nationwide total RVUs are calculated by
summing the work expense and non-
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57675
facility practice expense RVUs found in
Optum Essential RBRVS. The resulting
nationwide total RVUs obtained using
these data sources are multiplied by the
geographic area adjustment factors
determined pursuant to paragraph
(f)(2)(iv) of this section to obtain the
area-specific total RVUs.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Geographically-adjusted 80th
percentile conversion factors. CPT/
HCPCS codes are separated into the
following 23 CPT/HCPCS code groups:
Allergy immunotherapy, allergy testing,
cardiovascular, chiropractor, consults,
emergency room visits and observation
care, hearing/speech exams,
immunizations, inpatient visits,
maternity/cesarean deliveries,
maternity/non-deliveries, maternity/
normal deliveries, miscellaneous
medical, office/home/urgent care visits,
outpatient psychiatry/alcohol and drug
abuse, pathology, physical exams,
physical medicine, radiology, surgery,
therapeutic injections, vision exams,
and well-baby exams. For each of the 23
CPT/HCPCS code groups, representative
CPT/HCPCS code group; see paragraph
(a)(3) of this section for Data Sources.
The 80th percentile charge for each
selected CPT/HCPCS code is obtained
from the FAIR Health database. A
nationwide conversion factor (a
monetary amount) is calculated for each
CPT/HCPCS code group as set forth in
paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this section. The
nationwide conversion factors for each
of the 23 CPT/HCPCS code groups are
trended forward to the effective time
period for the charges, as set forth in
paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this section. The
resulting amounts for each of the 23
groups are multiplied by geographic
area adjustment factors determined
pursuant to paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this
section, resulting in geographicallyadjusted 80th percentile conversion
factors for each geographic area for the
23 CPT/HCPCS code groups for the
effective charge period.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) Nationwide 80th percentile
charges by HCPCS code. For each
HCPCS dental code, 80th percentile
charges are extracted from various
independent data sources, including the
National Dental Advisory Service
nationwide pricing index and the Dental
FAIR Health module (see paragraph
(a)(3) of this section for Data Sources).
Charges for each database are then
trended forward to a common date,
based on actual changes to the dental
services component of the CPI–U.
Charges for each HCPCS dental code
from each data source are combined into
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
57676
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
an average 80th percentile charge by
means of the methodology set forth in
paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this section.
HCPCS dental codes designated as
unlisted are assigned 80th percentile
charges by means of the methodology
set forth in paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this
section. Finally, the resulting amounts
are each trended forward to the effective
time period for the charges, as set forth
in paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section.
The results constitute the nationwide
80th percentile charge for each HCPCS
dental code.
(i) Averaging methodology. The
average charge for any particular HCPCS
dental code is calculated by first
computing a preliminary mean of the
available charges for each code.
Statistical outliers are identified and
removed. In cases where none of the
charges are removed, the average charge
is calculated as a mean of all reported
charges.
(ii) Nationwide 80th percentile
charges for HCPCS dental codes
designated as unlisted procedures. For
HCPCS dental codes designated as
unlisted procedures, 80th percentile
charges are developed based on the
weighted median 80th percentile charge
of HCPCS dental codes within the series
in which the unlisted procedure code
occurs. A nationwide VA distribution of
procedures and services is used for the
purpose of computing the weighted
median.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Geographic area adjustment
factors. A geographic adjustment factor
(consisting of the ratio of the level of
charges in a given geographic area to the
nationwide level of charges) for each
geographic area and dental class of
service is obtained from Milliman Inc.,
Dental Health Cost Guidelines, a
database of nationwide commercial
insurance charges and relative costs;
and a normalized geographic adjustment
factor computed from the Dental FAIR
Health module, as follows: Using local
and nationwide average charges
reported in the FAIR Health database, a
local weighted average charge for each
dental class of procedure codes is
calculated using utilization frequencies
from the Milliman Inc., Dental Health
Cost Guidelines as weights (see
paragraph (a)(3) of this section for Data
Sources). Similarly, using nationwide
average charge levels, a nationwide
average charge by dental class of
procedure codes is calculated. The
normalized geographic adjustment
factor for each dental class of procedure
codes and for each geographic area is
the ratio of the local average charge
divided by the corresponding
nationwide average charge. Finally, the
geographic area adjustment factor is the
arithmetic average of the corresponding
factors from the data sources mentioned
in the first sentence of this paragraph
(h)(3).
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) RVUs for CPT/HCPCS codes that
do not have Medicare-based RVUs and
are not designated as unlisted
procedures. For CPT/HCPCS codes that
are not assigned RVUs in paragraphs
(i)(2)(i) or (iii) of this section, total RVUs
are developed based on various charge
data sources. For these CPT/HCPCS
codes, the nationwide 80th percentile
billed charges are obtained, where
statistically credible, from the FAIR
Health database. For any remaining
CPT/HCPCS codes, the nationwide 80th
percentile billed charges are obtained,
where statistically credible, from the
Part B component of the Medicare
Standard Analytical File 5 Percent
Sample. For any remaining CPT/HCPCS
codes that have not been assigned RVUs
using the preceding data sources, the
nationwide total RVUs are calculated by
summing the work expense and nonfacility practice expense RVUs found in
Optum Essential RBRVS. The resulting
nationwide total RVUs obtained using
these data sources are multiplied by the
geographic area adjustment factors
determined pursuant to paragraph
(i)(2)(iv) of this section to obtain the
area-specific total RVUs.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Geographically-adjusted 80th
percentile conversion factors.
Representative CPT/HCPCS codes are
statistically selected and weighted so as
to give a weighted average RVU
comparable to the weighted average
RVU of the entire pathology/laboratory
CPT/HCPCS code group. The 80th
percentile charge for each selected CPT/
HCPCS code is obtained from the FAIR
Section
Remove
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
Chief Business Office ...........................................................
https://www.va.gov/cbo, under ‘‘Charge Data.’’ .....................
17.101
17.101
17.101
17.101
Ingenix/St. Anthony’s ...........................................................
MDR .....................................................................................
MedStat ................................................................................
Milliman USA, Inc .................................................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:48 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Health database. A nationwide
conversion factor (a monetary amount)
is calculated as set forth in paragraph
(i)(3)(i) of this section. The nationwide
conversion factor is trended forward to
the effective time period for the charges,
as set forth in paragraph (i)(3)(ii) of this
section. The resulting amount is
multiplied by a geographic area
adjustment factor determined pursuant
to paragraph (i)(3)(iv) of this section,
resulting in the geographically-adjusted
80th percentile conversion factor for the
effective charge period.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) * * *
(3) Nationwide 80th percentile
charges for HCPCS codes without RVUs.
For each applicable HCPCS code, 80th
percentile charges are extracted from
two independent data sources: the FAIR
Health database and the combined Part
B and DME components of the Medicare
Standard Analytical File 5 Percent
Sample. Charges from each database are
then trended forward to the effective
time period for the charges, as set forth
in paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section.
Charges for each HCPCS code from each
data source are combined into an
average 80th percentile charge by means
of the methodology set forth in
paragraph (l)(3)(ii) of this section. The
results constitute the nationwide 80th
percentile charge for each applicable
HCPCS code.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Averaging methodology. The
average 80th percentile trended charge
for any particular HCPCS code is
calculated by first computing a
preliminary mean of the available
charges for each HCPCS code. Statistical
outliers are identified and removed. In
cases where none of the charges are
removed, the average charge is
calculated as a mean of all reported
charges.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3.
§ 17.101
[Amended]
In the table below, for each section
indicated in the left column, remove the
words indicated in the middle column
from wherever it appears in the section,
and add the words indicated in the right
column.
Add
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Office of Community Care.
https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE,
Rates and Charges.’’
Optum Essential.
FAIR Health.
MarketScan.
Milliman, Inc.
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
under
‘‘Payer
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 208 / Monday, October 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Section
Remove
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
17.101 ........................
percent Sample ....................................................................
2.0 ........................................................................................
6.5 ........................................................................................
4. Amend § 17.106 by:
a. Revising paragraph (c)(4).
b. Adding new paragraph (f)(2)(viii).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
ACTION:
■
■
■
§ 17.106
payers.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) A third-party payer may not,
without the consent of a U.S.
Government official authorized to take
action under 38 U.S.C. 1729 and this
part, offset or reduce any payment due
under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or this part on the
grounds that the payer considers itself
due a refund from a VA facility. A
written request for a refund must be
submitted within 18 months from the
original payment date and adjudicated
separately from any other claims
submitted to the third-party payer under
38 U.S.C. 1729 or this part. If third-party
payers do not submit requests for a
refund within this 18-month time frame,
VA will not provide a refund to thirdparty payers for a paid claim for any
reason.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(viii) A provision in a third-party
payer’s plan that directs payment for
care or services be refused or lessened
because the billing is not presented in
accordance with a specified
methodology (such as a line item
methodology) is not by itself a
permissible ground for refusing or
reducing third-party payment.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–22972 Filed 10–25–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0136; FRL–10001–36–
OAR]
Renewable Fuel Standard Program:
Standards for 2020 and BiomassBased Diesel Volume for 2021, and
Response to the Remand of the 2016
Standards; Supplemental Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 25, 2019
Jkt 250001
Add
Percent Sample.
6.5.
2.0.
Proposed rule.
In a July 29, 2019 notice of
proposed rulemaking, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) proposed
percentage standards for four categories
of renewable fuel that would apply to
obligated parties in 2020 under the
Renewable Fuel Standard. This action
takes into consideration certain
comments received in response to the
proposed rule. Based on these
comments and additional information,
EPA is issuing a supplemental proposal
and requests comment on adjustments
to the percentage standards for 2020 that
result from the amended definitions of
two of the terms used to calculate the
percentage standards. We are proposing
to project the volume of gasoline and
diesel that will be exempt in 2020 due
to small refinery exemptions based on a
three-year average of the relief
recommended by the Department of
Energy (DOE). From 2016–2018 the
relief recommended by the DOE would
have resulted in a reduction to the
renewable volume obligation of
approximately 770 million RINs per
year. The amended definitions proposed
in this rule would effectively increase
the percentage standards that apply to
non-exempt obligated parties to offset
future small refinery exemptions and
help ensure that the required volumes
are met.
DATES:
Comments: Comments must be
received on or before November 29,
2019.
Public Hearing: EPA will hold a
public hearing will be held on October
30, 2019, at the location noted below
under ADDRESSES. The hearing will
begin at 9:00 a.m. and end when all
parties present who wish to speak have
had an opportunity to do so. Parties
wishing to testify at the hearing should
notify the contact person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by
October 24, 2019. Additional
information regarding the hearing
appears below under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
SUMMARY:
VA collection rules; third-party
You may send your
comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0136, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
57677
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
method) Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
• Mail: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
Office of Air and Radiation Docket, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Docket
Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20004. The Docket
Center’s hours of operations are 8:30
a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except
Federal Holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received may be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Hearing: The hearing will be held at
the following location: Ann Arbor
Marriott Ypsilanti at Eagle Crest, 1275 S.
Huron St., Ypsilanti, MI 48197
(telephone number (734) 487–2000). A
complete set of documents related to the
proposal will be available for public
inspection through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0136. Documents
can also be viewed at the EPA Docket
Center, located at 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW, Room 3334, Washington,
DC between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays.
Julia
MacAllister, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Assessment and
Standards Division, Environmental
Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood
Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone
number: (734) 214–4131; for questions
regarding this proposed action, email
address: RFS-Rulemakings@epa.gov; for
information regarding the public
hearing and to register for the public
hearing, email address: RFS-Hearing@
epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Entities
potentially affected by the July 29, 2019,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\28OCP1.SGM
28OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 208 (Monday, October 28, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57668-57677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22972]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AQ69
Billing and Collection by VA for Medical Care and Services
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
regulations concerning collection and recovery by VA for medical care
and services provided to an individual for treatment of a nonservice-
connected disability. Specifically, this rulemaking would revise the
provisions of VA regulations that determine the charges VA will bill
third-party payers for non-VA care provided at VA expense, would
include a time limit for which third-party payers can request a refund,
and would clarify that third-party payers cannot reduce or refuse
payment because of the billing methodology used to determine the
charge. These revisions would clarify VA billing practices, result in
more equitable charges to third-party payers, and ensure that VA
collects payments timely and effectively. Additionally, this rulemaking
would make certain technical corrections to the existing regulations,
and amend associated definitions.
DATES: Comments must be received by VA on or before December 27, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through https://www.Regulations.gov, by mail or hand-delivery to Director, Office of
Regulation Policy and Management (00REG), Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Room 1064, Washington, DC 20420; or by
fax to (202) 273-9026. (This is not a toll-free number.) Comments
should indicate that they are submitted in response to ``RIN 2900-AQ69,
Billing and Collection by VA for Medical Care and Services.'' Copies of
comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office
of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1064, between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please
call (202) 461-4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll-free
number.) In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed
online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at https://www.Regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Duran, Director of Policy and
Planning, Office of Community Care (10D), Ptarmigan at Cherry Creek
Denver, CO 80209, [email protected] or (303) 372-4629. (This is not
a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 1729 of Title 38, United
States Code (U.S.C.), VA has the right to recover or collect reasonable
charges for medical care or services from a third party to the extent
that the veteran or the provider of the care or services would be
eligible to receive payment from the third party for: A nonservice-
connected disability for which the veteran is entitled to care (or the
payment of expenses of care) under a health plan contract; a
nonservice-connected disability incurred incident to the veteran's
employment and covered under a worker's compensation law or plan that
provides reimbursement or indemnification for such care and services;
or a nonservice-connected disability incurred as a result of a motor
vehicle accident in a State that requires automobile accident
reparations (no-fault) insurance. This proposed rule would revise two
of VA's regulations (i.e., sections 17.101 and 17.106 of title 38, Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR)) that implement 38 U.S.C. 1729.
In this proposed rule, we would revise 38 CFR 17.101, which
establishes the instances when VA will collect and recover for medical
care and services and the methodology used to determine the reasonable
charges VA can bill for medical care and services. In this rulemaking,
we propose to amend the amount VA will bill a third party when the
medical care was provided at a non-VA facility at VA expense. We also
propose to make several technical amendments to 38 CFR 17.101, to
correct clerical errors and update office and data source names.
Additionally, we propose to add two new definitions and remove one
current definition to be consistent with the proposed technical
amendments.
In addition to revising Sec. 17.101, this rulemaking would also
revise Sec. 17.106. Section 1729 of 38 U.S.C. authorizes VA
[[Page 57669]]
to collect the reasonable charges for medical care and services from a
third-party payer and to compromise, settle, or waive a claim (such as
a refund). Additionally, section 1729 prohibits any contract or other
agreement operating to prevent recovery or collection by the United
States.
Current 38 CFR 17.106 implements 38 U.S.C. 1729 by describing VA's
rules for recovery and collection of reasonable charges from a third-
party payer for medical care and services provided for a nonservice-
connected disability in or through any VA facility to a veteran who is
a beneficiary under a thirty-party's plan. This section also explains
that a third-party payer may not, without consent of the U.S.
Government, offset or reduce any payment due under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or
part 17 of 38 CFR in the instance that the third-party payer considers
itself due a refund; and requires that any request for a refund be
submitted in writing. Section 17.106 describes those conditions under
which a third-party payer may not reduce, offset, or request a refund
for payments made pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 1729. In this rulemaking, we
propose to amend 38 CFR 17.106 to clarify the timeframe for submitting
a written request for a refund for claims under part 17 or 38 U.S.C.
1729, and would explain that VA would not provide a refund for any
reason, to include if a retroactive service-connection determination is
made more than 18 months after the date payment is made by the third-
party payer. We also propose to add a new condition under which a
third-party payer could not refuse or reduce their payment for a claim
under section 1729.
Changes to 17.101
As explained in more detail below, we would amend current Sec.
17.101 by adding and removing definitions, changing the amount VA will
bill a third party when the medical care was provided at a non-VA
facility at VA expense, and making several technical amendments.
Sec. 17.101(a)(5) Definitions
We would revise Sec. 17.101(a)(5) which defines certain terms used
throughout Sec. 17.101. We would add two new definitions and remove a
current definition. In proposed Sec. 17.101(a)(5), we would remove the
definition of ``MDR.'' MDR stands for Medical Data Research, which is
defined as a medical charge database published by Ingenix, Inc. It is
referred to throughout Sec. 17.101, as it was a database used to
calculate charges. However, it is no longer used, and has been replaced
by FAIR Health. We would insert a definition for ``FAIR Health''
immediately following the definition of ``DRG,'' and define ``FAIR
Health'' in Sec. 17.101(a)(5) to mean any of the FAIR Health Charge
Benchmarks products developed by FAIR Health. This would be consistent
with changes we propose to make throughout 17.101 to replace ``MDR''
with ``FAIR Health.'' This is explained in more detail later in this
rulemaking.
In proposed Sec. 17.101(a)(5), we would insert a definition of
``MarketScan'' immediately following the definition of ``ICU.'' We
would define ``MarketScan'' to mean the MarketScan Commercial Claims &
Encounters Database developed by Truven Health Analytics LLC.
MarketScan has replaced MedStat, which is referenced throughout Sec.
17.101 as it is a database used for billing purposes. Since it has been
replaced by MarketScan, we would define it in Sec. 17.101(a)(5). As
explained in more detail later this rulemaking, we also would replace
all references to MedStat with MarketScan.
Sec. 17.101(a)(7)
Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 1729, VA is authorized to collect reasonable
charges in certain circumstances, but the statute does not define what
reasonable charges are. In current 38 CFR 17.101, VA established the
methodology it uses to determine what constitutes reasonable charges
and directs when reasonable charges will be charged to third-party
payers. Section 17.101 requires that VA charge the higher of the amount
determined using the methodologies in this section (reasonable charges)
or the amount VA actually paid to the provider for the care. We propose
to amend Sec. 17.101(a)(7) to bill third-party payers the reasonable
charges rate that is determined using the methodology in Sec. 17.101,
as if the care was provided at a VA facility. In this regard, if an
individual received surgery at a non-VA facility at VA expense, the
charges billed to the individual's health insurance (or other third-
party payer) would be the same as if the individual received the
surgery at a VA facility.
The current practice of charging the higher of the amount
determined using the methodologies in Sec. 17.101 (reasonable charges)
or the amount VA actually paid creates confusion in the field and
additional administrative burdens when determining the appropriate
amount to bill payers. Third-party payers have also indicated a
preference for being charged using the same methodology regardless of
whether the care was provided at a VA facility or at a non-VA facility
at VA expense.
We believe that by removing the portion of the current regulation
that requires VA to charge the higher of the two rates and, instead,
requiring VA to bill the rate determined using the methodologies set
forth in this section, it will provide greater clarity and uniformity
in VA's billing practices. In this regard, requiring VA to charge the
same rate regardless of whether the care was provided at a VA facility
or a non-VA facility at VA expense will cut down on the administrative
burden associated with determining the charges. Currently, the VA
billing officials must first determine that the care was provided at a
non-VA facility, then determine the rates based on two different
methodologies. Finally, the billing official must determine which is
higher and enter that cost into the billing system. Under the proposed
rule, VA billing officials will merely determine one rate using the
same methodology regardless of where the care was furnished.
Additionally, we find that it is equitable to charge the same rates
regardless of the facility in which the individual sought treatment;
the third-party payer should not be disadvantaged and required to pay
higher charges because the individual sought care at a non-VA facility.
Moreover, the proposed revision is beneficial to the third-party payer
as there is no scenario in which the third-party payer would be charged
more under the proposed rule than they are charged under the current
rule. Specifically, if the higher charge is the charge determined
according to this section, the third-party payer will still be charged
the amount determined in this section. However, if the higher amount is
the actual cost VA paid, the third-party payer will be able to pay the
lower, reasonable charges rate that was determined using the
methodologies in this section. We note that in the vast majority of
cases, the reasonable rates are higher than that amount actually paid
and we do not think that this would ultimately change the amount that
we are charging and collecting. This is consistent with generally
accepted billing practices in the industry, as there is typically one
set of rates that all health care providers charge. However, some of
the amount charged is written off and the amount the payer ends up
paying is usually lower than the amount billed.
Technical Amendments to Sec. 17.101
We propose to make several technical amendments to ensure the
information contained in Sec. 17.101 is accurate and reflects changes
to VA's organizational structure, the names of companies and
[[Page 57670]]
data source references. VA has not updated the data sources and names
since 2003, and there have been several changes to these since that
time. See 68 FR 70714. However, in the annual publication of the data
sources used to calculate charges, these changes have been reflected.
See https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE/revenue_ops/payer_rates.asp. We
now propose to update Sec. 17.101 to reflect these changes.
Currently, Sec. 17.101(a)(2) and (3) jointly explain that the data
for calculating actual charge amounts based on methodologies in Sec.
17.101, the specific editions of the data sources used to calculate
these amounts, and the information on where these data sources may be
obtained will either be published in a notice in the Federal Register
or will be posted on the internet site of the Veterans Health
Administration (VHA) Chief Business Office, currently at https://www.va.gov/cbo, under ``Charge Data.'' Since the promulgation of Sec.
17.101, the name of the responsible office for billing and collection
has changed from Chief Business Office to Office of Community Care.
Relatedly, the website has changed from https://www.va.gov/cbo to
https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE.
To ensure the correct VHA offices and website are referenced in
Sec. 17.101, we propose to replace all references in Sec.
17.101(a)(2) and (a)(3) to ``Chief Business Office'' with ``Office of
Community Care,'' and replace all references in Sec. 17.101(a)(2) and
(a)(3) to ``https://www.va.gov/cbo, under `Charge Data' '' with
``https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE, under `Payer Rates and Charges.'''
The relevant information on the charges data is located under ``Payer
Rates and Charges'' and we would update Sec. 17.101(a)(2) and (3) to
reflect that.
We would amend Sec. 17.101 by replacing all references to
``Ingenix/St. Anthony's'' with ``Optum Essential.'' Ingenix/St.
Anthony's was a data source used to calculate charges under Sec.
17.101. This data source was used to calculate such charges as
physician and other professional charges (except for anesthesia and
certain dental services); pathology and laboratory charges; relative
value units for durable medical equipment (DME), drugs, injectables,
and other medical services, items, and supplies. This data source is
referenced in Sec. 17.101(f)(2)(ii); (i)(2)(ii); and (l)(2)(i)(A)-(B),
(M). Optum Essential has replaced Ingenix/St. Anthony's, as Ingenix
went out of business more than five years ago. We propose to revise
Sec. 17.101 to reference Optum Essential instead of Ingenix/St.
Anthony's, and we would want the regulation to be consistent with this
change to the data source.
In Sec. 17.101, we propose to replace all references to ``MDR''
and add in its place ``FAIR Health'' since FAIR Health has replaced
MDR. We would propose to make these changes throughout Sec. 17.101.
MDR stands for Medical Data Research, which was a medical charge
database published by Ingenix, Inc. It is referred to throughout
current Sec. 17.101, as it was a database used to calculate charges,
including outpatient facility charges; physician and other professional
charges (except for certain dental services; professional charges for
anesthesia services; pathology and laboratory charges; and charges for
DME, drugs, injectables, and certain other medical services, items, and
supplies. For example, it is referenced in current Sec.
17.101(e)(3)(ii), (e)(4), (f)(2)(ii), (f)(3), (g)(3)(i), (i)(2)(i)-
(ii), (i)(3), (l)(2)(iii), (l)(3), and (l)(5)(ii). However, Ingenix
went out of business over five years ago, and FAIR Health became the
successor company. MDR is thus no longer used and has been replaced by
FAIR Health in calculating charges under Sec. 17.101. We would update
Sec. 17.101 to reflect this change in the name. We propose to replace
all references in Sec. 17.101 to ``MedStat'' with ``MarketScan'' as
the name of this data source has changed from MedStat to MarketScan.
MedStat is referenced throughout Sec. 17.101 as it is a database to
calculate acute inpatient facility charges and outpatient facility
charges. It is referenced in Sec. 17.101(b)(2), (b)(3), and
(e)(3)(ii). Since it has been replaced by MarketScan, we propose to
replace all references to MedStat with MarketScan in Sec. 17.101 to
ensure this regulation reflects this change and the correct name of the
data source.
Throughout Sec. 17.101, we would replace all references to
``Milliman USA, Inc.'' and add in its place ``Milliman, Inc.'' since
that is the correct name of the company which has changed since 2003.
Milliman USA, Inc. is referenced in current Sec. 17.101(e)(4), (f)(3),
(g)(3)(i), (h)(3), (i)(3), (l)(3), and (l)(5)(iii). In Sec. 17.101,
Milliman USA, Inc. is referenced with regards to its various health
cost guidelines and data sets. These guidelines and data sets have been
used to calculate outpatient facility charges; physician and other
professional charges (including anesthesia and dental services); and
charges for DME, drugs, injectables, and other medical services, items,
and supplies. Because the name has changed, we would update the
regulation to accurately reflect the name of this company throughout
Sec. 17.101. We note that Milliman USA, Inc.'s Health Cost Guidelines
fee survey which is referenced in current paragraphs (f)(3) and (i)(3)
is no longer used, and we propose to remove those references to it in
these paragraphs, as explained later in this rulemaking.
We propose to amend Sec. 17.101 by replacing all references to
``percent Sample'' with ``Percent Sample'' as percent should be
capitalized. ``Percent Sample'' is included in several paragraphs
within Sec. 17.101 (including but not limited to Sec. 17.101(d)(2),
(e)(3)(i) through (ii), and (g)(3)(i)) in reference to the Medicare
Standard Analytical File. This Percent Sample is used to calculate
partial hospitalization facility charges, outpatient facility charges,
physician and other professional charges except for anesthesia services
and certain dental services, observation care facility charges, and
ambulance and other emergency transportation charges. We would update
Sec. 17.101 to ensure that references to Percent Sample are correctly
capitalized.
We would amend Sec. 17.101(e)(3)(i)(C) by replacing the reference
to ``2.0'' with ``6.5'', and replacing the references to ``6.5'' with
``2.0''. This specifically relates to the minimum and maximum 80th
percentile charge to Medicare Ambulatory Payment Classification payment
amount ratios, which are used to calculate outpatient facility charges
under Sec. 17.101. This is a clerical error, as 6.5 should be 2.0 and
2.0 should be 6.5. We now propose to correct this error in proposed
Sec. 17.101(e)(3)(i)(C).
[[Page 57671]]
For ease of reference, the following chart explains these technical
changes to Sec. 17.101 as discussed in the preceding paragraphs:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Propose to remove Propose to add
------------------------------------------------------------------------
17.101(a)..................... Chief Business Office of Community
Office. Care
17.101(a)..................... https://www.va.gov/ https://www.va.gov/
cbo, under COMMUNITYCARE,
``Charge Data.''. under ``Payer
Rates and
Charges.''
17.101........................ Ingenix/St. Optum Essential.
Anthony's.
17.101........................ MDR................ FAIR Health.
17.101........................ MedStat............ MarketScan.
17.101........................ Milliman USA, Inc.. Milliman, Inc.
17.101........................ percent Sample..... Percent Sample.
17.101(e)(3)(i)(C)............ 2.0................ 6.5.
17.101(e)(3)(i)(C)............ 6.5................ 2.0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the changes proposed above, we would amend paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) of Sec. 17.101 by removing obsolete references. Section
17.101(f)(2)(ii) describes the methodology and data sources used to
calculate physician and other professional charges except for
anesthesia services and certain dental services. First, we would remove
the language that states that for any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes, the
nationwide 80th percentile billed charges are obtained, where
statistically credible, from the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance database. We would remove this language
from the paragraph as the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance database is a data source that no
longer exists, and is no longer applicable or used in calculating these
charges (i.e., physician and other professional charges except for
anesthesia services and certain dental services). There is no
replacement so we would remove this language entirely from this
paragraph.
Similarly, we would remove the word ``three'' in Sec.
17.101(f)(2)(ii). In current paragraph (f)(2)(ii), we reference the
number of databases used to determine the total RVUs for Current
Procedural Terminology (CPT) and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding
System (HCPCS) codes that do not have Medicare Relative Value Units
(RVUs) and are not designated as unlisted procedures. These three data
sources are the MDR database, the Part B component of the Medicare
Standard Analytical File 5 Percent Sample, and Prevailing Healthcare
Charges System nationwide commercial insurance database. Because we are
proposing to remove reference to the Prevailing Healthcare Charges
System nationwide commercial insurance database, as explained in the
preceding paragraph, there will no longer be three data sources used in
this determination.
For the same reasons, we would remove from the final sentence in
this paragraph the word ``four'' with regard to the number of data
sources used. The data sources used to make this determination under
Sec. 17.101(f)(2)(ii) may vary. Thus, we would not list each data
source used and would also not identify the specific number of data
sources used. We would include the data source information on https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE or in a Federal Register notice (referenced in
proposed Sec. 17.101(a)(3)) instead of publishing them in regulation.
Therefore, the public will still be informed of the sources used as
that information will continue to be located on our websites or in a
notice in the Federal Register, and updated on an annual basis. As
explained previously, we are also proposing to update the VA website to
reflect the correct web address (https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE). We
note that the most recent Federal Register notices containing this
information were published on December 14, 2017 and September 19, 2018.
See 82 FR 59213 and 83 FR 47412.
We would also remove the word ``untrended'' from Sec.
17.101(f)(2)(ii). This relates to nationwide conversion factor for the
corresponding CPT/HCPCS code group. However, this term should not have
been included in the original regulation as it is not a word, and
removing it is merely a technical change as its removal would have no
impact on our practices. We would continue to use the nationwide
conversion factor for the corresponding CPT/HCPCS code group.
We propose to revise paragraphs (f)(3) and (i)(3) of Sec. 17.101,
which reference the Milliman USA, Inc., Health Cost Guidelines fee
survey in calculating such charges as physician and other professional
charges except for anesthesia and certain dental services and pathology
and laboratory charges, respectively. We would remove this language
from paragraphs (f)(3) and (i)(3), as this data source no longer
exists. We would not replace it with any specific data source, as the
data source used can vary. As previously explained, the data sources
will be available to the public at https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE or
in a Federal Register notice (referenced in proposed Sec.
17.101(a)(3)) instead of publishing them in regulation.
Current Sec. 17.101(h) describes the methodology for calculating
professional charges for dental services identified by HCPCS Level II
codes. Paragraph (h)(2) specifically explains the three data sources
used to determine the 80th percentile charges for each HCPCS dental
code. The sources referenced in this paragraph include Prevailing
Healthcare Charges System database, National Dental Advisory Service
nationwide pricing index; and the Dental UCR Module of the
Comprehensive Healthcare Payment System. The Prevailing Healthcare
Charges System database no longer exists. We would thus revise Sec.
17.101 (h)(2) to remove the reference to that data source. We would not
replace it in paragraph (h)(2) with another database as that can vary.
We propose to revise the first sentence of paragraph (h)(2) to state
``various independent data sources'' instead of ``three independent
data sources'' to reflect the fact that the data sources used can vary.
Because of this, we would not list every data source used in this
paragraph. As previously mentioned, VA publishes the charges and data
sources (including the specific editions of these data sources) used to
calculate the charges either through a Federal Register notice or on
https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE as referenced in proposed Sec.
17.101(a)(3).
We would also revise the language in this same paragraph that
references ``UCR Module of the Comprehensive Healthcare Payment System,
a release from Ingenix from a nationwide database of dental charges''
and instead insert ``FAIR Health module'' as the
[[Page 57672]]
FAIR Health module replaced the UCR Module of the Comprehensive
Healthcare Payment System. Ingenix, which was the original creator of
this comprehensive health care payment system, went out of business
over five years ago, and FAIR Health became the successor company. The
FAIR Health module replaced the UCR Module of the Comprehensive
Healthcare Payment System, and thus we would revise paragraph (h)(2)
accordingly.
We would then amend paragraph (h)(2)(i), which explains the
methodology used to determine the average charge for any particular
HCPCS dental code. This is done by computing a preliminary mean average
of the three charges for each code. We would revise Sec.
17.101(h)(2)(i) by removing the language ``average'' in reference to
``preliminary mean'' in the first sentence to correctly state how the
charges are calculated. The words ``average'' and ``mean'' are
redundant as these two words have the same meaning. We use the
preliminary mean and we would update the paragraph (h)(2)(i) to reflect
this.
In that same sentence, we would also remove ``three'' and add
``available'' in reference to the charges for each code as the number
of charges for each code can vary based on the number of sources used.
This paragraph references three charges because three data sources are
reflected in paragraph (h)(2). However, as mentioned previously, we are
proposing to revise paragraph (h)(2) to reflect that one of these data
sources (Prevailing Healthcare Charges System database) no longer
exists, and the number of data sources used to calculate these charges
under paragraph (h) can vary. Instead of listing the data sources and
including the specific number of data sources, this information would
continue to be made available to the public either through a Federal
Register notice or on https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE as referenced in
proposed Sec. 17.101(a)(3).
In the second sentence in paragraph (h)(2)(i), we propose to remove
the language ``by testing whether any charge differs from the
preliminary mean charge by more than 50 percent of the preliminary mean
charge. In such cases, the charge most distant from the preliminary
mean is removed as an outlier, and the average charge is calculated as
a mean of the two remaining charges.'' This language refers to how
statistical outliers are identified and removed in calculating the
average charge and is based on using three data sources. Because we
propose to update Sec. 17.101(h)(2) to eliminate the use of three data
sources and because the number of data sources can vary, we would
remove this language to correctly state how charges are calculated and
allow for variability. Instead, this sentence would simply state that
``statistical outliers are identified and removed.'' There may not be
more than two data sources used, and thus there may not be two
remaining charges. This paragraph would be updated to reflect this
potential reality.
The last sentence of paragraph (h)(2)(i) explains that in cases
where none of the charges differ from the preliminary mean charge by
more than 50 percent of the preliminary mean charge, the average charge
is calculated as a mean of all three reported charges. As previously
explained in the preceding paragraphs, we would no longer use three
data sources and the number of data sources can vary. We propose to
remove the language in this last sentence of paragraph (h)(2)(i),
specifically ``differ from the preliminary mean charge by more than 50
percent of the preliminary mean charge'' and replace that with
``removed''. We would also remove ``three'' from the last sentence in
this paragraph to correctly state how the charges are calculated and to
reflect that the average charge is no longer based on three reported
charges. Thus, the proposed revised sentence would explain that where
none of the charges are removed, the average charge is calculated as a
mean of all reported charges.
In calculating professional charges for dental services identified
by HCPCS Level II codes, paragraph (h)(3) of Sec. 17.101 describes how
each geographic adjustment factor is determined using Milliman USA,
Inc., Dental Health Cost Guidelines, and a normalized geographic
adjustment factors computed from the Dental UCR Module of the
Comprehensive Payment System compiled by Ingenix. FAIR Health module
has replaced ``UCR Module of the Comprehensive Healthcare Payment
System compiled by Ingenix.'' As previously mentioned, Ingenix was the
original creator of this Dental UCR Module of the Comprehensive Payment
System and went out of business over five years ago. FAIR Health became
the successor company, and the FAIR Health module is used in place of
the Dental UCR Module of the Comprehensive Payment System. Thus, we
propose to remove the reference to this dental UCR module and replace
it with ``FAIR Health module.''
We would revise Sec. 17.101(i)(2)(ii) which describes the
methodology and data sources used to calculate pathology and laboratory
charges. Paragraph (i)(2)(ii) specifically describes how total RVUs for
CPT/HCPCS codes that do not have Medicare-based RVUs are developed
based on various charge data sources (including the MDR database, Part
B component of the Medicare Standard Analytical File 5 Percent Sample,
the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System nationwide commercial
insurance database and Ingenix/St. Anthony's RBRVS). As explained
previously in this rulemaking, we note that we propose to update the
names of several of these databases (i.e., from MDR to FAIR Health, and
from Ingenix/St. Anthony's to Optum Essentials). We propose to remove
the current language that explains that for any remaining CPT/HCPCS
codes, the nationwide 80th percentile billed charges are obtained,
where statistically credible, from the Prevailing Healthcare Charges
System nationwide commercial insurance database. We would also remove
the language that explains that for each of these CPT/HCPCS codes,
nationwide total RVUs are obtained by taking the nationwide 80th
percentile billed charges obtained using the preceding three databases
and dividing by the untrended nationwide conversion factor determined
pursuant to paragraphs (i)(3) and (i)(3)(i) of this section. We would
remove these sentences since the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System
nationwide commercial insurance database is no longer available and
there is no replacement.
We would revise the remaining sentences in this same paragraph to
state that for any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes that have not been
assigned RVUs using the preceding data sources (i.e., the FAIR Health
database, Part B component of the Medicare Standard Analytical File 5
Percent Sample, the Optum Essentials RBRVS will be used in the
calculation of nationwide total RVUs; and that the resulting nationwide
total RVUs obtained using these data sources (i.e., FAIR Health
database and Part B component of the Medicare Standard Analytical File
5 Percent Sample, and the Optum Essentials) will be multiplied by the
geographic area adjustment factors determined pursuant to paragraph
(i)(2)(iv) of this section in order to obtain the area-specific total
RVUs. We would make these changes to the last two sentences in the
paragraph to accurately reflect the process for determining total RVUs
for CPT/HCPCS codes that do not have Medicare-based RVUs. This is
because the Prevailing Healthcare Charges System nationwide commercial
insurance database is no longer available and there is no replacement
for that database. We would also revise the final sentence to
[[Page 57673]]
reflect that we would use the data sources in this paragraph to
determine RVUs. Because the data sources we use to make this
determination under Sec. 17.101(i)(2)(ii) may vary, we would not list
each data source used and would also not identify the specific number
of data sources used. Since the data sources used can vary, we would
include the data source information on https://www.va.gov/COMMUNITYCARE
or in a Federal Register notice (referenced in proposed Sec.
17.101(a)(3)) instead of publishing them in regulation.
We would amend several paragraphs in Sec. 17.101(l) to correctly
state how the charges for DME, drugs, injectables, and other medical
services, items, and supplies identified by HCPCS Level II codes are
calculated. Paragraph (l)(3) explains how the 80th percentile charges
for each applicable HCPCS code are extracted using three independent
data sources: The MDR database; Medicare, as represented by the
combined Part B and DME components of the Medicare Standard Analytical
File 5 Percent Sample; and Milliman USA, Inc., Optimized HMO (Health
Maintenance Organization) Data Sets. In paragraph (l)(3), we propose to
remove ``three'' and ``Milliman USA, Inc., Optimized HMO (Health
Maintenance Organization) Data Sets'' in the first sentence. We would
make this change because the ``Milliman USA, Inc. Optimized HMO Data
Sets'' no longer exists and there is no replacement. Thus, we now use
two data sources instead of three. As explained previously in this
rulemaking, we would update the reference to the MDR database to
reflect that the FAIR Health database has replaced this database. MDR
was a medical charge database published by Ingenix, Inc. However, it is
no longer used, and has been replaced by the FAIR Health database. We
would update Sec. 17.101(l) to accurately reflect these changes.
We would also amend paragraph (l)(3)(ii) in Sec. 17.101 to
correctly state how the average 80th percentile trended charge for any
particular HCPCS code is calculated. Currently, this paragraph explains
that this average charge is calculated by computing a preliminary mean
average of the three charges for each HCPCS code and explains how
statistical outliers are identified and removed. Additionally, it
explains that the average charge is calculated as a mean of three
reported charges in cases where none of the charges differ from the
preliminary mean charge by more than five times the preliminary mean
charge, or less than 0.2 times the preliminary mean charge. We propose
to revise this paragraph by removing from the first sentence
``average'' immediately following ``preliminary mean'', and replacing
in the same sentence ``three'' with ``available.'' The words
``average'' and ``mean'' are repetitive and redundant, as these two
words have meant the same to us in the context of this methodology, and
we would thus remove the word ``average'' after ``preliminary mean.''
We would also remove ``three'' in the first sentence of this same
paragraph and replace it with ``available.'' As explained previously,
Milliman USA, Inc., Optimized HMO (Health Maintenance Organization)
Data Sets no longer exists, and the number of data sets used under
paragraph (l)(3) is two (FAIR Health database and the combined Part B
and DME components of the Medicare Standard Analytical File 5 Percent
Sample). Because of this, we would revise Sec. 17.101(l)(3)(ii) to
reflect available charges instead of three charges.
We propose to further revise the language in paragraph (l)(3)(ii)
that describes how statistical outliers are identified and removed. The
paragraph explains that the methodology used to identify and remove
statistical outliers based on the charges from the three databases
which is done by testing whether any charge differs from the
preliminary mean charge by more than five times the preliminary mean
charge, or by less than 0.2 times the preliminary mean charge. The
remaining sentences in this paragraph further explain that the charge
most distance from the preliminary mean is removed as an outlier, and
that the average charge is calculated as a mean of the two remaining
charges. The last sentence further states that the average charge is
calculated as a mean of all three reported charges where none of the
charges differ from the preliminary mean charge by more than five times
the preliminary mean charge, or less than 0.2 times the preliminary
mean charge. As explained previously, because we use two data sources
now instead of three, this language on how we would determine the
statistical outliers and the average charge is no longer accurate.
There would no longer be two remaining charges in identifying and
removing outliers. We would thus revise this paragraph to correctly
state how charges are calculated. In addition to those changes we would
make to paragraph (l)(3)(ii) as proposed in the preceding paragraphs,
after the first sentence in this paragraph, we would state that
``statistical outliers are identified and removed.'' After this
sentence, we would remove the remaining subsequent text of the
paragraph and add a sentence to state that where none of the charges
are removed, the average charge is calculated as a mean of all reported
charges. This paragraph would be updated to reflect how average charges
are determined under paragraph (l)(3) as we explained previously.
Sec. 17.106 VA Collection Rules; Third-Party Payers
As previously explained, section 1729 of 38 U.S.C. authorizes VA to
collect the reasonable charges for medical care and services from a
third-party payer and to compromise, settle, or waive a claim (such as
a refund). Additionally, section 1729 prohibits any contract or other
agreement operating to prevent recovery or collection by the United
States. This is implemented in 38 CFR 17.106 as current Sec. 17.106
authorizes VA to collect from third-party payers. Specifically, Sec.
17.106(c)(4) directs that a third-party payer may not, without the
consent of a U.S. Government official authorized to take action under
38 U.S.C. 1729 and this part, offset or reduce any payment due under 38
U.S.C. 1729 or this part on the grounds that the payer considers itself
due a refund from a VA facility. A written request for a refund must be
submitted and adjudicated separately from any other claims submitted to
the third-party payer under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or this part.
Currently, third-party payers are requesting refunds many months
and sometimes years after the original payment was submitted and
processed by VA. This creates difficulty for VA billing staff and makes
it increasingly more difficult to approximate the funding needed to
provide the refunds. Therefore, in this rulemaking, we propose to
revise Sec. 17.106(c)(4) to add a time frame of 18 months from the
time the payer makes their original payment to request a refund. We
also propose to add language to clarify that if a request for a refund
is not submitted within this 18-month time frame, VA will not provide a
refund to third-party payers for a claim paid for any reason. VA
believes that adding a timeframe of 18 months provides ample time for
the third-party payer to request the refund and also provides VA with
greater finality when determining the budget. We also believe that we
are able to require such a timeframe for third-party payer requests for
these refunds as we interpret the broad language in 38 U.S.C. 1729 to
authorize us to do so. As proposed in 38 CFR 17.106(c)(4), if a third-
party payer requests a refund outside of the 18-month time frame, we
[[Page 57674]]
would not provide a refund for a claim paid for any reason. As
previously explained, we believe this is reasonable as 18 months is
ample time to request a refund and would be consistent with our
authority in 38 U.S.C. 1729. We note that if a retroactive service-
connection determination is made more than 18 months after the date
payment is made by the third-party payer, VA would not provide a refund
to the third-party payer for a paid claim.
Section 1729(f) provides that no provision of any third-party
payer's plan having the effect of excluding from coverage or limited
payment for certain care if that care is provided in or through any VA
facility shall operate to prevent collection by the United States.
Pursuant to this authority, VA promulgated Sec. 17.106(f) which
describes the conditions under which a third-party payer may not
reduce, offset, or request a refund for payments made to VA. Currently,
paragraph (f)(2) contains seven such conditions, and we now propose to
add an eighth condition. In proposed paragraph (f)(2)(viii), we would
state that a provision in a third-party payer's plan that directs
payment for care or services be refused or lessened because the billing
is not presented in accordance with a specified methodology (such as a
line item methodology) is not by itself a permissible ground for
refusing or reducing third-party payment of the charges billed by VA.
Most private sector hospitals in the United States perform itemized
billing, meaning they bill for those ancillary services, room and
board, and supplies provided to the patient and include charges for
each individual item or service that was provided to the patient. VA
does not use itemized billing when determining charges, and does not
break down each item or service provided and include charges for such
item or service. Instead, VA uses a per diem methodology, under which
there are separate per diem charges for room and board and for all
ancillary services. VA then sends the third-party payer the bill using
the per diem methodology. However, as mentioned, this does not break
down the charges by item or service, and third-party payers have raised
issues with this methodology because they are unable to determine the
charge for each individual item or service provided. Because VA's
billing methodology does not conform to some third-party payers' line-
item billing methodology, some third-party payers have refused to pay
either the full charges or part of the charges for VA care or medical
services. We believe revising Sec. 17.106(f)(2) as proposed would be
equitable to all third-party payers by applying the same standard to
all third-party payers and would require all third-party payers to pay
regardless of whether our billing methodologies are the same as their
preferred method. In addition, upon request from the payer, in
accordance with the instructions on the billing document, VA would
provide the medical records that provided the basis for the billing.
This is not described in the regulation, but is provided here to
explain that we provide these medical records. Providing the medical
records would ensure that the third-party payer would have an
opportunity to review the billing document alongside the medical
records to fully understand the nature of the charges.
Effect of Rulemaking
The Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to be revised by this
proposed rulemaking, would represent the exclusive legal authority on
this subject. No contrary rules or procedures would be authorized. All
VA guidance would be read to conform with this proposed rulemaking if
possible or, if not possible, such guidance would be superseded by this
rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Although this proposed rule contains a provision constituting a
collection of information, at 38 CFR 17.101, under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), no proposed new or
modified collections of information are associated with this rule. The
information collection provision for Sec. 17.101 is currently approved
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and has been assigned OMB
control number 2900-0606.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601-612. We have not proposed any new requirements that would
have such an effect. The changes being made to these regulations are
mostly technical in nature, and conform to existing statutory
requirements and existing practices in the program. Therefore, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this amendment would be exempt from the initial and
final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and
604.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that
this rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at
https://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the
rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of the
rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's website at
https://www.va.gov/orpm/, by following the link for VA Regulations
Published from FY2004 through FYTD. This rule is not an E.O. 13771
regulatory action because this rule is not significant under E.O.
12866.
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C.
1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year. This proposed rule would have no such
effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for
the programs affected by this document are 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary
Care; 64.011, Veterans Dental Care; 64.012, Veterans Prescription
Service; 64.013, Veterans Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014, Veterans State
Domiciliary Care; 64.015, Veterans State Nursing Home Care; 64.029--
Purchase Care Program; 64.033--VA Supportive Services for Veteran
Families Program; 64.034--VA Grants for Adaptive Sports Programs for
Disabled Veterans and Disabled Members of the Armed Forces; 64.035--
[[Page 57675]]
Veterans Transportation Program; 64.039--CHAMPVA; 64.040--VHA Inpatient
Medicine; 64.041--VHA Outpatient Specialty Care; 64.042-- VHA Inpatient
Surgery; 64.043--VHA Mental Health Residential; 64.044-- VHA Home Care;
64.045--VHA Outpatient Ancillary Services; 64.046--VHA Inpatient
Psychiatry; 64.047--VHA Primary Care; 64.048--VHA Mental Health
clinics; 64.049--VHA Community Living Center; 64.050--VHA Diagnostic
Care.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse, Foreign Relations,
Government contracts, Grant programs-health, Grant programs-veterans,
Health care, Health facilities, Health professions, Health records,
Homeless, Medical and dental schools, Medical devices, Medical
research, Mental health programs, Nursing home care, Philippines,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Scholarships and fellows,
Travel, Transportation expenses, Veterans.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the
Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an
official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Robert L.
Wilkie, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on May 6, 2019, for publication.
Consuela Benjamin,
Regulation Development Coordinator, Office of Regulation Policy &
Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
PART 17--MEDICAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.
* * * * *
Section 17.101 is also issued under 38 U.S.C. 101, 1701, 1705,
1710, 1721, 1722, 1729.
* * * * *
0
2. Amend 17.101 by:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(5), removing the definition of ``MDR.''
0
b. In paragraph (a)(5), adding alphabetically the definitions of ``FAIR
Health'' and ``MarketScan''.
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(7), (f)(2)(ii), (f)(3), (h)(2) introductory
text, (h)(2)(i), (h)(2)(ii), (h)(3), (i)(2)(ii), (i)(3), (l)(3)
introductory text, and (l)(3)(ii).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 17.101 Collection or recovery by VA for medical care or services
provided or furnished to a veteran for a nonservice-connected
disability.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) * * *
* * * * *
FAIR Health means any of the Fair Health Charge Benchmarks products
developed by Fair Health.''
* * * * *
MarketScan means the MarketScan Commercial Claims & Encounters
Database developed by Truven Health Analytics LLC.
* * * * *
(7) Charges for medical care or services provided by non-VA
providers at VA expense. When medical care or services are furnished at
the expense of the VA by non-VA providers, the charges billed for such
care or services will be the charges determined according to this
section.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) RVUs for CPT/HCPCS codes that do not have Medicare RVUs and
are not designated as unlisted procedures. For CPT/HCPCS codes that are
not assigned RVUs in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(iii) of this
section, total RVUs are developed based on various charge data sources.
For these CPT/HCPCS codes, that nationwide 80th percentile billed
charges are obtained, where statistically credible, from the FAIR
Health database. For any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes, the nationwide 80th
percentile billed charges are obtained, where statistically credible,
from the Part B component of the Medicare Standard Analytical File 5
Percent Sample. For each of these CPT/HCPCS codes, nationwide total
RVUs are obtained by taking the nationwide 80th percentile billed
charges obtained using the preceding databases and dividing by the
nationwide conversion factor for the corresponding CPT/HCPCS code group
determined pursuant to paragraphs (f)(3) and (f)(3)(i) of this section.
For any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes that have not been assigned RVUs
using the preceding data sources, the nationwide total RVUs are
calculated by summing the work expense and non-facility practice
expense RVUs found in Optum Essential RBRVS. The resulting nationwide
total RVUs obtained using these data sources are multiplied by the
geographic area adjustment factors determined pursuant to paragraph
(f)(2)(iv) of this section to obtain the area-specific total RVUs.
* * * * *
(3) Geographically-adjusted 80th percentile conversion factors.
CPT/HCPCS codes are separated into the following 23 CPT/HCPCS code
groups: Allergy immunotherapy, allergy testing, cardiovascular,
chiropractor, consults, emergency room visits and observation care,
hearing/speech exams, immunizations, inpatient visits, maternity/
cesarean deliveries, maternity/non-deliveries, maternity/normal
deliveries, miscellaneous medical, office/home/urgent care visits,
outpatient psychiatry/alcohol and drug abuse, pathology, physical
exams, physical medicine, radiology, surgery, therapeutic injections,
vision exams, and well-baby exams. For each of the 23 CPT/HCPCS code
groups, representative CPT/HCPCS code group; see paragraph (a)(3) of
this section for Data Sources. The 80th percentile charge for each
selected CPT/HCPCS code is obtained from the FAIR Health database. A
nationwide conversion factor (a monetary amount) is calculated for each
CPT/HCPCS code group as set forth in paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this
section. The nationwide conversion factors for each of the 23 CPT/HCPCS
code groups are trended forward to the effective time period for the
charges, as set forth in paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this section. The
resulting amounts for each of the 23 groups are multiplied by
geographic area adjustment factors determined pursuant to paragraph
(f)(3)(iii) of this section, resulting in geographically-adjusted 80th
percentile conversion factors for each geographic area for the 23 CPT/
HCPCS code groups for the effective charge period.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) Nationwide 80th percentile charges by HCPCS code. For each
HCPCS dental code, 80th percentile charges are extracted from various
independent data sources, including the National Dental Advisory
Service nationwide pricing index and the Dental FAIR Health module (see
paragraph (a)(3) of this section for Data Sources). Charges for each
database are then trended forward to a common date, based on actual
changes to the dental services component of the CPI-U. Charges for each
HCPCS dental code from each data source are combined into
[[Page 57676]]
an average 80th percentile charge by means of the methodology set forth
in paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this section. HCPCS dental codes designated
as unlisted are assigned 80th percentile charges by means of the
methodology set forth in paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section. Finally,
the resulting amounts are each trended forward to the effective time
period for the charges, as set forth in paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this
section. The results constitute the nationwide 80th percentile charge
for each HCPCS dental code.
(i) Averaging methodology. The average charge for any particular
HCPCS dental code is calculated by first computing a preliminary mean
of the available charges for each code. Statistical outliers are
identified and removed. In cases where none of the charges are removed,
the average charge is calculated as a mean of all reported charges.
(ii) Nationwide 80th percentile charges for HCPCS dental codes
designated as unlisted procedures. For HCPCS dental codes designated as
unlisted procedures, 80th percentile charges are developed based on the
weighted median 80th percentile charge of HCPCS dental codes within the
series in which the unlisted procedure code occurs. A nationwide VA
distribution of procedures and services is used for the purpose of
computing the weighted median.
* * * * *
(3) Geographic area adjustment factors. A geographic adjustment
factor (consisting of the ratio of the level of charges in a given
geographic area to the nationwide level of charges) for each geographic
area and dental class of service is obtained from Milliman Inc., Dental
Health Cost Guidelines, a database of nationwide commercial insurance
charges and relative costs; and a normalized geographic adjustment
factor computed from the Dental FAIR Health module, as follows: Using
local and nationwide average charges reported in the FAIR Health
database, a local weighted average charge for each dental class of
procedure codes is calculated using utilization frequencies from the
Milliman Inc., Dental Health Cost Guidelines as weights (see paragraph
(a)(3) of this section for Data Sources). Similarly, using nationwide
average charge levels, a nationwide average charge by dental class of
procedure codes is calculated. The normalized geographic adjustment
factor for each dental class of procedure codes and for each geographic
area is the ratio of the local average charge divided by the
corresponding nationwide average charge. Finally, the geographic area
adjustment factor is the arithmetic average of the corresponding
factors from the data sources mentioned in the first sentence of this
paragraph (h)(3).
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) RVUs for CPT/HCPCS codes that do not have Medicare-based RVUs
and are not designated as unlisted procedures. For CPT/HCPCS codes that
are not assigned RVUs in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) or (iii) of this section,
total RVUs are developed based on various charge data sources. For
these CPT/HCPCS codes, the nationwide 80th percentile billed charges
are obtained, where statistically credible, from the FAIR Health
database. For any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes, the nationwide 80th
percentile billed charges are obtained, where statistically credible,
from the Part B component of the Medicare Standard Analytical File 5
Percent Sample. For any remaining CPT/HCPCS codes that have not been
assigned RVUs using the preceding data sources, the nationwide total
RVUs are calculated by summing the work expense and non-facility
practice expense RVUs found in Optum Essential RBRVS. The resulting
nationwide total RVUs obtained using these data sources are multiplied
by the geographic area adjustment factors determined pursuant to
paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of this section to obtain the area-specific total
RVUs.
* * * * *
(3) Geographically-adjusted 80th percentile conversion factors.
Representative CPT/HCPCS codes are statistically selected and weighted
so as to give a weighted average RVU comparable to the weighted average
RVU of the entire pathology/laboratory CPT/HCPCS code group. The 80th
percentile charge for each selected CPT/HCPCS code is obtained from the
FAIR Health database. A nationwide conversion factor (a monetary
amount) is calculated as set forth in paragraph (i)(3)(i) of this
section. The nationwide conversion factor is trended forward to the
effective time period for the charges, as set forth in paragraph
(i)(3)(ii) of this section. The resulting amount is multiplied by a
geographic area adjustment factor determined pursuant to paragraph
(i)(3)(iv) of this section, resulting in the geographically-adjusted
80th percentile conversion factor for the effective charge period.
* * * * *
(l) * * *
(3) Nationwide 80th percentile charges for HCPCS codes without
RVUs. For each applicable HCPCS code, 80th percentile charges are
extracted from two independent data sources: the FAIR Health database
and the combined Part B and DME components of the Medicare Standard
Analytical File 5 Percent Sample. Charges from each database are then
trended forward to the effective time period for the charges, as set
forth in paragraph (l)(3)(i) of this section. Charges for each HCPCS
code from each data source are combined into an average 80th percentile
charge by means of the methodology set forth in paragraph (l)(3)(ii) of
this section. The results constitute the nationwide 80th percentile
charge for each applicable HCPCS code.
* * * * *
(ii) Averaging methodology. The average 80th percentile trended
charge for any particular HCPCS code is calculated by first computing a
preliminary mean of the available charges for each HCPCS code.
Statistical outliers are identified and removed. In cases where none of
the charges are removed, the average charge is calculated as a mean of
all reported charges.
* * * * *
0
3.
Sec. 17.101 [Amended]
In the table below, for each section indicated in the left column,
remove the words indicated in the middle column from wherever it
appears in the section, and add the words indicated in the right
column.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Remove Add
------------------------------------------------------------------------
17.101........................ Chief Business Office of Community
Office. Care.
17.101........................ https://www.va.gov/ https://www.va.gov/
cbo, under COMMUNITYCARE,
``Charge Data.''. under ``Payer
Rates and
Charges.''
17.101........................ Ingenix/St. Optum Essential.
Anthony's.
17.101........................ MDR................ FAIR Health.
17.101........................ MedStat............ MarketScan.
17.101........................ Milliman USA, Inc.. Milliman, Inc.
[[Page 57677]]
17.101........................ percent Sample..... Percent Sample.
17.101........................ 2.0................ 6.5.
17.101........................ 6.5................ 2.0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4. Amend Sec. 17.106 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c)(4).
0
b. Adding new paragraph (f)(2)(viii).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 17.106 VA collection rules; third-party payers.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) A third-party payer may not, without the consent of a U.S.
Government official authorized to take action under 38 U.S.C. 1729 and
this part, offset or reduce any payment due under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or
this part on the grounds that the payer considers itself due a refund
from a VA facility. A written request for a refund must be submitted
within 18 months from the original payment date and adjudicated
separately from any other claims submitted to the third-party payer
under 38 U.S.C. 1729 or this part. If third-party payers do not submit
requests for a refund within this 18-month time frame, VA will not
provide a refund to third-party payers for a paid claim for any reason.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(viii) A provision in a third-party payer's plan that directs
payment for care or services be refused or lessened because the billing
is not presented in accordance with a specified methodology (such as a
line item methodology) is not by itself a permissible ground for
refusing or reducing third-party payment.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-22972 Filed 10-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P