[Federal Register: September 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 178)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 47458-47470]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16se09-8]
[[Page 47458]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
42 CFR Part 405
[CMS-6025-F]
RIN 0938-AN42
Medicare Program; Limitation on Recoupment of Provider and
Supplier Overpayments
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule implements a provision of the Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA)
which prohibits recouping Medicare overpayments from a provider or
supplier that seeks a reconsideration from a Qualified Independent
Contractor (QIC). This provision changes how interest is to be paid to
a provider or supplier whose overpayment is reversed at subsequent
administrative or judicial levels of appeal. This final rule defines
the overpayments to which the limitation applies, how the limitation
works in concert with the appeals process, and the change in our
obligation to pay interest to a provider or supplier whose appeal is
successful at levels above the QIC.
DATES: Effective Date: These regulations are effective on November 16,
2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Debbie Miller (410) 786-1492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Prior to passage of the MMA, CMS could recoup overpayments
regardless of whether a provider or supplier had appealed. Section
935(f)(2) of the MMA, codified at section 1892(f) of the Social
Security Act, prohibits the recoupment of Medicare overpayments during
a provider or supplier appeal to a Qualified Independent Contractor
(QIC). CMS will also stop recoupment during the first level of appeal,
the redetermination, if the provider or supplier files a timely request
for appeal, as explained in detail within the text of this regulation.
However, the contractor may initiate or resume recoupment, whether or
not the provider or supplier subsequently appeals the QIC determination
to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), the Medicare Appeals Council, or
Federal court.
This final rule defines the overpayments to which the limitation on
recoupment applies, how the limitation works in concert with the
appeals process, and sets time limits for recouping overpayments,
specifically providing 41 days for a provider or supplier to file the
first level of appeal before the contractor can begin recoupment and
providing the provider or supplier 60 days to appeal at the second
level before the contractor can begin recoupment.
This final rule also changes how interest is to be paid to a
provider or supplier whose overpayment is subsequently reversed at the
ALJ, Medicare Appeals Council, or Federal court levels of appeal.
Before the MMA was passed, CMS was liable for interest charges if it
did not pay within 30 days of an underpayment determination. This final
rule requires that if an overpayment determination is overturned in
administrative or judicial appeals, above the QIC level of appeal, CMS
is liable for interest on recouped overpayments that has accrued since
the original determination. This final rule implements this new
requirement, while leaving all other interest calculation regulations
intact. Therefore, if a provider or supplier takes advantage of the
limitation on recoupment, and ultimately loses on appeal, it will still
be liable for all accrued interest.
A. Legislation
Section 935 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and
Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108-173) amended Title XVIII
of the Social Security Act (the Act) to add a new paragraph (f) to
section 1893 of the Act, the Medicare Integrity Program. This new sub-
section contains eight substantive provisions addressing the recovery
of overpayments. This final rule implements the second of these
provisions--the limitation on recoupment.
The statute requires us to change the way we recoup certain
overpayments. It also changes how interest is to be paid to a provider
or supplier whose overpayment determination is reversed at
administrative or judicial levels of appeal above the QIC. We note that
the changes to recoupment and interest work in tandem with Medicare
fee-for-service claims appeal process. We refer readers to the
September 22, 2006 proposed rule (71 FR 55406) or to the applicable
regulations at 42 CFR 405.900 for a further discussion of the claims
appeal process. The September 22, 2006 proposed rule includes a brief
discussion of the appeals process and a detailed chart which sets forth
the levels of appeals as well as applicable time frames and amount in
controversy requirements.
B. Appeals and Limitation on Recoupment
Recoupment is the recovery of a Medicare overpayment by reducing
present or future Medicare payments and applying the amount withheld
against the debt. Under our existing regulations, providers and
suppliers can challenge an overpayment determination through both the
rebuttal and appeals processes. The rebuttal process provides the
debtor the opportunity to submit a statement and/or evidence stating
why recoupment should not be initiated. The outcome of the rebuttal
process could change how or if we recoup. Section 1893 of the Act as
amended by Section 935 of the MMA and the provisions of this final rule
do not alter the rebuttal process. The regulatory definition of
``recoupment'' is set forth at Sec. 405.370. See Sec. 405.374 for
information on the rebuttal process.
An appeal is an examination of the validity of the overpayment
determination. Before section 1893(f)(2) of the Act was enacted, if a
provider or supplier elected to appeal, there was no effect on our
ability to recover the debt. However, if the overpayment determination
was reversed in whole or in part, at any stage of the administrative or
judicial appeal process, appropriate adjustments would be made to the
overpayment and the amount of interest assessed.
When section 1893(f)(2) of the Act was enacted, our recoupment
process was changed. Section 1893 (f)(2) of the Act states:
In the case of a provider of services or supplier that is
determined to have received an overpayment under this title and that
seeks a reconsideration by a qualified independent contractor on
such determination under section 1869(b)(1), the Secretary may not
take any action (or authorize any other person, including any
Medicare contractor, as defined in subparagraph (C)) to recoup the
overpayment until the date the decision on the reconsideration has
been rendered.
C. Assessment of Interest
In addition to changing the recoupment process, section 1893(f)(2)
of the Act also has the effect of changing how we pay interest to a
provider or supplier who is successful in having an overpayment
determination fully or partially reversed at the latter stages of the
appeal process.
Previously, we paid interest on underpayments solely in accordance
with sections 1815(d) and 1833(j) of the Act. (See also, Sec.
405.378.) An
[[Page 47459]]
underpayment would usually result when we had recovered, through
recoupment or otherwise, an overpayment; the decision was fully or
partially reversed at some point in the appeal process; and after
appropriate adjustments, we owed the balance to the provider or
supplier. Interest would accrue from the date of the ``final
determination'' and was owed if the underpayment was not paid within 30
days. Following an appeal decision favorable to a provider or supplier,
the Medicare contractor would effectuate the decision. If the decision
created an underpayment, the contractor would issue a written
determination of the amount Medicare owed as an underpayment. The
written determination was considered a new final determination;
interest would accrue from the date of the final determination and
would be owed/payable if the underpayment was not paid by the Medicare
contractor within 30 days of the final determination of the
underpayment.
The new interest provision found in section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the
Act revises the way interest is to be paid to a provider or supplier
whose overpayment determination is overturned in administrative or
judicial appeals subsequent to the second level of appeal (the QIC
reconsideration). Section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act states:
Insofar as the determination on such appeal is against the
provider of services or supplier, interest on the overpayment shall
accrue on and after the date of the original notice of overpayment.
Insofar as such determination against the provider of services or
supplier is later reversed, the Secretary shall provide for
repayment of the amount recouped plus interest at the same rate as
would apply under the previous sentence for the period in which the
amount was recouped.
Section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act does not specifically amend
sections 1815(d) and 1833(j) of the Act. In addition, the MMA
conference report does not reference these sections. The statute and
the conference report are both silent on the relationship between
paying or collecting interest: (1) Based on the final determination
concept embodied in sections 1815(d) and 1833(j) of the Act; and (2)
the concept of paying interest based on how long we held funds,
ultimately determined through the latter stage of the appeal process to
belong to the provider, as incorporated in section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the
Act.
The statute does not change the obligation of the provider or
supplier to pay interest if the overpayment determination is affirmed
at any level of administrative or judicial appeal. In accordance with
sections 1815(d) and 1833(j) of the Act, interest continues to accrue
from the date of the final determination as defined in Sec.
405.378(c). Section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act explains that if an appeal
of an overpayment is upheld before the QIC, ``interest on the
overpayment shall accrue on and after the date of the original notice
of overpayment.'' For overpayments subject to the limitation on
recoupment provision, the date of the final determination is the date
of the original notice of overpayment (that is, the demand letter).
Therefore, section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act is consistent with sections
1815(d) and 1833(j) of the Act and does not alter our ability to assess
interest against the provider or supplier.
In addition, the statute does not change the obligation of Medicare
to pay the provider or supplier interest if the overpayment
determination is reversed at the first (redetermination) or second
(reconsideration) level of the administrative appeal process and the
appeal decision generates an underpayment. At these levels of appeal,
interest would continue to be payable by Medicare if an underpayment is
not paid to the provider or supplier within 30 days of the date of the
final determination. The change in the method of paying interest
resulting from section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act is applicable only
where the reversal occurs at the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) level
or subsequent levels of administrative appeal or judicial review. At
these higher levels of administrative appeal or judicial review,
interest becomes payable by Medicare based on the period we recouped
and retained the provider's or supplier's funds where the decision
results in a full or partial reversal and Medicare previously recouped
funds.
We determine the rate of interest in accordance with Sec. 405.378
by comparing the private consumer rate with the current value of funds
rate. Interest is assessed at the higher of these two rates that is in
effect on the date of the final determination of the amount of the
overpayment or underpayment. Since February 2001 to the present time,
it has ranged from a low of 10.75 percent to a high of 14.125 percent.
In accordance with Sec. 411.24(m)(2), interest is calculated on
Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) debts in the same manner as for Medicare
overpayments and underpayments. In addition, the same interest rate is
used.
Interest accrues daily but is assessed and calculated in full 30
day periods. We charge simple rather than compound interest, and
payments we receive are applied first to accrued interest and then to
principal. Interest we collect on overpayments and MSP recoveries goes
to the general fund of the U.S. Treasury. The principal amount we
recover is used to reimburse the applicable Medicare Trust Fund the
Hospital Insurance (Part A) or the Supplementary Medical Insurance
(Part B and now D) trust funds, which are special accounts in the U.S.
Treasury. Interest we pay on Medicare underpayments comes from the
applicable Medicare Trust Fund.
D. Suspension
We note that this new MMA provision does not affect how we recover
overpayments from providers or suppliers that have been placed on
payment suspension. Under Sec. 405.371, an intermediary, a carrier, or
CMS may suspend the payment of claims if there is reliable information
that an overpayment, fraud, or willful misrepresentation exists or that
payments to be made may not be correct. Once an overpayment amount is
determined, suspended payments must first be applied to eliminate any
overpayment as specified in Sec. 405.372(e). We do not interpret
section 1893(f)(2) of the Act as amending our authority to apply
suspended payments toward reducing or eliminating an overpayment.
Furthermore, we do not interpret section 1893(f) of the Act to require
that suspended payments be released to a provider or supplier once an
overpayment amount is determined. If the suspended payments are
insufficient to fully eliminate any overpayment, and the provider or
supplier meets the requirements of this final rule, the limitation on
recoupment provision under section 1893(f)(2) of the Act will be
applicable to any remaining balance still owed to CMS.
We also note that section 1893(f)(2) of the Act does not alter the
process for providers or suppliers to appeal overpayment determinations
that follow suspension actions. Providers and suppliers may continue to
appeal the overpayment determination as they could before the enactment
of the MMA.
II. Provisions of the Proposed Regulations and Response to Comments
In the September 22, 2006 Federal Register (71 FR 55404), we
published the proposed rule entitled, ``Limitation on Recoupment of
Provider and Supplier Overpayments'' and provided for a 60-day comment
period. The rule proposed to implement a provision of the MMA that
prohibited recouping Medicare overpayments when a reconsideration
appeal is received from
[[Page 47460]]
a provider or supplier until a decision is rendered by a QIC. The
provision changes how interest is to be paid to a provider or supplier
whose overpayment is reversed at subsequent administrative or judicial
levels of appeal. The proposed rule defined the overpayments to which
the limitation applies, how the limitation works in concert with the
appeals process, and the change in our obligation to pay interest to a
provider or supplier whose appeal is successful at levels above the
QIC.
We received a total of 11 timely comments from physicians, hospital
associations, home health facilities, medical equipment providers, and
other individuals and health care associations.
Brief summaries of each proposed provision, a summary of the public
comments we received, and our responses to the comments are set forth
below.
A. General Comments
Most of the comments received ranged from general comments that
supported or opposed the proposed provisions, to very specific
questions or comments regarding the proposed changes.
Comment: We received two comments that supported CMS's decision to
halt recoupment during the period that the provider seeks a first level
of appeal (redetermination) as stated in proposed Sec. 405.379(d)(1).
Response: We appreciate the commenters recognizing that CMS has
attempted to fairly implement the requirements of section 1893(f)(2) of
the Act while still fulfilling its fiduciary responsibility to collect
overpayments aggressively.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern that CMS's limitation on
recoupment provisions afford greater protections to overpaid providers
than to providers who are merely suspected to have overpayments and for
whom payments are suspended while an overpayment is being determined.
Response: Section 1893(f)(2) of the Act prevents the Secretary from
taking any ``action * * * to recoup the overpayment''. The disposition
of suspended funds as explained in Sec. 405.372(e) is not a
``recoupment'' as that term is defined in Sec. 405.370. The statute
does not broaden or alter CMS's definition of recoupment to also apply
to the application of suspended funds. Because CMS is only limited by
section 1893 (f)(2) of the Act from recouping Medicare payments, we are
not restricted in our ability to apply suspended funds to reduce or
dispose of an overpayment.
B. Authority Citation for Subpart C of Part 405
Subpart C of part 405 implements several sections of the Act
including sections authorizing the recovery of overpayments and
assessment of interest. In the September 22, 2006 proposed rule, we
proposed to revise the authority citation to explicitly add Section
1893 of the Act, amended by section 935 of the MMA, to add the
limitation on recoupment as well as other provisions addressing the
recovery of overpayments. We received no comments on this provision.
Thus, in this final rule, we are adopting the authority citation
provisions of the proposed rule without change.
C. Proposed Change to Sec. 405.370 Definitions
Section Sec. 405.370 defines key terms that apply to subpart C of
part 405. In the September 22, 2006 proposed rule, we proposed to
revise Sec. 405.378 and add a new Sec. 405.379. We added new
definitions to Sec. 405.370. We also proposed that selected terms used
in Sec. 405.378 and proposed Sec. 405.379 be given the same meaning
as in the appeals context.
Comment: Several commenters suggested that the definition of
Medicare contractor be amended to include Recovery Audit Contractors
(RACs).
Response: We agree with the commenter and have revised the
definition of Medicare Contractor to include this change. We note that
our intent was not to exclude RACs from being subject to the rule.
Accordingly, we are revising the definition of Medicare Contractor,
and finalizing all other definitions in Sec. 405.370 as proposed
without change.
D. Sec. 405.373 Proceeding for Offset or Recoupment
Section 405.373 establishes the general rules and procedures to be
followed once CMS or a Medicare contractor determines that an offset or
recoupment should be put into effect. Specifically, Sec. 405.373(e)
addresses the duration of a recoupment or offset that has been put into
effect and identifies the three specific circumstances under which a
recoupment or offset would stop. In the September 22, 2006 proposed
rule, we proposed to revise the introductory text of paragraph (e) to
explicitly refer to Sec. 405.379, implementing the statutory
limitation on recoupment, as a separate basis to stop recoupments that
have been put into effect.
We received no comments on these provisions. Accordingly, we are
finalizing Sec. 405.373 as proposed without modification.
E. Sec. 405.378 Interest charges on overpayment and underpayments to
providers, suppliers and other entities
Section 405.378 implements sections 1815(d) and 1833(j) of the Act
which requires us to charge interest on overpayments and pay interest
on underpayments if payment is not made within 30 days of the date of
the ``final determination''. Under sections 1815(d) and 1833(j) of the
Act, the date of the final determination dictates when interest begins
to accrue and determines whether we pay interest on an underpayment or
collect interest on an overpayment.
In paragraph (c), we define what constitutes a final determination
both for overpayments and underpayments arising from a cost report
determination as well as those that are claims based.
In paragraph (d), we establish the basis for the interest rate used
for Medicare overpayments and underpayments as well as for other
Medicare program activities, for example Medicare Secondary Payer
recoveries (Sec. 411.24(m) which references Sec. 405.378(d)).
In the September 22, 2006 proposed rule, we proposed to revise
Sec. 405.378 to specify how interest is assessed for the subset of
overpayments subject to the limitation on recoupment under section
1893(f)(2) of the Act. In Sec. 405.378, we proposed to clarify that if
a provider or supplier overpayment determination is affirmed at any
level of administrative or judicial appeal, interest owed by the
provider or supplier would continue to accrue from the final
determination. If the overpayment determination is reversed in favor of
the provider or supplier, interest may be payable by Medicare to the
provider or supplier under one of two different methodologies depending
upon the appeal level at which the reversal occurs. If a full or
partial reversal in favor of the provider or supplier occurs at the
first (redetermination) or second (reconsideration) level of the
administrative appeal process, interest may be payable by Medicare to
the provider or supplier if the underpayment is not paid within 30 days
of the final determination as that term is defined in the proposed
revisions to Sec. 405.378(c).
It is only where the reversal occurs at the ALJ level or
Departmental Appeals Board's Appeals Council level of
[[Page 47461]]
administrative appeal or judicial review that interest becomes payable
by Medicare based on the period that we recouped and retained the
provider's or supplier's funds.
In the September 22, 2006 proposed rule, we proposed to amend Sec.
405.378(a) by adding the reference to 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act, which
is one of the enumerated provisions of the Act that this regulatory
section is designed to implement.
We also proposed to revise paragraph (b)(2), which states the basic
rule that interest accrues from the date of final determination, to
clarify there is a new exception to this rule by referencing paragraph
(j) of this section.
In addition, we proposed to amend paragraph (c)(1)(ii) which lists
what constitutes a final determination in cases where a Notice of
Amount of Program Reimbursement (NPR) is not issued.
First, we proposed to remove the existing final determination
definition based on certain Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) decisions
under paragraph(c)(1)(ii)(C). The change in how interest is assessed
under section 1893(f)(2) of the Act applies at the third level of
appeal (ALJ) and subsequent administrative and judicial review levels.
Therefore, we proposed to make these changes at paragraph (j).
Second, we proposed to add an additional definition for a final
determination, at paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(C), arising from a full or
partial reversal at the redetermination level of appeal. This change
was designed to clarify that if an overpayment is reversed in whole or
in part at the first level of appeal, the redetermination level,
interest accrues from the date of the ``final determination'' and is
owed by Medicare if the underpayment is not paid within 30 days.
Following a redetermination decision favorable to a provider or
supplier, the contractor must effectuate the decision and make a
written determination of the amount Medicare owes. Interest accrues
from the date of the written determination.
Finally, we proposed to add paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(D) as an
additional type of final determination. This is a written determination
arising from a full or partial reversal of an overpayment determination
at the QIC reconsideration level (the second level of appeal). This
addition was designed to clarify that if an overpayment determination
is reversed in whole or in part at the QIC reconsideration, the final
determination for purposes of assessing interest is the date of the
written determination to the provider or supplier of the amount
Medicare owes. Interest accrues from the date of this written
determination and is owed to the provider or supplier if the
underpayment is not paid within 30 days.
These proposed changes to the final determination definitions are
intended to work in conjunction with the limitation on recoupment
requirements in Sec. 405.379. Providers and suppliers can take
advantage of the limitation on recoupment by not paying during the
redetermination and reconsideration levels of appeal. However, interest
will still continue to accrue during those periods. If a provider or
supplier loses at either level of appeal, and they did not pay their
overpayment during the appeal, they will owe both the overpayment
amount and accrued interest.
We proposed to revise paragraph (c)(2) by adding the cross
references to paragraphs (i) and (j) of this section which states the
exceptions to assessing interest based on the date of final
determination.
For purposes of clarity and to group the exceptions to the ``final
determination'' rule in a logical sequence, we proposed to redesignate
paragraph (h), respectively as paragraph (i) and paragraph (i) as
paragraph (h). We note that the text of these redesignated paragraphs
did not change.
In addition, we proposed to add a new paragraph (j) to establish
the basis for paying interest to a provider or supplier whose
overpayment determination is reversed in whole or in part at the third
level of administrative appeal (ALJ) or above. This new interest
provision is required by section 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act which states,
``[i]nsofar as such determination against the provider of services or
supplier is later reversed, the Secretary shall provide for repayment
of the amount recouped plus interest at the same rate as would apply
under the previous sentence for the period in which the amount was
recouped.'' In paragraph (j), we explain how interest is assessed
against the government at any administrative and judicial appeal level
above the QIC reconsideration. This new method applies only to
overpayments subject to the limitation on recoupment under Sec.
405.379. It is predicated upon the recoupment and retention of funds by
CMS or the Medicare contractor at the time the decision reversing the
overpayment determination, in whole or in part, is rendered.
In paragraph (j)(1), we state that the rate of interest is the same
rate that CMS charges on overpayments and pays on underpayments to
providers, suppliers and other health care entities. This rate, as
specified in paragraph (d) of this section, is the higher of the
private consumer rate or the current value of funds rate. We note that
the interest rate established in paragraph (d) changes periodically.
In paragraph (j)(2), we describe the point in time where the
applicable interest rate is fixed. This is the date the decision
reversing the overpayment is issued by the ALJ, Medicare Appeals
Council, Federal District Court or other Federal reviewing court.
In paragraph (j)(3), we explain how interest would be calculated.
Interest will be paid on the total principal amount recouped. We will
pay simple rather than compound interest, and will not pay interest on
interest; this mirrors the manner in which we assess interest against
providers. Monies we recoup and apply to interest will be refunded and
not included in the ``amount recouped'' for purposes of calculating any
interest due the provider. The periods of recoupment will be calculated
in full 30-day periods; and interest will not be payable for any
periods of less than 30 days in which we had possession of the recouped
funds.
In calculating the period in which the amount was recouped, we will
deduct days in which either or both the ALJ's or the Medicare Appeals
Council's adjudication time frames are tolled due to specific actions
by the appellant over which the government has no control. Our rules on
the procedures and time frames to request an ALJ hearing provide that
if the appellant fails to copy the other parties or files the request
with an entity other than that specified in the QIC's reconsideration,
the ALJ's 90 day adjudication deadline is tolled.
Similarly, our rules on the procedures and time frames to request a
Medicare Appeals Council review provide that if the appellant fails to
copy the other parties or files the request with an entity other than
that specified in the notice of the ALJ's action, the Medicare Appeals
Council's adjudication period to conduct a review is tolled. Therefore,
in paragraph (j)(3)(iv) and (v), we state that in calculating how much
interest we owe a provider or supplier, we account for these potential
delays by deducting days attributable to actions by the provider or
supplier which have the effect of extending the time in which we had
possession of the recouped funds.
We state in paragraph (j)(4) that, in the cases of a partial
reversal of an overpayment determination, we would allocate the funds
recouped first to that portion of the overpayment
[[Page 47462]]
determination affirmed by the ALJ, Medicare Appeals Council, or any
Federal court. If after this allocation excess recouped funds remain,
interest would be paid to the provider or supplier on this amount in
accordance with the other provisions specified in paragraph (j).
All comments and CMS's responses related to the proposed revisions
of Sec. 405.378 are discussed below:
Comment: Two commenters suggested that Sec. 405.378(j) be revised
to state that Medicare must pay interest from the date of recoupment
regardless of whether the reversal occurs at the redetermination,
reconsideration, or ALJ level.
Response: Section 1893 (f)(2)(B) of the Act clearly states that CMS
must pay interest to a provider or supplier only when a reconsideration
is ``later reversed.'' Therefore, we are not authorized by statute to
pay interest from the date of recoupment if a decision at the
redetermination or reconsideration level of appeal reverses a prior
determination or decision. The statute only requires the payment of
interest back to the date of recoupment when a finding by an ALJ, or
other higher administrative or judicial entity, reverses a QIC
reconsideration decision. CMS only pays interest when specifically
obligated by statute. We believe the commenter's suggestion is contrary
to the plain meaning of the statute.
Comment: One commenter suggested that because interest charges
continue to accrue against a provider or supplier even if they avail
themselves of the limitation on recoupment, CMS will make itself whole
by satisfying the overpayment through interest collections.
Response: CMS must forward to the (Department of Treasury) General
Fund any interest collected. CMS neither retains, nor is made whole by
interest collected on behalf of the Treasury.
Comment: One commenter stated that the proposed new definitions of
when CMS pays interest on underpayments that result from a reversal, in
whole or in part, at the redetermination level and at the
reconsideration level (Sec. 405.378(c)(1)(ii)(C) and (c)(1)(ii)(D)),
are not fair to providers or suppliers, and result in providers or
suppliers giving interest-free loans to Medicare for the period of time
between the decision and when Medicare effectuates the decision.
Response: Medicare's longstanding policy is that a final
determination occurs when the determination sets forth a specific
amount that is due. Further, as explained in Sec. 405.378(e)(4),
interest to a provider or supplier does not begin to accrue until the
date of the written determination notifying the provider or supplier of
the amount of the underpayment. Although it is possible that a decision
at the QIC level could include the precise amount that is owed as an
underpayment, more often, the decision requires that the Medicare
contractor compute the amount due to the provider. For example, if the
QIC decision is a partial reversal of an overpayment where
extrapolation was used to determine the overpayment, it typically must
be recalculated to account for the revisions made to the sample claims
upon which the extrapolated overpayment is based. Only after the
recalculation of the overpayment is completed will the contractor
become aware of any potential underpayment. A written determination on
appeal that Medicare owes an underpayment but without specific
information as to what the amount is owed, does not permit sufficient
information to determine the payment amount and subsequent interest.
Interest is paid when a specific amount is known and is not paid within
30 days. Similarly, providers have 30 days to repay an overpayment
where the amount has been determined before interest is assessed.
In considering the comment, we decided to remove Sec.
405.378(c)(1)(ii)(C) and (c)(1)(ii)(D). These two provisions included
in our proposed rule explained when a final determination of an
underpayment occurred during the first two levels of administrative
appeal. However, we believe the language in Sec. 405.378(c)(1)(ii)(B),
which states that a written determination of an underpayment
constitutes a final determination, adequately covers these two levels
of appeal. Thus, we believe paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(C) and (c)(1)(ii)(D)
are unnecessary. After all levels of appeal, an underpayment will be
determined when a sum certain is calculated and the provider or
supplier is notified of the underpayment, regardless of whether a QIC
or a contractor performs the recalculation.
Comment: One commenter stated that interest should be prorated for
periods less than 30 days.
Response: CMS will continue to pay interest on underpayments it
owes the provider or supplier, the same way it assesses interest on
overpayments owed by the provider or supplier. Periods of less than 30
days are not counted. Only full 30 day periods are used to calculate
interest. This is based on Sec. 405.378(b)(2) where interest accrues
and is paid for each full 30 day period that payment is delayed.
Comment: Two commenters asked CMS to reconsider the proposal to
deduct from the interest owed to the provider those days that are
tolled during an ALJ or Appeals Council adjudication period.
Response: The appeals regulations in Sec. 405.1014 and Sec.
405.1106 provide extensions (or tolling) of the adjudication timeframe
for issuance of ALJ decisions and Medicare Appeals Council review
decisions when certain specific actions are taken by an appellant that
are outside the government's control, (for example, the appellant fails
to copy the other parties on their request for an ALJ hearing). We
believe that our proposal to deduct the days that are associated with
an appellant's actions aligns itself with the language in the appeals
regulations. CMS should not be required to pay interest on days that
the appellant is in control of, or is perfecting an appeal request, or
takes action that delays the administrative proceedings.
Accordingly, we are finalizing Sec. 405.378 as proposed with
modifications, as noted above.
F. Sec. 405.379 Limitation on Recoupment of Provider and Supplier
Overpayments.
In the September 22, 2006 proposed rule, we proposed to add a new
section Sec. 405.379 to subpart C of Part 405 to implement the
statutory limitation on recoupment under section 1893(f)(2) of the Act.
Specifically, in proposed paragraph (a) we explained that
1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act is the statutory basis for this section. In
addition, we stated that the basis and purpose of this section is to
impose a limit on our recoupment of Medicare overpayments, if a
provider or supplier appeals until a decision by a QIC is made.
In paragraph (b), we delineated those types of overpayments that
are expressly subject to the recoupment limitation: (1) those appealed
by the provider or supplier under the Medicare claims appeal process;
(2) post-pay denial of claims for benefits under Medicare Part A and
Part B for which a demand for payment has been made; and (3) Medicare
Secondary Payer (MSP) recoveries where the provider or supplier
received a duplicate primary payment and MSP recoveries based on the
provider's or supplier's failure to file a proper claim with the third
party payer plan, program, or insurer for payment.
Section 935(b) of the MMA specified that section 1893(f)(2) of the
Act shall apply to ``actions'' taken after the date of enactment of the
MMA; that is actions taken after December 8, 2003.
[[Page 47463]]
For these purposes, we defined these actions to be the date the
contractor could have instituted recoupment action based on Part A
debts determined on or after November 24, 2003, Part B debts determined
on or after October 29, 2003, and a small group of MSP debts determined
on or after October 10, 2003.
In paragraph (b), we also provided the categories of overpayments
to which the limitation does not apply, although this is not an
exhaustive list of exclusions. The limitation would not apply to all
MSP recoveries other than provider/supplier MSP duplicate primary
payment recoveries or MSP recoveries attributable to the provider's or
supplier's failure to file a proper claim. It would not apply to
beneficiary overpayments nor overpayments that arise from a cost report
determination and are appealed under the provider reimbursement
process.
In paragraph (c), we specified how two key actions that trigger the
limitation on recoupment are to be construed. A provider must act
decidedly to stop recoupment. Recoupment of an overpayment once
initiated will be stopped at the first two levels of the appeals
process (the redetermination and the reconsideration) upon receipt of a
timely and valid appeal request applicable to that level. The provider
or supplier does not have to take any affirmative action to invoke the
limitation on recoupment beyond the act of appealing. What constitutes
a valid and timely request for a redetermination and, subsequently what
constitutes a valid and timely request for a reconsideration is already
described in established Medicare appeal regulations and implementing
policies. (See 42 CFR part 405 subpart I).
In paragraph (d), we proposed the general framework for
implementing the limitation on recoupment. Once an overpayment is
determined and the substantive and procedural requirements to afford
the provider or supplier an opportunity for rebuttal under Sec.
405.374 and Sec. 405.375 are satisfied, recoupment can proceed unless
and until a valid request for a redetermination is received. This means
we can recoup during the period when a provider's or supplier's right
to request a redetermination has not expired. This places the
obligation on the provider or supplier who wishes to capitalize on the
benefit afforded by the recoupment limitation to request a
redetermination.
Under the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000, the
Medicare contractor is required to make a redetermination decision
within 60 calendar days of the date the contractor receives a timely
filed request for a redetermination. We proposed in paragraph (d)(2)
that if the redetermination is an affirmation in whole or in part, we
can proceed to recoup any outstanding principal and interest 30 days
after notice unless a valid request for a reconsideration is received
in the interim.
In paragraph (d)(3), we specified that the Medicare contractor
shall cease recoupment upon receipt of a timely and valid request for a
reconsideration. If recoupment has not gone into effect, the contractor
shall not initiate it. The contractor may initiate or resume recoupment
upon final action by the QIC in accordance with paragraph (f) which is
explained in detail below.
The general rule we proposed in paragraphs (d)(4) and (d)(5) states
that, unless the reconsideration results in a full reversal of the
overpayment determination, recoupment of outstanding principal and
interest may be initiated or resumed upon final action by the QIC
whether or not the provider or supplier appeals to the ALJ, the
Medicare Appeals Council, or Federal court. If the provider or supplier
subsequently appeals, the contractor may continue recouping outstanding
overpayments in accordance with Sec. 405.373(e).
In paragraph (d)(6), we clarified that each overpayment
determination and its appeal status is separate and distinct from other
debts owed by the same provider or supplier. Therefore, we make
explicit that if an overpayment determination is appealed and
recoupment stopped, this would not preclude the Medicare contractor
from recouping other overpayments owed by the provider or supplier.
In paragraph (d)(7), we stated that amounts properly recouped
before the imposition of the recoupment limitation, at either or both
the first and second levels of appeal, may be retained until and unless
there is an administrative or judicial reversal of the overpayment
determination.
In paragraph (d)(8), we stated that if an overpayment determination
is reversed through the administrative or judicial process, appropriate
adjustments in the debt and the amount of interest charged would be
made to give effect to these decisions.
In paragraph (d)(9), we made explicit that interest is payable on
overpayments, subject to the recoupment limitation, in accordance with
the provisions of Sec. 405.378.
In paragraph (e), we stated the specific rules for initiating or
resuming recoupment after the redetermination decision. The necessary
conditions are that the debt (remaining unpaid principal balance and
interest) has not been liquidated and the substantive and procedural
rebuttal requirements have been satisfied. We proposed that recoupment
can resume: (1) Immediately upon receipt of a request to withdraw the
redetermination request; (2) on the 30th calendar day after the date of
the notice of redetermination affirming the overpayment determination
in whole; or (3) on the 30th calendar day after a written notice to the
provider or supplier of the revised overpayment amount if the
redetermination results in an affirmation in part. We proposed in
paragraph (e)(2), that recoupment would be stopped again upon receipt
of a timely and valid request for a reconsideration by the QIC.
In paragraph (f), we set forth the specific rules for initiating or
resuming recoupment after final action by the QIC. It also defines what
constitutes final action by a QIC for purposes of this section. As is
the case when recoupment is resumed after the redetermination decision,
the conditions necessary for resumption are that the debt (remaining
unpaid principal balance and interest) has not been liquidated and the
substantive and procedural rebuttal requirements have been satisfied.
Under the statute, once a provider or supplier has sought a
reconsideration by the QIC, we may not take any action to recoup the
overpayment until the date the decision on the reconsideration has been
rendered. We believe it is consistent with this provision to interpret
``the date the decision on the reconsideration is rendered'' as the
date on which the QIC issues its final decision, dismissal order, or
notice with respect to escalation.
There are three possible actions that a QIC may take with respect
to a request for reconsideration. First, it may complete its review and
issue a reconsideration. Second, in appropriate circumstances, it may
dismiss the request for reconsideration. Third, if the QIC is unable to
complete its reconsideration within the mandated 60 day time frame, it
may issue a notice to the parties that it will not be able to complete
its reconsideration in the allotted time and advise them of their right
to escalate their appeal to the ALJ level. The parties may then notify
the QIC of their intent to escalate the appeal. Following the receipt
of this notice, the QIC must either issue its reconsideration within 5
days or issue a notice acknowledging the escalation
[[Page 47464]]
request and forward the case file to the ALJ hearing office.
We proposed that the earliest to occur of these three actions (a
reconsideration, a dismissal, or the written notification to the
parties that the reconsideration has been escalated) or the receipt of
a withdrawal request from the provider or supplier would constitute the
final QIC action that would permit the initiation, or resumption, of
the recoupment of an overpayment. The provider or supplier who elects
to escalate the appeal from the QIC to the ALJ would thereby lose the
benefit of the limitation on recoupment (recoupment could begin).
However, we do not view this as a disadvantage to the provider or
supplier who retains the ability to seek escalation or not to seek
escalation. We also clarified that where the final action is the notice
of the reconsideration, in order to institute or resume recoupment, the
reconsideration decision must affirm the overpayment determination in
whole or in part.
In paragraph (g), we addressed a series of specific rules and
situations on how recouped funds are to be applied. Funds recouped
before receipt of a timely and valid redetermination request may be
retained and applied first to accrued interest and then to the
principal balance. If the overpayment in question is reversed at the
first level of appeal, consistent with current policies, the amount
held may be applied to any other debt owed by the provider or supplier;
any excess would then be released to the provider or supplier.
In the case of a partial reversal at the redetermination level in
which the decision reduces the debt below the amount already recouped,
the same policies would be followed with respect to the application of
the recouped funds. In the case of an affirmation where the provider or
supplier appeals to the next level, the Medicare contractor would
retain the monies and apply them first to interest and then to the
principal balance pending final action by the QIC on the
reconsideration request.
If funds are properly recouped between a redetermination decision
and a provider's subsequent request for a reconsideration, these would
be retained and applied first to interest, then to principal pending
final action by the QIC. If the final QIC action is a dismissal,
receipt of a withdrawal, notice of escalation, or a reconsideration
decision affirming the overpayment in whole, funds recouped are applied
to interest, then to principal; recoupment may be resumed as necessary
to liquidate the debt. If the QIC reconsideration decision is a full
reversal, the amount recouped may be applied to any other debt
(including interest) owed by the provider or supplier before any excess
is released. If the reconsideration decision is a partial reversal and
reduces the debt below the amount already recouped, the same policies
would be followed with respect to the application of the recouped
funds.
In paragraph (h), we specified how we would insulate a provider or
supplier, invoking the limitation on recoupment under this section,
from the operation of Sec. 401.607(c)(2)(iv). This latter rule
provides that missing one payment under a 6-month extended repayment
plan granted under the authority of Sec. 401.607(c)(2) constitutes a
default allowing CMS to accelerate the debt.
All comments and CMS's responses related to Sec. 405.379 are
discussed below:
Comment: Two commenters stated that in the proposed rule CMS
explained that it would not recoup until after the requirement to
afford the provider or supplier an opportunity for rebuttal was
satisfied. In addition, the commenters asked if the rebuttal process
conflicts with the proposed provisions.
Response: The rebuttal process is a separate and independent right
that is not affected by this regulation, and occurs independently of
the appeals process set forth in part 405 subpart I. The statement in
the proposed regulation regarding the rebuttal process was simply an
acknowledgement that this process remains available to providers and
suppliers. Sections 405.373 through 405.375 explain the process by
which CMS gives notice of an overpayment and offers an opportunity for
rebuttal before it takes an action to offset or recoup that
overpayment. The provider may submit a rebuttal statement within 15
days of the notice. The Medicare contractor has 15 days to review the
statement and determine whether to proceed with the recoupment or not
to proceed, based on the rebuttal statement. In contrast, the
limitation on recoupment provision does not afford the contractor any
discretion in proceeding or stopping recoupment of an overpayment. If a
valid request for a first or second level appeal is filed, the
contractor must stop recoupment. As a practical matter, providers who
want to ensure that CMS stops recoupment will avail themselves of the
limitation on recoupment process through a timely and valid appeal
rather than the rebuttal process.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS provide the full
120-day filing period for a redetermination and the 180-day period for
a reconsideration before starting recoupment of the overpayment. The
commenters indicated that the proposed rule forces providers to choose
either to initiate a timely appeal to stop recoupment, or take full
advantage of the timeframe for filing an appeal. In addition, the
commenters stated that recouping before the filing periods have
concluded was not in compliance with the statute.
Response: The comment that recoupment should be delayed 120 days
after the receipt of an overpayment determination or 180 days after the
notice of a redetermination is inconsistent with the applicable
statute. In order to trigger the statutory limitation on recoupment,
the provider must seek a reconsideration. The statute is clear that
recoupment is either stopped, or may not begin, when a valid request
for a reconsideration is filed. However, the statute is silent with
regard to actions CMS may take after an initial demand is issued and
before a request for reconsideration is filed. CMS has a fiduciary
responsibility to timely and aggressively collect Medicare debt or
refer the debt to Treasury for collection as mandated by the Debt
Collection Improvement Act. Unless a provider or supplier purposely
avails themselves of the limitation on recoupment, CMS has a statutory
obligation to collect these outstanding debts. Based on the statutory
language CMS could recoup during the period the provider is actively
pursuing a first level of appeal (redetermination). This approach would
reduce the complexity of implementing this new statutory provision.
Also, it would shorten the period of deferred recoupment under the Act,
thereby minimizing risk to the Medicare Trust Fund. However, as we
noted earlier, this approach would result in many instances where CMS
would have recouped the overpayment before the provider could request a
reconsideration and thereby invoke the limitation on recoupment. We
suggested in our September 2006 proposed rule that this view, while
permissible, would unfairly impact many providers and suppliers. Using
our discretionary rulemaking authority, CMS is also limiting recoupment
when the provider requests a redetermination (that is, the first level
of appeal). Based on this comment, CMS is revising Sec. 405.379(a) to
make clear that we are implementing the statutory requirement to limit
recoupment during reconsideration, as well as limiting recoupment
during redetermination, the first level of appeal.
[[Page 47465]]
In both cases, the provider or supplier must take some decided
affirmative action, (that is, requesting a redetermination or a
reconsideration). Moreover, to wait until the expiration of the appeals
filing periods would adversely impact providers and suppliers who do
not wish to appeal, because they would be subject to several months of
interest. To avoid this, these providers and suppliers would have to
take some affirmative action to indicate that they do not want to
appeal which unfairly places a burden on these providers and suppliers
who want to pay their overpayments and do not want to appeal.
Therefore, CMS has determined that the timeframes established for
recoupment are both reasonable for allowing providers sufficient time
to initiate a timely appeal and are also consistent with our fiduciary
responsibility for collecting Medicare debt. Based on the foregoing
discussion, CMS is in compliance with the statute. We are not adopting
the commenters' suggestion.
Comment: One commenter suggested that if CMS does not halt
recoupment until the first and second level appeals periods expire, CMS
should require a provider or supplier to inform the contractor of its
intent to initiate an appeal. In addition, the commenter indicated that
providers expressing their intent to appeal would not be subject to
recoupment.
Response: We believe the language of the statute that the provider
must ``seek'' a reconsideration clearly intends for a process that
actively engages both the provider or supplier and CMS. An intent to
file has no time limits for a provider or supplier and has the effect
of staying any collections indefinitely. Further, simply signaling an
intent to file has no binding effect on a party, and does not
necessarily mean that a provider or supplier will ultimately seek any
appeal. Thus, we are not adopting the commenter's suggestion.
Comment: One commenter suggested that CMS should ensure that
language in the overpayment notices clearly advise the provider or
supplier that if it files a request for a redetermination by a
specified date that recoupment would be stayed and that these notices
should also specify the time period in which recoupment would be
stayed. Additionally, language in the notices should state that
interest continues to accrue from the date of the original overpayment
determination.
Response: We agree with the commenter that language regarding when
recoupment starts and stops and that interest continues to accrue from
the date of the initial overpayment determination should be included in
the overpayment determination letters. However, we view those
procedures as part of the specific manual instructions to be issued to
Medicare contractors. Manual instructions contain model letters and
instructions to Medicare contractors on the preparation and content of
demand letters. Thus, we do not believe it is necessary to revise the
rule to include the commenter's suggestion.
Comment: Two commenters stated that the limitation of recoupment
should apply to those Part B debts determined on or after October 29,
2003 and Part A debts determined on or after November 29, 2003. The
commenters further explained that this means that CMS could begin
recoupment on the 16th day or the 41st day after the notice of
overpayment is issued and before a redetermination is filed depending
on whether the notice came from the Medicare intermediary or the
Medicare carrier. The commenter expressed that this is disparate
treatment and asked CMS to explain the rationale for the policy.
Response: Medicare contractors' internal shared systems largely
determined when those contractors instituted recoupment. Recoupment
began approximately 16 days after the notice of overpayment, if the
notice was issued by a Medicare intermediary, and 41 days after the
notice of overpayment if the notice was issued by a Medicare carrier
unless in both cases, the contractor received information from the
provider about how it intended to repay the overpayment.
The limitation on recoupment provision required us to consider more
consistent system rules for when recoupment could begin or resume. For
consistent application of the limitation on recoupment and before a
request for a redetermination is received, we modified our Part A
systems to be consistent with our Part B systems and both will begin
recoupment at day 41 following the notice of overpayment for those
overpayments subject to the limitation on recoupment. This aligns
itself with interest regulations at Sec. 405.378, that states interest
is not due if the debt is liquidated within 30 days. If a provider or
supplier pays the overpayment or requests a redetermination by the 30th
day following the notice of overpayment, Medicare contractors have an
additional 10 days to ensure posting of payments or receipt of a valid
request for a redetermination. Medicare overpayment demand letters will
include clear language about when recoupment can begin. We are also
amending the regulation at Sec. 405.379(d)(1) to reflect the 41 day
system modification.
Comment: Two commenters stated that providers who fail to introduce
all relevant evidence before the QIC are precluded from presenting new
evidence to an ALJ, absent good cause. Thus, an appellant may need more
than 30 days to prepare a request for reconsideration that contains all
relevant evidence.
Response: The requirement in Sec. 405.966 for the early
presentation of evidence by providers and suppliers is based on the
statutory requirement contained in section 1869(b)(3) of the Act, as
added by section 933(a) of the MMA, which states that a provider or
supplier may not, in any subsequent level of appeal, introduce evidence
that was not presented at the reconsideration conducted by the QIC,
unless there is good cause that precluded the introduction of that
evidence at or before the reconsideration. While it is in the interest
of both the Medicare provider and supplier community and CMS that
appellants have the opportunity to submit a complete appeal request
with all relevant evidence, we believe it is necessary to strike a
balance between the need to timely recoup Medicare overpayments and the
need to give providers and suppliers a reasonable time to prepare an
appeal.
Therefore, after carefully considering all comments received, we
have decided to extend the period before contractors may initiate
recoupment following a redetermination to the 60th calendar day rather
than the 30th calendar day. Providers or suppliers may take the full
180 days to appeal. However, to avoid recoupment starting or resuming
following a redetermination, a valid request for reconsideration must
be filed with the appropriate QIC by the 60th day following the date of
the redetermination. This change is reflected at Sec.
405.379(e)(1)(ii) and (e)(1)(iii).
Comment: One commenter indicated that there is no provision to
notify the provider or supplier that recoupment has stopped once the
provider or supplier submits a request for reconsideration to the QIC.
The commenter recommended that the QIC issue to the provider or
supplier a written notification that recoupment efforts have ceased
once they file a request for reconsideration to the QIC.
Response: As part of the QICs' current standard operating
procedures, QICs send an acknowledgement notice within 14 days of
receipt of a request for reconsideration to the provider or
[[Page 47466]]
supplier. However, the Medicare contractor, not the QIC, is responsible
for all overpayment recoupment activities, including the cessation of
recoupments. The provider or supplier is notified by the Medicare
contractor via a payment remittance advice that claims are continuing
to be paid and are not being recouped or offset. We will consider
whether any additional notice is necessary and, if so, we will include
additional guidance in our manual instructions rather than through a
regulatory issuance.
Comment: One commenter stated that recoupment should cease upon a
request for reconsideration and should not be initiated or resumed
until after an ALJ or judicial decision was rendered.
Response: When a valid request for a reconsideration is received,
recoupment ceases. Section 1893(f)(2) of the Act only requires CMS to
stop recoupment when a valid request for reconsideration is received.
It does not limit CMS' authority to resume recoupment following the
reconsideration decision issued by the QIC. Thus, as stated in Sec.
405.379(d)(4) and (d)(5), recoupment can resume following a decision by
the QIC, whether or not the QIC decision is further appealed.
Therefore, we are not adopting the commenter's suggestion, as we
believe the suggestion is contrary to section 1893(f)(2) of the Act.
However, we are making technical changes to Sec. 405.379(d), (f), and
(g) of this section to remove the word ``final'' preceding ``action.''
We believe that use of the word ``final'' in these provisions is
confusing because ``final action'' could be incorrectly construed as
meaning a final administrative action of the Secretary which can be
appealed directly to Federal district court. The intent of this
regulatory provision is to explain the types of actions by the QIC that
are binding on the parties and would enable recoupment to be initiated
or resumed. As was stated in the proposed rule and this final rule,
these actions are a decision, dismissal order, or notice that it cannot
complete its reconsideration in a timely manner. Because the underlying
QIC actions that will allow CMS to initiate or resume recoupment have
remained unchanged, we are making only a non-substantive, technical
change to clarify the ambiguity discussed above by deleting the word
``final.''
We also note one further technical change we are making to Sec.
405.379(c). In this paragraph, we revised incorrect cross-references to
Sec. 405.940 and Sec. 405.958, and cross references to Sec. 405.974
through Sec. 405.978. Specifically, we revised the regulatory text of
(c)(1) to refer to Sec. 405.940 through Sec. 405.958 and we revised
the regulatory text of (c)(2) to refer to Sec. 405.960 through Sec.
405.978.
Comment: One commenter suggested that a provider's choice to
escalate the appeal to the ALJ because of a delay at the QIC should
toll recoupment.
Response: Notice by the QIC that it is unable to meet the mandated
response timeframe for issuing a decision immediately gives the
provider or supplier control to request an ALJ appeal. Practically,
this result is no different than a decision issued by the QIC that
affirms the prior decision and the provider or supplier requests an
appeal. In both instances the appeal has passed out of the
reconsideration level and the statutory requirement to limit recoupment
no longer applies. We note that we are not adopting the commenter's
suggestion.
Comment: One commenter stated that CMS has not addressed how
extended repayment plans work in conjunction with the limitation on
recoupment. The commenter stated that a provider might want to repay
the overpayment by seeking an extended repayment plan at some point in
the appeals process. For example, the provider might not have a
favorable decision at the first level of appeal and chooses not to
appeal to the second level. Also, the commenter recommended that CMS
revise the rule to include language that recoupment may not occur for
30 days after the redetermination and/or reconsideration to give the
provider time to request and CMS to review and approve an extended
repayment plan.
Response: In paragraph (h) of Sec. 405.379, we state that a
provider or supplier who timely files a redetermination of an
overpayment but such overpayment is under an extended repayment plan, a
missed payment under the plan does not put the provider in default of
the extended repayment plan. This permits the provider or supplier to
invoke the limitation on recoupment provisions to stop recoupment when
a valid request for redetermination is filed. We are revising paragraph
(h) of Sec. 405.379 to permit the provider or supplier to similarly
invoke the limitation on recoupment if a timely and valid request for
reconsideration is received. Additionally, in this final rule, we do
not prohibit the provider or supplier from requesting a repayment plan
at any time or at any stage of an appeal. Payments made by a provider
or supplier who requested to repay in installments under an extended
repayment plan are not recoupments for purposes of this rule. If a
provider or supplier does not make timely payments under its schedule,
the provider or supplier would be placed on recoupment but can invoke
the benefit of the limitation as stated above.
Providers or suppliers who wish to make repayment arrangements
following a redetermination can do so during the 60 days the provider
or supplier is also deciding whether to appeal to a reconsideration.
Providers or suppliers who wish to make repayment arrangements
following a reconsideration have the opportunity to do that during the
rebuttal period required under Sec. 405.374.
We note that we have revised paragraph (h) of Sec. 405.379 for
clarity. Yet these revisions do not make substantive changes to the
policy. Further we corrected an incorrect cross reference to Sec.
401.607(c)(2)(iv). Specifically we revised the regulations text to
refer to Sec. 401.607(c)(2)(v).
Comment: One commenter suggested that CMS give the provider the
option of repaying the overpayment immediately, even if the provider
appeals the overpayment determination. The commenter also stated that
paying the debt immediately allows the provider to exercise their
appeal rights without incurring substantial interest charges. The
commenter also stated that the statute does not preclude the provider
from voluntarily returning funds during the administrative appeals
process.
Response: We appreciate the observations and the suggestion
submitted by the commenter. Currently, providers or suppliers have
several options at the time of the notice of overpayment. For example,
they may pay the overpayment and not pursue an appeal, pay the
overpayment and proceed with an appeal, or not pay the overpayment and
proceed with a timely appeal. Providers or suppliers who choose to pay
immediately, as the commenter suggests, avoid paying interest. Also, as
the commenter suggested, providers or suppliers can voluntarily repay
any time during the appeal, thereby limiting their interest exposure.
Because payments made as a lump sum or through an extended repayment
plan are not recoupments subject to the limitation, no modifications
are necessary.
Accordingly, we are finalizing Sec. 405.379 with modifications as
noted above.
III. Provisions of the Final Rule
In this final rule, we are adopting the provisions as set
forth in the September 22, 2006 proposed rule with the following
revisions:
[[Page 47467]]
In Sec. 405.370(b), we revised the definition of Medicare
contractor to include a recovery audit contractor.
In Sec. 405.378(c), we removed paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(C)
and (c)(1)(ii)(D) regarding the definition of a final determination.
In Sec. 405.379(a) we made revisions to make clear that
we are implementing the statutory requirement to limit recoupment
during reconsideration, as well as limiting recoupment during
redetermination, and the first level of appeal.
In Sec. 405.379(c) we revised incorrect cross-references
to Sec. 405.940 and Sec. 405.958, and cross references to Sec.
405.974 through Sec. 405.978. Specifically, we revised the regulatory
text of (c)(1) to refer to Sec. 405.940 through Sec. 405.958 and we
revised the regulatory text of (c)(2) to refer to Sec. 405.960 through
Sec. 405.978.
In Sec. 405.379(d), we added language to paragraph (d)(1)
to provide that recoupment may begin no earlier than 41 days following
the date of the initial notice of overpayment.
In Sec. 405.379(d), we made a technical change to
paragraph (d)(4) by removing the word ``final'' to clarify that actions
of a QIC are not necessarily considered final administrative actions of
the Secretary which can be appealed directly to Federal district court.
In Sec. 405.379(e), we revised paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) and
(e)(1)(iii) to extend the timeframe for limiting recoupment before
reconsideration is filed from 30 calendar days to 60 calendar days.
In Sec. 405.379(f) and (g), we made technical changes.
Specifically, we revised the heading of paragraph (f) by removing the
word ``final''. In paragraphs (f)(1) and (2), and (g)(1) and (2), we
removed the word ``final''. We made these technical changes to clarify
that actions of a QIC are not necessarily considered final actions of
the Secretary which can be directly appealed to Federal district court.
In Sec. 405.379(h), we added language that permits the
provider or supplier who might otherwise be found to be in default on
their extended repayment schedule, but submits a valid and timely
reconsideration not be deemed in default. We also revised paragraph (h)
for clarity. These revisions do not make substantive changes to the
policy. Further we corrected an incorrect cross reference to Sec.
401.607(c)(2)(iv). Specifically we revised the regulatory text to refer
to Sec. 401.607(c)(2)(v).
IV. Collection of Information Requirements
This document does contain information collection requirements;
however, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 exempts the information
collection activities referenced in this Final Rule. In particular, 5
CFR 1320.4 excludes collection activities during the conduct of
administrative actions such as redeterminations, reconsiderations, and/
or appeals. Specifically, these actions are taken after the initial
determination or a denial of payment. See also, 44 USC 3518(c).
V. Regulatory Impact Statement
A. Overall Impact
We have examined the impacts of this final rule as required by
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30,
1993), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub.
L. 96-354), section 1102(b) of the Social Security Act, section 202 of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), Executive
Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4, 1999), and the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)).
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and equity). A regulatory impact
analysis (RIA) must be prepared for major rules with economically
significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1 year). We do not
expect this final rule to have a substantial financial impact on
beneficiaries, providers, or suppliers. Additionally, we anticipate
that Federal costs to implement this final rule will be approximately
$1 to $10 million per year in additional interest payments, which is
well under the threshold of $100 million in any 1 year.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief
of small businesses if a rule has a significant impact on a substantial
number of small businesses or other small entities. For purposes of the
RFA, small entities include small businesses, nonprofit organizations,
and government agencies. The great majority of hospitals and most other
providers and suppliers are small entities, either by being nonprofit
organizations or by meeting the Small Business Administration
definition of a small business (having revenues of less than 7 million
to 34.5 million in any 1 year). For purposes of the RFA, all providers
and suppliers affected by this regulation are considered to be small
entities. Individuals and States are not included in the definition of
a small entity.
In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act requires us to prepare a
regulatory impact analysis if a rule may have a significant impact on
the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals. This
analysis must conform to the provisions of section 604 of the RFA. For
purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a small rural
hospital as a hospital that is located outside of a metropolitan
statistical Area and has fewer than 100 beds.
We are not preparing analyses for either the RFA or section 1102(b)
of the Act. We are uncertain how many small entities would be affected
by this final rule as this would depend in part upon voluntary actions
on the part of the provider or supplier. The purpose of this rule is to
limit our ability to recoup against providers or suppliers who appeal
an overpayment determination. In order to impact a provider or
supplier, the provider or supplier must have received an erroneous
payment; an overpayment must be determined and demanded; the provider
or supplier must elect to appeal; and the provider or supplier may not
satisfy the overpayment by making either a lump sum payment or
requesting to repay the debt in installments. The only possible adverse
impact upon a provider or supplier is that by deferring repayment of
the overpayment until final action by the QIC, the provider would owe
additional interest. However, the provider or supplier can avoid the
additional interest exposure by electing to satisfy the debt by a lump
sum payment or an installment payment while still pursuing the appeal.
In addition, should the overpayment determination be reversed at a
level above the QIC, the provider or supplier potentially will receive
additional interest beyond what CMS would be obligated to pay under
current regulations. Therefore, we expect the impact of this final rule
to be positive although the extent to which it would benefit any one
provider or supplier would depend upon specific facts and circumstances
and voluntary choices made by that provider or supplier. The impact on
small rural hospitals is expected to be similarly positive but
unpredictable. Therefore, we are certifying that this final rule will
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small rural
hospitals.
[[Page 47468]]
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also
requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $100
million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. In 2009, that
threshold is $133 million. This rule will not have this effect on
State, local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector.
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an
agency must meet when it publishes a proposed rule (and subsequent
final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State
and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has federalism
implications. This final rule will not have a substantial effect on
State or local governments.
A comment and the CMS response to the impact analysis section are
discussed below:
Comment: One commenter states that CMS should have performed an
impact analysis because the commenter believes that the CMS proposal to
recoup before the 120 day time period for filing a request for
redetermination has expired may not afford protections from recoupment
and may have an impact on small business. Additionally, the commenter
believes CMS can determine negative impact by looking at overpayment
data.
Response: As previously stated CMS plans to adopt a process that
will give providers and suppliers an opportunity to stop recoupment if
they act decidedly by submitting a request for redetermination within
30 days of the initial notice of overpayment. CMS will not begin
recoupment until the 41st day allowing Medicare contractors time to act
on information it receives from the provider. Also, after reviewing
public comments concerning the timeframe to limit recoupment before
reconsideration is filed; CMS is expanding the 30 day time limit to 60
days. We believe that these timeframes afford providers or suppliers
ample protections to stop recoupment. Thus, we are not adopting the
commenter's suggestion.
B. Conclusion
For these reasons, we did not prepare analyses for either the RFA
or section 1102(b) of the Act because we have determined that this
final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities or a significant impact on the
operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals.
In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this
regulation was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 405
Administrative practice and procedure; Health facilities; Health
professions; Kidney diseases; Medical devices; Medicare; Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements; Rural areas; X-rays.
0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR chapter IV as follows:
PART 405--FEDERAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE AGED AND DISABLED
Subpart C--Suspension of Payment, Recovery of Overpayments, and
Repayment of Scholarships and Loans
0
1. The authority citation for subpart C is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 1102, 1815, 1833, 1842, 1866, 1870, 1871,
1879, 1892 and 1893 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302,
1395g, 1395l, 1395u, 1395cc, 1395gg, 1395hh, 1395pp, 1395ccc and
1395ddd) and 31 U.S.C. 3711.
0
2. Section 405.370 is amended by designating the existing text as
paragraph (a), and adding a new paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 405.370 Definitions.
* * * * *
(b) For purposes of Sec. Sec. 405.378 and 405.379, the following
terms apply:
Appellant means the beneficiary, assignee or other person or entity
that has filed and pursued an appeal concerning a particular initial
determination. Designation as an appellant does not in itself convey
standing to appeal the determination in question.
Fiscal intermediary means an organization that has entered into a
contract with CMS in accordance with section 1816 of the Act and is
authorized to make determinations and payments for Part A of title
XVIII of the Act, and Part B provider services as specified in Sec.
421.5(c) of this chapter.
Medicare Appeals Council means the council within the Departmental
Appeals Board of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Medicare contractor, unless the context otherwise requires,
includes, but is not limited to, a fiscal intermediary, carrier,
recovery audit contractor, and Medicare administrative contractor.
Party means an individual or entity listed in Sec. 405.906 that
has standing to appeal an initial determination and/or a subsequent
administrative appeal determination.
Qualified Independent Contractor (QIC) Qualified Independent
Contractor (QIC) means an entity which contracts with the Secretary in
accordance with section 1869 of the Act to perform reconsiderations
under Sec. 405.960 through Sec. 405.978.
Remand means to vacate a lower level appeal decision, or a portion
of the decision, and return the case, or a portion of the case, to that
level for a new decision.
Vacate means to set aside a previous action.
0
3. In Sec. 405.373, paragraph (e) introductory text is revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 405.373 Proceeding for offset or recoupment.
* * * * *
(e) Duration of recoupment or offset. Except as provided in Sec.
405.379, if a recoupment or offset is put into effect, it remains in
effect until the earliest of the following:
* * * * *
0
4. Section 405.378 is amended by--
0
A. Revising paragraph (a);
0
B. Revising paragraph (b)(2);
0
C. Republishing paragraph (c)(1) introductory text;
0
D. Revising paragraph (c)(1)(ii);
0
E. Revising paragraph (c)(2);
0
F. Redesignating paragraphs (h) and (i) as paragraphs (i) and (h)
respectively;
0
G. Adding paragraph (j).
Sec. 405.378 Interest charges on overpayment and underpayments to
providers, suppliers and other entities.
(a) Basis and purpose. This section, which implements sections
1815(d), 1833(j) and 1893(f)(2)(B) of the Act and common law, and
authority granted under the Federal Claims Collection Act, provides for
the charging and payment of interest on overpayments and underpayments
to Medicare providers, suppliers, HMOs, competitive medical plans
(CMPs), and health care prepayment plans (HCPPs).
(b) * * *
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (j) of this section, interest
accrues from the date of the final determination as defined in
paragraph (c) of this section, and either is charged on the overpayment
balance or paid on the underpayment balance for each full 30-day period
that payment is delayed.
(c) * * * (1) For purposes of this section, any of the following
constitutes a final determination:
* * * * *
(ii) In cases in which an NPR is not used as a notice of
determination (that
[[Page 47469]]
is, primarily under part B), one of the following constitutes a final
determination -
(A) A written determination that an overpayment exists and a
written demand for payment; or
(B) A written determination of an underpayment.
* * * * *
(2) Except as required by any subsequent administrative or judicial
reversal and specifically as provided in paragraphs (i) and (j) of this
section, interest accrues from the date of final determination as
specified in this section.
* * * * *
(j) Special rule for provider or supplier overpayments subject to
Sec. 405.379. If an overpayment determination subject to the
limitation on recoupment under Sec. 405.379 is reversed in whole or in
part by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) or at subsequent
administrative or judicial levels of appeal and if funds have been
recouped and retained by the Medicare contractor, interest will be paid
to the provider or supplier as follows:
(1) The applicable rate of interest is that provided in paragraph
(d) of this section.
(2) The interest rate in effect on the date the ALJ, the Medicare
Appeals Council, the Federal district court or subsequent appellate
court issues a decision reversing the overpayment determination in
whole or in part is the rate used to calculate the interest due the
provider or supplier.
(3) Interest will be calculated as follows:
(i) Interest will be paid on the principal amount recouped only.
(ii) Interest will be calculated on a simple rather than a compound
basis.
(iii) Interest will be calculated in full 30-day periods and will
not be payable on amounts recouped for any periods of less than 30 days
in which the Medicare contractor had possession of the funds.
(iv) In calculating the period in which the amount was recouped,
days in which the ALJ's adjudication period to conduct a hearing are
tolled under 42 CFR 405.1014 shall not be counted.
(v) In calculating the period in which the amount was recouped,
days in which the Medicare Appeals Council's adjudication period to
conduct a review are tolled under 42 CFR 405.1106 shall not be counted.
(4) If the decision by the ALJ, Medicare Appeals Council, Federal
district court or a subsequent Federal reviewing court, reverses the
overpayment determination, as modified by prior levels of
administrative or judicial review, in part, the Medicare contractor in
effectuating the decision may allocate recouped monies to that part of
the overpayment determination affirmed by the decision. Interest will
be paid to the provider or supplier on recouped amounts that remain
after this allocation in accordance with this paragraph (j) of this
section.
0
5. Section 405.379 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 405.379 Limitation on recoupment of provider and supplier
overpayments.
(a) Basis and purpose. This section implements section
1893(f)(2)(A) of the Act which limits recoupment of Medicare
overpayments if a provider of services or supplier seeks a
reconsideration until a decision is rendered by a Qualified Independent
Contractor (QIC). This section also limits recoupment of Medicare
overpayments when a provider or supplier seeks a redetermination until
a redetermination decision is rendered.
(b) Overpayments subject to limitation. (1) This section applies to
overpayments that meet the following criteria:
(i) Is one of the following types of overpayments:
(A) Post-pay denial of claims for benefits under Medicare Part A
which is determined and for which a written demand for payment has been
made on or after November 24, 2003; or
(B) Post-pay denial of claims for benefits under Medicare Part B
which is determined and for which a written demand for payment has been
made on or after October 29, 2003; or
(C) Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) recovery where the provider or
supplier received a duplicate primary payment and for which a written
demand for payment was issued on or after October 10, 2003; or
(D) Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) recovery based on the provider's
or supplier's failure to file a proper claim with the third party payer
plan, program, or insurer for payment and, if Part A, demanded on or
after November 24, 2003, or, if Part B, demanded on or after October
29, 2003; and
(ii) The provider or supplier can appeal the overpayment as a
revised initial determination under the Medicare claims appeal process
at 42 CFR parts 401 and 405 or as an initial determination for
provider/supplier MSP duplicate primary payment recoveries.
(2) This section does not apply to all other overpayments
including, but not limited to, the following:
(i) All Medicare Secondary Payer recoveries except those expressly
identified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(C) and (D) of this section;
(ii) Beneficiary overpayments; and
(iii) Overpayments that arise from a cost report determination and
are appealed under the provider reimbursement process of 42 CFR part
405 Subpart R--Provider Reimbursement Determinations and Appeals.
(c) Rules of construction. (1) For purposes of this section, what
constitutes a valid and timely request for a redetermination is to be
determined in accordance with Sec. 405.940 through Sec. 405.958.
(2) For purposes of this section, what constitutes a valid and
timely request for a reconsideration is to be determined in accordance
with Sec. 405.960 through Sec. 405.978.
(d) General rules. (1) Medicare contractors can begin recoupment no
earlier than 41 days from the date of the initial overpayment demand
but shall cease recoupment of the overpayment in question, upon receipt
of a timely and valid request for a redetermination of an overpayment.
If the recoupment has not yet gone into effect, the contractor shall
not initiate recoupment.
(2) If the redetermination decision is an affirmation in whole or
in part of the overpayment determination, recoupment may be initiated
or resumed in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section.
(3) Upon receipt of a timely and valid request for a
reconsideration of an overpayment, the Medicare contractor shall cease
recoupment of the overpayment in question. If the recoupment has not
yet gone into effect, the contractor must not initiate recoupment.
(4) The contractor may initiate or resume recoupment following
action by the QIC in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section.
(5) If the provider or supplier subsequently appeals the
overpayment to the ALJ, the Medicare Appeals Council, or Federal court,
recoupment remains in effect as provided in Sec. 405.373(e).
(6) If an overpayment determination is appealed and recoupment
stopped, the contractor may continue to recoup other overpayments owed
by the provider or supplier in accordance with this section.
(7) Amounts recouped prior to a reconsideration decision may be
retained by the Medicare contractor in accordance with paragraph (g) of
this section.
[[Page 47470]]
(8) If either the redetermination or reconsideration decision is a
full reversal of the overpayment determination or if the overpayment
determination is reversed in whole or in part at subsequent levels of
administrative or judicial appeal, adjustments shall be made with
respect to the overpayment and the amount of interest charged.
(9) Interest accrues and is payable in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 405.378.
(e) Initiating or resuming recoupment after redetermination
decision. (1) Recoupment that has been deferred or stopped may be
initiated or resumed if the debt (remaining unpaid principal balance
and interest) has not been satisfied in full and the provider or
supplier has been afforded the opportunity for rebuttal in accordance
with the requirements of Sec. 405.373 through Sec. 405.375.
Recoupment may be resumed under any of the following circumstances:
(i) Immediately upon receipt by the Medicare contractor of the
provider's or supplier's request for a withdrawal of a request for a
redetermination in accordance with Sec. 405.952(a).
(ii) On the 60th calendar day after the date of the notice of
redetermination issued under Sec. 405.956 if the redetermination
decision is an affirmation in whole of the overpayment determination in
question.
(iii) On the 60th calendar day after the date of the written notice
to the provider or supplier of the revised overpayment amount, if the
redetermination decision is an affirmation in part, which has the
effect of reducing the amount of the overpayment.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraphs (e)(i), (ii) and (iii) of this
section, recoupment must not be resumed, or if resumed, must cease upon
receipt of a timely and valid request for a reconsideration by the QIC.
(f) Initiating or resuming recoupment following action by the QIC
on the reconsideration request. (1) Recoupment may be initiated or
resumed upon action by the QIC subject to the following limitations:
(i) The provider or supplier has been afforded the opportunity for
rebuttal in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 405.373 through
Sec. 405.375; and
(ii) The debt (remaining unpaid principal balance and interest) has
not been satisfied in full; and
(iii) If the action by the QIC is the notice of the
reconsideration, the reconsideration decision either affirms in whole
or in part the overpayment determination, including the
redetermination, in question.
(2) For purposes of this paragraph (f), the action by the QIC on
the reconsideration request is the earliest to occur of the following:
(i) The QIC mails or otherwise transmits written notice of the
dismissal of the reconsideration request in its entirety in accordance
with Sec. 405.972; or
(ii) The QIC receives a timely and valid request to withdraw the
request for the reconsideration in accordance with Sec. 405.972; or
(iii) The QIC transmits written notice of the reconsideration in
accordance with Sec. 405.976; or
(iv) The QIC notifies the parties in writing that the
reconsideration is being escalated to an ALJ in accordance with Sec.
405.970.
(g) Disposition of funds recouped. (1) If the Medicare contractor
recouped funds before a timely and valid request for a redetermination
was received, the amount recouped may be retained and applied first to
accrued interest and then to reduce or eliminate the principal balance
of the overpayment subject to the following:
(i) If the redetermination results in a reversal, the amount
recouped may be applied to any other debt, including interest, owed by
the provider or supplier before any excess is released to the provider.
(ii) If the redetermination results in a partial reversal and the
decision reduces the overpayment plus assessed interest below the
amount already recouped, the excess may be applied to any other debt,
including interest, owed by the provider or supplier before any excess
is released to the provider or supplier.
(iii) If the redetermination results in an affirmation and the
provider or supplier subsequently requests a reconsideration, the
Medicare contractor may retain the amount recouped and apply the funds
first to accrued interest and then to outstanding principal pending
action by the QIC on the reconsideration request.
(2) If the Medicare contractor also recouped funds in accordance
with paragraph (e) of this section, the amount recouped may be retained
by the Medicare contractor and applied first to accrued interest and
then to reduce or eliminate the outstanding principal balance pending
action by the QIC on the reconsideration request.
(3) If the action by the QIC is a dismissal, receipt of a
withdrawal, a notice that the reconsideration is being escalated to an
ALJ, or a reconsideration which affirms in whole the overpayment
determination, including the redetermination, in question, the amount
recouped is applied to interest first, then to reduce the outstanding
principal balance and recoupment may be resumed as provided under
paragraph (f) of this section.
(4) If the action by the QIC is a reconsideration, which reverses
in whole the overpayment determination, including the redetermination,
in question, the amount recouped may be applied to any other debt,
including interest, owed by the provider or supplier to CMS or to HHS
before any excess is released to the provider or supplier.
(5) If the action by the QIC is a reconsideration which results in
a partial reversal and the decision reduces the overpayment plus
assessed interest below the amount already recouped, the excess may be
applied to any other debt, including interest, owed by the provider or
supplier to CMS or to HHS before any excess is released to the provider
or supplier.
(h) Relationship to Extended Repayment Schedules. Notwithstanding
Sec. 401.607 (c)(2)(v) of this chapter regarding an extended repayment
schedule (ERS), a provider or supplier will not be deemed in default if
recoupment of an overpayment is not effectuated or stopped in
accordance with this section, and the following conditions are met:
(1) The provider or supplier has been granted an ERS under Sec.
401.607(c) of this chapter.
(2) The ERS has been granted for an overpayment that is listed in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(3) The provider or supplier has submitted a valid and timely
request to the Medicare contractor for a redetermination of the
overpayment in accordance with Sec. Sec. 405.940 through 405.958 or
reconsideration of the overpayment in accordance with Sec. Sec.
405.960 through 405.978.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.773,
Medicare--Hospital Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, Medicare--
Supplementary Medical Insurance Program)
Dated: April 29, 2009.
Charlene Frizzera,
Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
Approved: June 17, 2009.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-22166 Filed 9-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P