Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Establishment of the Multi-State Plan Program for the Affordable Insurance Exchanges, 69802-69819 [2014-27793]
Download as PDF
69802
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Dated: September 30, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2014–27752 Filed 11–21–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
45 CFR Part 800
RIN 3206–AN12
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Establishment of the Multi-State
Plan Program for the Affordable
Insurance Exchanges
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is issuing a
proposed rule to implement
modifications to the Multi-State Plan
(MSP) Program based on the experience
of the Program to date. OPM established
the MSP Program pursuant to section
1334 of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act, as amended by the
Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010, referred to
collectively as the Affordable Care Act.
This proposed rule clarifies the
approach used to enforce the applicable
requirements of the Affordable Care Act
with respect to health insurance issuers
that contract with OPM to offer MSP
options. This proposed rule amends
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
Comments are due on or before
December 24, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Regulation Identifier
Number (RIN) 3206–AN12 using any of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail, Hand Delivery or Courier:
National Healthcare Operations,
Healthcare and Insurance, U.S. Office of
Personnel Management, 1900 E Street
NW., Room 3468, Washington, DC
20415.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
SUMMARY:
MSP standards related to coverage area,
benefits, and certain contracting
provisions under section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act. This document
also makes non-substantive technical
changes.
Cameron Stokes by telephone at (202)
606–2128, by FAX at (202) 606–4430, or
by email at mspp@opm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act (Pub. L. 111–148), as amended by
the Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–
152), together known as the Affordable
Care Act, provides for the establishment
of Affordable Insurance Exchanges, or
‘‘Exchanges’’ (also called Health
Insurance Marketplaces, or
‘‘Marketplaces’’), where individuals and
small businesses can purchase qualified
coverage. The Exchanges provide
competitive marketplaces for
individuals and small employers to
compare available private health
insurance options based on price,
quality, and other factors. The
Exchanges enhance competition in the
health insurance market, improve
choice of affordable health insurance,
and give individuals and small
businesses purchasing power
comparable to that of large businesses.
The Multi-State Plan (MSP) Program
was created pursuant to section 1334 of
the Affordable Care Act to increase
competition by offering high-quality
health insurance coverage sold in
multiple States on the Exchanges. The
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) is proposing this regulation to
modify the standards set forth for the
MSP Program under 45 CFR part 800
that was published as final rule on
March 11, 2013 (78 FR 15560). This
proposed rule will clarify OPM’s intent
in administering the Program as well as
make regulatory changes in order to
expand issuer participation and
offerings in the Program to meet the goal
of increasing competition.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Abbreviations
EHB Essential Health Benefits
FEHBA Federal Employees Health Benefits
Act
FEHB Program Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program
HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services
MSP Multi-State Plan
NAIC National Association of Insurance
Commissioners
OPM U.S. Office of Personnel Management
PHS Act Public Health Service Act
QHP Qualified Health Plan
SHOP Small Business Health Options
Program
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Affordable Insurance Exchanges
B. Objectives of the Multi-State Plan
Program
C. Review of U.S. Office of Personnel
Management’s Role in Contracting Under
the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program
D. Overview of the Multi-State Plan
Program’s Statutory Requirements
E. Stakeholder Interaction
II. Proposed Regulatory Approach
A. Overview of Regulatory Approach
B. Governing Law
III. Provisions of the Proposed Regulation
A. General Provisions and Definitions
B. Multi-State Plan Issuer Requirements
C. Application and Contracting Procedures
D. Compliance
E. Miscellaneous
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
VII. Unfunded Mandates
VIII. Federalism
I. Background
Section 1334 of the Affordable Care
Act created the Multi-State Plan (MSP)
Program to foster competition in the
individual and small group health
insurance markets on the Exchanges
(also called Health Insurance Exchanges
or Marketplaces) based on price, quality,
and benefit delivery. The Affordable
Care Act directs the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) to
contract with private health insurance
issuers to offer at least two MSP options
on each of the Exchanges in the States
and the District of Columbia.1 2 The law
1 Multi-State Plan option or MSP option means a
discrete pairing of a package of benefits with
particular cost sharing (which does not include
premium rates or premium rate quotes) that is
offered under a contract with OPM.
2 Note that the U.S. Department of Health &
Human Services (HHS) determined that Statespecific requirements in the ACA do not apply to
U.S. territories, and thus territories are not required
to establish Exchanges. See Letter to Commissioner
Gregory R. Francis, Division of Banking &
Insurance, St. Croix, Virgin Islands, from Marilyn
Tavenner, Administrator, Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services, July 16, 2014.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
allows MSP issuers to phase in
coverage.3
In the 2014 plan year, OPM
contracted with one group of issuers to
offer more than 150 MSP options in 31
States, including the District of
Columbia. Approximately 371,000
individuals have enrolled in an MSP
option to date. OPM added a second
group of issuers for plan year 2015 and
the MSP Program will expand into five
additional States for a total of 36 States.
The Program will offer more than 200
MSP options on the Exchanges during
the 2015 plan year to further
competition and expand choices
available to individuals, families, and
small businesses.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Affordable Insurance Exchanges
The Affordable Care Act established
the Exchanges where individuals and
small businesses can purchase qualified
coverage. The Exchanges provide
competitive marketplaces for
individuals and small businesses to
compare health insurance coverage
based on price, quality, and other
factors. The goals of the Exchanges are
to enhance competition in the health
insurance market, improve choice of
affordable health insurance, and provide
individuals and small businesses
purchasing power comparable to that of
large businesses.
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to modify the MSP Program final rule
published March 11, 2013.4 Proposed
changes to the regulation include
clarifications to the process by which
OPM administers the MSP Program,
pursuant to section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act, and revisions to
select sections of the regulation that
establish standards and requirements
applicable to MSP options and MSP
issuers.
B. Objectives of the Multi-State Plan
Program
MSP options were among several
private health insurance coverage
options offered on the Exchanges
beginning in 2014. MSP options differ
from QHPs in that MSP options are
certified by OPM to be offered on an
Exchange through the MSP Program
application process and signing of a
contract with OPM. In administering the
MSP Program, OPM focuses on several
important objectives:
3 Multi-State Plan issuer or MSP issuer means a
health insurance issuer or group of issuers that has
a contract with OPM to offer MSP options pursuant
to section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act.
4 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Establishment of the Multi-State Plan Program for
the Affordable Insurance Exchanges, 78 FR 15560
(Mar. 11, 2013).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
• To ensure a choice of at least two
options for high-quality health
insurance coverage on each Exchange;
• To promote competition on the
Exchanges to the benefit of all
consumers;
• To provide strong, effective
contractual oversight of the issuers that
offer MSP options; and
• To work cooperatively with States
and HHS to ensure a level playing field
between QHP issuers and MSP issuers.
Pursuant to section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act, the Director of
OPM sets standards for the MSP
Program. Under section 1334(b)(2), MSP
issuers generally are also required to
comply with requirements of State law
not inconsistent with requirements in
section 1334. OPM accordingly aligns
standards for the MSP Program with the
standards set for QHPs and QHP issuers
by States, HHS, and the Exchanges. In
certain unique and specific
circumstances, MSP Program standards
differ from QHP requirements. OPM
will continue to ensure that to the
extent that any of the rules governing
MSP options and MSP issuers differ
from those governing QHPs and QHP
issuers, the standards afford the MSP
options and MSP issuers neither a
competitive advantage nor disadvantage
with respect to other plans offered on
the Exchange. OPM will continue to
administer the MSP Program in a
manner that is sensitive to the
significant State and Federal interests
affected by the MSP Program and
informed by input from a broad array of
stakeholders. Accordingly, OPM
appreciates the ongoing coordination
and cooperation with States and HHS in
the administration of the MSP Program.
C. Review of OPM’s Role in Contracting
Under the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program
Enacted in 1959, the Federal
Employees Health Benefits Act (FEHBA)
established health benefits for Federal
employees, annuitants, and their
dependents. More than eight million
employees, annuitants, and their family
members have coverage under the
Federal Employees Health Benefits
(FEHB) Program. Enrollees can choose
fee-for-service plans with preferred
providers, local Health Maintenance
Organizations, consumer-driven health
plans, or high-deductible health plans
in the FEHB Program. Among these
options are six nationwide plans, each
of which offers coverage in all 50 States
and the District of Columbia.
For the 2014 and 2015 plan years,
OPM negotiated with issuers to
participate in the MSP Program. The
process was guided by our experience in
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69803
the FEHB Program, although it differed
in certain respects from the FEHB
Program process to account for the
differences between the large group
market, where OPM solely operated
prior to the MSP Program, and the
individual and small group markets
served by the Exchanges.
D. Overview of the MSP Program’s
Statutory Requirements
Section 1334(a)(1) of the Affordable
Care Act requires OPM to ‘‘enter into
contracts with health insurance issuers,
(which may include a group of health
insurance issuers affiliated either by
common ownership and control or by
the common use of a nationally licensed
service mark) . . . to offer at least 2
multi-State qualified health plans
through each Exchange in each State.’’ 5
The Director has the authority to
implement and administer the MSP
Program ‘‘in a manner similar to the
manner in which the Director
implements the contracting provisions
with respect to carriers under the
Federal Employees Health Benefit
Program.’’ 6 Further, OPM may enter
into these contracts without regard to
competitive bidding laws.7 Each MSP
Program contract must be for a term of
at least one year, but can be
automatically renewable in the absence
of a notice of termination from either
the MSP issuer or OPM.8
The statute grants to OPM the
authority to certify MSP options.9 Any
MSP options offered under a contract
negotiated with OPM are ‘‘deemed to be
certified by an Exchange for purposes of
section 1311(d)(4)(A)’’ of the Affordable
Care Act and would not need to apply
separately for certification on each
Exchange,10 as outlined at 45 CFR
155.1010(b)(1). The Director is
authorized to withdraw approval of an
MSP Program contract after notice and
opportunity for a hearing.11 The
Director also has the authority to
negotiate with each MSP issuer ‘‘(A) a
medical loss ratio; (B) a profit margin;
(C) the premiums to be charged; and (D)
such other terms and conditions of
coverage as are in the interests of
enrollees in such plans.’’ 12
MSP issuers are required to be
licensed in each State in which they
offer an MSP option 13 and be ‘‘subject
5 Affordable
Care Act section 1334(a)(1).
Care Act section 1334(a)(4).
7 Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(1).
8 Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(2).
9 Affordable Care Act section 1334(d).
10 Id.
11 Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(7).
12 Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(4).
13 Affordable Care Act section 1334(b)(2).
6 Affordable
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
69804
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
to all requirements of State law not
inconsistent with this section [1334],
including the standards and
requirements that a State imposes that
do not prevent the application of a
requirement of part A of title XXVII of
the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act)
or a requirement of this title [I of the
Affordable Care Act].’’ 14 The Affordable
Care Act directs that MSP issuers must
comply with the minimum standards for
FEHB Program carriers under section
8902(e) of title 5 of the United States
Code to the extent that the standards do
not conflict with provisions of title I of
the Affordable Care Act.15 Congress also
authorized OPM to establish additional
standards for MSP options that OPM, in
consultation with HHS, deems
‘‘appropriate.’’ 16
E. Stakeholder Interaction
To assess the level of interest in the
MSP Program, and to ascertain feedback
from stakeholders about the program,
OPM issued a Request for Information
June 16, 2011.17 OPM received 19
responses representing the views of 39
groups and organizations. Responses
came from health insurance issuers
(including issuers of dental and vision
insurance), employer organizations,
labor organizations, consumer groups,
patient organizations, and provider
associations. On December 5, 2012,
OPM published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (77 FR 72582) establishing
the MSP Program at part 800 of title 45,
Code of Federal Regulations. OPM
received about 350 comments from a
wide variety of entities and individuals.
Since publishing the final rule, OPM
conducted presentations and met with
numerous stakeholders to seek feedback
on the implementation of the MSP
Program. Stakeholder groups included
representatives from the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC), States, tribal entities, consumer
advocacy groups, health insurance
issuers, provider associations, and trade
groups. OPM also convened groups of
individuals—representing the general
public as well as consumer advocates—
to solicit input on branding and
marketing of the MSP Program.
OPM is also in the process of
establishing an MSP Program Advisory
Board, the purpose of which will be to
‘‘provide recommendations on the
activities’’ of the MSP Program.18 A
14 Affordable
Care Act section 1334(b)(2).
Care Act section 1334(b)(3).
16 Affordable Care Act section 1334(b)(4).
17 The Request for Information is available at
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=
form&id=677e422dd3f2bc983cb985eb73995b63&
tab=core&_cview=1.
18 Affordable Care Act section 1334(h).
15 Affordable
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
‘‘significant percentage of the members’’
of the MSP Program Advisory Board
will be enrollees in an MSP option or
representatives of such enrollees.19
Members of the MSP Program Advisory
Board will exchange information, ideas,
and recommendations regarding OPM’s
administration of the MSP Program.
OPM values the participation of diverse
stakeholders and encourages them to
submit comments on this proposed rule.
II. Proposed Regulatory Approach
A. Overview of Regulatory Approach
OPM’s approach to the development
of this proposed regulation seeks to:
• Support a program that will attract
additional issuers and thus, offer a
greater selection of MSP options on each
Exchange in every State and the District
of Columbia.
• Balance State and Federal
regulatory interests in a manner that
will enable MSP issuers to offer viable
plans on the Exchanges.
• Ensure a level playing field such
that neither MSP options nor plans
offered by non-MSP issuers are
advantaged or disadvantaged on the
Exchanges.
OPM seeks comment on whether
these proposed changes to this
regulation satisfy our goals. We are
republishing the unchanged sections of
the regulation to provide context for the
proposed changes as well as to include
non-substantive technical corrections.
B. Governing Law
The Affordable Care Act generally
requires that the MSP Program be
governed by all State and Federal laws
that apply to QHPs. The Act, however,
grants discretion to the Director to
administer the MSP Program in a
manner that fulfills OPM’s statutory
responsibility to ensure that there are at
least two issuers offering MSP options
on each Exchange in every State and the
District of Columbia. OPM recognizes
that potential MSP issuers seek
administrative simplicity and some
uniformity of standards in the MSP
Program. Accordingly, in unusual
circumstances, it may be necessary for
the Director to adopt standards or
requirements for the MSP Program that
differ from standards and requirements
applicable to QHPs under either State or
Federal law. This proposed regulation,
however, reflects the Director’s
continued intention for the MSP options
and MSP issuers to generally adhere to
all State and Federal laws applicable to
QHPs and QHP issuers, except to the
extent any such laws are inconsistent
with section 1334. We propose to
continue to implement these regulations
in OPM guidance and OPM’s contracts
with MSP issuers.
III. Provisions of the Proposed
Regulation
A. Subpart A—General Provisions and
Definitions
Definitions (§ 800.20)
We seek comments on a definition for
‘‘group of issuers’’ that was defined in
the final rule. We are specifically
interested in whether this definition
allows for alternative structures, such as
decentralized health insurance issuers
or organizations, to join together as
potential applicants to offer MSP
options. Under the definition in the
MSP Program final rule, a ‘‘group of
issuers,’’ for purposes of the MSP
Program, may include: (1) A group of
health insurance issuers who are
affiliated either by common ownership
and control or by common use of a
nationally licensed service mark (as
defined in § 800.20); or (2) an affiliation
of health insurance issuers and an entity
that is not an issuer but owns a
nationally licensed service mark.20 We
are making an editorial correction to
this definition under (1) to state that
‘‘health insurance issuers that are
affiliated.’’
We propose to add the definition for
‘‘Multi-State Plan option,’’ which may
also be referred to as ‘‘MSP option.’’ We
propose the definition of ‘‘MSP option’’
as a discrete pairing of a package of
benefits with particular cost sharing
(which does not include premium rates
or premium rate quotes) that is offered
pursuant to a contract with OPM
pursuant to section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act and meets the
requirements of 45 CFR part 800. We
also propose to remove the definition of
‘‘Multi-State Plan.’’ The term ‘‘MultiState Plan option’’ is more precise and
avoids the confusion of the varying
definitions of the word ‘‘plan’’ in the
context of health insurance. In the past
two years, OPM refined how to use the
term ‘‘Multi-State Plan.’’ It is our
intention to not apply the term ‘‘MultiState Plan’’ as a general concept, but
instead as a specific descriptor used
under this Program. OPM registered the
term ‘‘Multi-State Plan’’ as a mark with
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,21
and we intend to enforce its exclusive
use under this Program.
We also propose to add a definition
for State-level issuer. This definition is
consistent with the statutory concept of
20 78
19 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
FR 15588.
Reg. No. 4599136.
21 U.S.
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
contracting with a group of issuers, and
our experience reviewing MSP
applications and negotiating contracts
with MSP issuers. We propose to define
a State-level issuer as a health insurance
issuer designated by the MSP issuer to
offer an MSP option or MSP options.
The State-level issuer may offer health
insurance coverage through one or more
MSP options in all or part of one or
more States.
OPM invites comments on the
proposed changes to the definitions
under 45 CFR 800.20.
B. Subpart B—Multi-State Plan Issuer
Requirements
Phased Expansion: Coverage in All
States; Coverage State-Wide; and SHOP
(§ 800.104)
Section 1334(e) of the Affordable Care
Act provides for OPM to phase
expansion of an issuer’s participation in
the MSP Program. In the final rule, OPM
largely codified the statutory language
for the phase-in standards and set
standards for coverage within a State,
participation in the Small Business
Health Insurance Options Program
(SHOP), and licensure. Since the
publication of the final rule, OPM
gained valuable insight and feedback
from MSP issuers and potential MSP
issuer applicants.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Coverage in All States
Under § 800.104(a) of the final rule,
OPM established a standard that it may
enter into a contract with a health
insurance issuer to offer MSP options if
the health insurance issuer agrees to a
phased expansion of coverage in States.
We request comment on how we may
expand participation in the Program to
meet the goal of increasing competition
while balancing consumers’ needs for
coverage across an entire State. OPM
conducted outreach to potential MSP
issuers and is engaged in ongoing
discussions with current MSP issuers to
address expansion of access to MSP
options for consumers throughout the
country. These issuers have expressed
significant concern about the challenges
of rapidly expanding access to MSP
coverage both within and across State
lines.
The text of section 1334 is clear in its
intent that the primary purpose of the
MSP Program is to promote competition
on Exchanges by contracting with
issuers to offer coverage in each State.
Section 1334 contemplates interest from
private health insurance issuers in
participating in the Program; however,
there is no requirement for health
insurance issuers to participate in the
Program. The statute sets forth
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
standards to guide the exercise of this
contracting authority, noting that
section 1334(b)(1) contemplates offering
coverage in every State and the District
of Columbia, and outlining a framework
within which participation in the MSP
Program is a feasible and attractive
business activity. Such standards
include the provisions under
subsections (b) and (e) on offering
coverage in every State. OPM intends to
ensure that MSP coverage is available as
expansively and as soon as practicable,
but recognizes the operational
challenges issuers may face.
OPM has discretion over how we may
implement and expand the MSP
Program. We request comment on
timeframes and other appropriate
parameters within which an MSP issuer
could reasonably expand participation
in the Program. For example, a MSP
issuer may be expected to expand to a
certain number of states within a
specified timeframe. In addition, we
request comment on how OPM may
encourage MSP issuers to expedite their
participation on the Exchanges in which
there is limited competition. At this
time, we do not propose any changes to
the regulatory text.
State-Wide Coverage
The final rule established a standard
for MSP coverage in a State under
§ 800.104(b) that permits OPM to enter
into a contract with an issuer that offers
coverage in part of a State, but not
necessarily the entire State. Most, but
not all, of the MSP options available to
consumers in plan years 2014 and 2015
provide coverage statewide.
In some circumstances, issuers in
particular States have not consistently
been able to offer statewide MSP
coverage. Based on discussions with
potential MSP issuers, we believe some
of the challenges to providing statewide
coverage in all States will continue to
impede expansion or participation in
the Program. One of these challenges is
the licensing agreements for use of a
nationally licensed service mark among
the group of issuers participating in the
MSP Program.22 Section 1334 requires
that a group of issuers offering MSP
coverage must be affiliated in one of a
few specific ways, including common
use of a nationally licensed service
mark. Antitrust and other laws that limit
the permissible scope of interaction
among issuers may make it difficult for
a group of issuers under the MSP
Program to coordinate nationally. OPM
is sensitive to these constraints and
recognizes that they may hinder
development and implementation of
22 45
PO 00000
CFR 800.20. (2013).
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
issuers’ plans to offer statewide MSP
coverage.
OPM is committed to a goal of
statewide coverage in the MSP Program,
and intends to continue working with
MSP issuers and potential MSP issuers
to develop productive and ambitious
approaches to achieving statewide
coverage. In clarifying the status of the
Program and how we are implementing
the standards set under § 800.104, we
propose to delete the standard for an
MSP issuer to submit a plan to become
statewide. In lieu of requiring a plan,
OPM intends to negotiate with MSP
issuers to determine their MSP coverage
area. In the MSP Program contract
negotiation process, we will consider
the MSP issuers’ capacity to provide
statewide coverage. OPM will take into
account many factors when assessing an
MSP issuer’s capacity for offering
statewide coverage (e.g., other business
commitments, financials, Exchange
QHP standards, and OPM’s dialogue
with State regulators). In addition, OPM
will assess consumers’ needs for
coverage, including ensuring that MSP
issuers’ proposed service areas have
been established without regard to
racial, ethnic, language, or health statusrelated factors listed in section 2705(a)
of the PHS Act, or other factors that
exclude specific high-utilizing, highcost, or medically underserved
populations.
SHOP Coverage
The final rule established flexibility
in SHOP participation for MSP issuers
in § 800.104(c) by establishing a policy
for participation consistent with
standards set for QHP issuers.
Specifically, we adopted standards that
require MSP issuers to generally comply
with standards in 45 CFR 156.200(g)
and with State standards for SHOP
participation if the State has set a
standard that requires QHP issuers to
participate. This policy provided OPM
discretion to provide MSP issuers
flexibility during the initial years of the
Program to phase into the SHOP in a
State-based Exchange. OPM provided
that an MSP issuer may meet the
requirements of 45 CFR 156.200(g)(3) if
a State-level issuer or any other issuer
in the same issuer group affiliated with
an MSP issuer provides coverage on the
Federally-facilitated SHOP. We
discussed this policy in-depth in the
final rule.23
Section 1334 requires OPM to
contract for coverage to be offered on
each Exchange in each State, offering
individual or small group coverage.
23 78
Sfmt 4702
69805
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
FR 15565.
24NOP1
69806
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Based on our current experience
implementing the Program, a number of
challenges prevent issuer participation
in the MSP Program, including timing
and resources. Very few MSP issuers
have offered MSP SHOP options in
these initial years of the Program. We
solicit comment on when MSP issuers
should be required to participate on the
SHOPs.
Benefits (§ 800.105)
The final rule adopted requirements
in § 800.105(a) that an MSP issuer must
offer a uniform package of benefits for
each MSP option within a State and that
the package of benefits must comply
with section 1302 of the Affordable Care
Act, as well as standards set by OPM
and any applicable standards set by
HHS.
In § 800.105(b), OPM finalized a rule
that allowed MSP issuers to offer a
package of benefits in all States that is
substantially equal to either (1) each
State’s Essential Health Benefits (EHB)benchmark plan in each State in which
it operates; or (2) any EHB-benchmark
plan selected by OPM. In response to
comments received on the proposed
rule, OPM clarified that the option
chosen must be applied uniformly in
each State in which the MSP issuer
proposes to offer MSP options.
OPM continues to conduct outreach
to potential MSP issuers and encourages
ongoing discussions with current MSP
issuers in hopes of expanding the
Program. OPM interprets the discretion
afforded to the Director under section
1334(a) of the Affordable Care Act, such
that he or she may administer the
Program in a way to attract issuers to the
Program and grow the Program to meet
the goal of increasing competition. By
applying the Director’s discretion to
offer flexibility in the selection of the
package of benefits, OPM hopes to
reduce the number of obstacles and
increase competition and consumer
choice while maintaining benefit
standards and protections
After completing two application
cycles for the MSP Program and
administering the Program since January
2014, OPM is proposing to adjust the
approach to the selection of the package
of benefits to allow for more flexibility
to attract issuers to the MSP Program
with the expectation of expanding
competition on the Exchanges. OPM is
requesting public comment on this
approach. This flexibility would allow
an MSP issuer to make benchmark
selections on a State-by-State basis. The
issuer would also be able to offer two or
more MSP options in each State, for
example, one using the State-selected
benchmark and one using the OPM-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
selected benchmark. OPM believes that
allowing this flexibility will enable
coalition building across issuers in
different States, so that they can work
together toward MSP options that meets
the MSP Program standards. For
example, an MSP issuer or potential
issuer that chooses to offer an OPMselected benchmark plan in one State
may want to partner with another MSP
issuer or potential issuer that would
choose to offer a State EHB-benchmark
plan in another State. We seek
comments on whether this would have
the desired effect of encouraging
participation without causing consumer
confusion or segmenting of risk.
In § 800.105(c)(1), OPM finalized the
selection of EHB-benchmark plans.
OPM selected the three largest FEHB
Program plan options by enrollment that
are open to Federal employees and
annuitants. These FEHB Program
benchmark plans were identified by
HHS pursuant to section 1302(b) of the
Affordable Care Act. On July 3, 2012,
HHS identified the three largest FEHB
Program plan options, as of March 31,
2012, as Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS)
Standard Option; BCBS Basic Option;
and Government Employees Health
Association (GEHA) Standard Option.24
OPM will continue to offer flexibility to
MSP issuers to select among these
benchmark options based on their
business strategies and perceived needs
of MSP enrollees.
In § 800.105(c)(2), OPM finalized the
requirement that any OPM-selected
EHB-benchmark plan lacking coverage
of pediatric oral services or pediatric
vision services must be supplemented
by the addition of the entire category of
benefits from the largest Federal
Employee Dental and Vision Insurance
Program (FEDVIP) dental or vision plan
option, respectively, pursuant to 45 CFR
156.110(b) and section 1302(b) of the
Affordable Care Act. On July 3, 2012,
HHS identified the largest FEDVIP
dental and vision plan options, as of
March 31, 2012, to be, respectively,
MetLife Federal Dental Plan High
Option and FEP BlueVision High
Option.25
OPM is proposing to add a
clarification in the new § 800.105(c)(3).
Based on outreach with potential MSP
issuers and ongoing discussions with
current MSP issuers, there is confusion
about the prescription drug formulary
standards of OPM-selected benchmarks.
As is done in the FEHB Program, OPM
24 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services,
Essential Health Benefits: List of the Largest Three
Small Group Products by State, available at https://
cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/largest-smgroupproducts-7-2-2012.pdf.PDF (July 3, 2012).
25 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
will work with MSP issuers to negotiate
a formulary that best manages the needs
of MSP enrollees while focusing on
managing costs and ensuring access. In
addition, OPM will ensure that MSP
issuers comply with any HHS standards
related to drug formularies for QHPs
and are not discriminatory in the
formulary’s design. OPM sees large
variations in the formulary structures in
the FEHB Program, and there are
ongoing changes in the use of managed
formularies. OPM also seeks comment
on the feasibility of substituting an
OPM-selected benchmark plan
formulary with the formulary from the
respective State’s EHB-benchmark plan.
This approach would promote
consistency in benefits to enhance
portability while maintaining a level
playing field. By working with MSP
issuers to build flexibility in the
management of formularies, OPM
believes the formulary will be seen as an
opportunity to build a plan around the
needs of enrollees while clarifying
formulary requirements with the OPMselected benchmarks.
In the final rule at § 800.105(c)(3),
proposed to be republished as
§ 800.105(c)(4), OPM finalized the use of
State definitions for habilitative services
where the State chooses to specifically
define this category pursuant to 45 CFR
156.110(f). In this section of the final
rule, OPM also reserved the authority to
determine what to include in this
category for the OPM-selected
benchmarks where the State has not
defined it and no definition exists in the
OPM-selected benchmark. OPM is
proposing to change this section to
apply a Federal definition of habilitative
services, should HHS choose to define
the term.
We propose to renumber
§ 800.105(c)(4) to § 800.105(c)(5). We are
not proposing changes to this standard.
In § 800.105(d), OPM finalized the
rule that an MSP issuer’s package of
benefits, including its formulary, must
be submitted to and approved by OPM,
which will determine whether a
package of benefits proposed by an MSP
issuer is substantially equal to an EHBbenchmark plan. OPM also plans to
review an MSP issuer’s package of
benefits for discriminatory benefit
design, consistently with section
1302(b)(4) of the Affordable Care Act
and 45 CFR 156.110(d), 156.110(e), and
156.125, and will work closely with
States and HHS to identify and
investigate any potentially
discriminatory or otherwise
noncompliant benefit design in MSP
options.
In § 800.105(e), OPM finalized the
rule that the cost of benefits required by
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
the State in addition to those in the
benchmark package would be assumed
by the State. This policy was consistent
with section 1334(c)(2) of the Affordable
Care Act. OPM now proposes to change
‘‘assume’’ to ‘‘defray’’ to make the
language align with the language in the
statute.
Assessments and User Fees (§ 800.108)
OPM has authority to collect MSP
Program user fees, and continues to
preserve its discretion to collect an MSP
Program user fee. We wish to clarify that
OPM may begin collecting the fee as
early as plan year 2015. The user fee
may be used to fund OPM activities
directly related to MSP Program
certification, administration, and
operational costs. We currently estimate
that any assessment or fee would be no
more than 0.2 percent of premiums. In
the Federally-facilitated Exchange, OPM
is coordinating with HHS regarding the
collection of user fees, so that issuers
would not be affected operationally. We
are revising the regulatory text to allow
for flexibility in the process for
collecting MSP Program assessments or
user fees. We solicit comments on the
process for collecting user fees in the
State-based Exchanges. We also seek
comments on the use of these fees.
Network Adequacy (§ 800.109)
We are proposing to add that an MSP
issuer must also comply with any
additional standards related to provider
directories set by HHS for QHP issuers.
Accreditation (§ 800.111)
We revised the reference to the
specific section in the Code of Federal
Regulations to 45 CFR 156.275(a)(1) to
be more precise.
Level Playing Field (§ 800.115)
We revised the regulatory text to
clarify that all the areas listed under
section 1324 of the Affordable Care Act
are subject to § 800.114. In addition, we
are making a technical correction to
§ 800.114(l) to change a reference to 45
CFR part 162 to 45 CFR part 164.
C. Subpart D—Application and
Contracting Procedures
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Application Process (§ 800.301)
In § 800.301, OPM provided that
health insurance issuers may submit
applications to OPM for participation in
the MSP Program. If OPM decided not
to consider new applications for the
upcoming year, it would issue a notice
indicating so. This section also specified
that applications would meet the form,
manner, and timeframes prescribed by
OPM.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
69807
The edit to § 800.301(a) is a technical
correction that more accurately
describes that OPM determines annually
whether new issuer applications should
be considered to participate in the MSP
Program. This correction is meant to
distinguish new applications from
renewal applications. OPM’s discretion
over whether to consider issuer
applications pertains to new issuers that
want to apply to participate in the MSP
Program for the first time. Issuers that
already participate in the MSP Program,
and would like to continue
participating, may submit a renewal
application to OPM on an annual basis.
OPM will determine annually whether a
renewal application is required.
distinguishing the two types of
nonrenewal, the rule will better align
with the terms described in the MSP
Program contract, which already
distinguishes these concepts. Despite
this distinction, the notice requirements
and MSP issuer responsibilities as
provided in subsections (b) and (c)
respectively, are still applicable. In
subsection § 300.306(c), with respect to
providing notice of termination to
enrollees, we propose to reference
§ 800.404(d) instead of duplicating the
explanation of the requirements in this
section. This will ensure consistency
across the MSP Program.
MSP Contracting (§ 800.303)
In § 800.303, OPM provided that an
applicant must execute a contract with
OPM to become an MSP issuer; that
OPM would establish a standard
contract for the MSP Program; that OPM
and an applicant would negotiate
premiums for each plan year; that OPM
would review for approval an
applicant’s benefit packages; that OPM
may negotiate additional contractual
terms and conditions; and that MSP
issuers would be certified to offer MSP
coverage on Exchanges.
The edit to § 800.303(f) is a technical
correction to clarify that the MSP
Program contract specifies that OPM
certifies the MSP options that are
authorized to provide coverage. We also
propose a technical correction to
§ 800.303(f)(2) consistent with the edit
to (f)(1) to provide that MSP options
must be certified in order to be offered
on an Exchange. These edits more
accurately describe the information that
is reflected in the MSP Program contract
with respect to OPM’s certification
process.
Contract Performance (§ 800.401)
Nonrenewal (§ 800.306)
The proposed language for
§ 800.306(a) serves to clarify two
different nonrenewal concepts. The
term ‘‘nonrenewal’’ as described in the
current rule more accurately describes
nonrenewal of an MSP Program contract
because it pertains to the MSP issuer.
Therefore, we propose the term
‘‘nonrenewal of contract’’ to clarify this
concept. Additionally, there are
instances where a State-level issuer may
choose not to renew its participation in
the MSP Program contract, even though
the MSP issuer (of which the State-level
issuer is a part) will continue to contract
with OPM. The current regulatory
language does not contemplate this
latter concept. Therefore, we propose
the term ‘‘nonrenewal of participation’’
to describe such concept. By
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
D. Subpart E—Compliance
In addition to other MSP contract
performance requirements, § 800.401
paragraphs (b)(5)–(6), (c), and (d) require
an MSP issuer to perform its obligations
under an MSP Program contract using
prudent business practices that
emphasize ethical standards and
compliance with OPM directives and
other applicable laws, regulations, and
MSP contract provisions. The section
prohibits fraud, waste, abuse, and
deceptive business practices. It also
requires an MSP issuer to adjudicate
claims promptly and maintain a system
that accurately accounts for costs
occurring under the MSP Program.
Although this section lists numerous
prudent and poor business practices, we
did not intend them to be exhaustive. In
addition, because industry standards
and State markets are evolving
constantly, we address business practice
standards in each MSP Program
contract. Therefore, we are clarifying
that OPM will consider an MSP issuer’s
specific circumstances and facts in
using its discretion to determine if an
MSP issuer has fulfilled its obligations
pursuant to this section. We seek
comment on these issues.
Contract Quality Assurance (§ 800.402)
OPM proposes corrections to
§ 800.402 paragraphs (b) and (c). In
paragraph (b), OPM proposes to clarify
that it ‘‘may,’’ instead of ‘‘will,’’
periodically evaluate a contractor’s
system of internal controls. OPM also
clarifies in paragraph (b) that it will
only acknowledge in writing when the
contractor’s system of internal controls
is inconsistent with the MSP Program
contract requirements. In paragraph (c),
OPM will correct a drafting error and
clarify that MSP issuers must comply
with the performance standards issued
‘‘pursuant’’ to this section.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
69808
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Compliance Actions (§ 800.404)
E. Subpart G—Miscellaneous
Disclosure of Information (§ 800.603)
OPM proposes to make technical edits
to § 800.404 paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and
(d). In paragraph (a)(4), we clarify that
OPM may initiate a compliance action
for violations of law or regulation as
OPM may determine, ‘‘including
pursuant to its authority under
§§ 800.102 and 800.114.’’ This revision
more accurately reflects OPM’s
approach to enforcement and
compliance.
In paragraph (b), we clarify that OPM
may withdraw certification of the MSP
option or options for noncompliance
with applicable law or the MSP
contract. Consistent with new paragraph
800.306(a)(2), we add ‘‘nonrenewal of
participation’’ as a compliance action.
Accordingly, we renumber the two
subsequent compliance actions. We also
revised ‘‘Nonrenewal of the MSPP
contract’’ to ‘‘Nonrenewal of contract’’
to be consistent with the term as defined
in new paragraph 800.306(a)(1). We
revise paragraph (c)(2) to include
nonrenewal of participation as a
compliance action for which OPM must
notify the MSP issuer of its right to
reconsideration.
Paragraph (d) requires an MSP issuer
to comply with State and Exchange
requirements regarding termination of a
plan when an MSP Program contract is
terminated or when OPM withdraws
certification. Absent State or Exchange
requirements, the MSP issuer must
provide enrollees 90 days’ notice. If a
State or Exchange has a requirement to
provide enrollees notice of more than 90
days, then the MSP issuer must comply
with that standard. We clarify that these
requirements are triggered in the event
that one of the following occurs: The
MSP Program contract is terminated,
OPM withdraws certification of an MSP
option, or if a State-level issuer’s
participation is not renewed.
Consumer Choice With Respect to
Certain Services (§ 800.602)
In order to effectively implement and
operationalize the MSP Program, there
may be circumstances in which OPM
would share information with State
entities, including State Departments of
Insurance and Exchanges. The sharing
of information is intended to keep such
entities informed and to reflect OPM’s
approach to compliance. The addition
of this new section clarifies that OPM
may use its discretion and authority to
disclose information to such State
entities. In all cases, OPM will adhere
to any applicable privacy and security
standards for the disclosure of such
information.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Reconsideration of Compliance Actions
(§ 800.405)
OPM proposes technical edits and
corrections to section 800.405. Section
800.405 describes the compliance
actions for which the MSP issuer may
request reconsideration. We correct
paragraph (a)(1) to reflect that an MSP
issuer may request reconsideration upon
withdrawal of certification of the MSP
option or options offered on an
Exchange. Consistent with the approach
800.404(b), we revise (a)(2) to allow an
MSP issuer to request reconsideration of
the nonrenewal of participation of a
State-level issuer. We renumber the
subsequent paragraphs accordingly.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
Section 1334(a)(6) of the Affordable
Care Act requires OPM to contract with
at least one MSP issuer that excludes
coverage of abortion services, except in
the case of rape or incest, or when the
life of the woman would be endangered.
In the MSP Program final rule, we
codified the statutory language and
provided sub-regulatory guidance to
MSP issuer applicants on how to meet
this requirement in their benefit
proposals.
For the 2014 and 2015 plan years,
OPM operationalized this policy by
requiring each MSP issuer to offer at
least one silver MSP option and one
gold MSP option that excludes these
services in each State in which it was
under contract. MSP issuers also had
discretion to cover these services if the
issuer offered additional MSP options
on the Exchange.
Consumers, State regulators, and
other stakeholders expressed to OPM
the desire to have greater transparency
with regard to MSP options that exclude
non-excepted abortion services.26
Section 2715 of the PHS Act requires
group health plans and health insurance
issuers of group or individual health
insurance coverage to provide ‘‘a
summary of benefits and coverage
explanation that accurately describes
the benefits and coverage under the
applicable plan or coverage to
applicants, enrollees, and policyholders
or certificate holders.’’ 27 MSP issuers
are required to notify consumers who
purchase an MSP option that covers
non-excepted abortion services of such
coverage as part of the SBC at time of
enrollment.28
We are proposing to add a new
paragraph (c) to § 800.602 that would
require an MSP issuer to provide
disclosure of coverage or exclusion of
this benefit before a consumer enrolls in
an MSP option. In addition, OPM will
reserve the authority to review and
approve these MSP notices and
materials. OPM requests comments on
the form and manner for the disclosure.
Note that the question of how this
coverage should be disclosed is not
unique to MSP options; the Departments
of Health and Human Services, Labor,
and Treasury intend to issue guidance
on the Summary of Benefits and
Coverage in the future.
26 These are services for which Federal funding is
prohibited.
27 PHS Act section 2715(a) (2012).
28 45 CFR 156.280(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Technical Changes to 45 CFR Part 800
In addition to the changes proposed
for the specific sections of the
regulation, we also propose technical
corrections to streamline the use of
‘‘MSP’’ throughout the rules. The
changes are not substantive to our
policy. These changes apply to all
sections and include the following:
• ‘‘MSPP’’ will be replaced with
‘‘MSP Program;’’
• ‘‘MSPP issuer’’ will be replaced
with ‘‘MSP issuer;’’
• ‘‘MSP’’ will be replaced with ‘‘MSP
option’’ when referring to the plan that
makes up the specific package of
benefits and associated cost-sharing;
and
• ‘‘MSPP contract’’ will be replaced
with ‘‘MSP Program contract.’’
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
OPM has examined the impact of this
proposed rule as required by Executive
Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning
and Review (September 30, 1993) and
Executive Order 13563 on Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review
(January 18, 2011). Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 direct agencies to
assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation
is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). A regulatory impact analysis
must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects ($100
million or more in any 1 year adjusted
for inflation). Section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as an action that is
likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more in any
one year or adversely affect in a material
way a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal government or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in Executive Order 12866.
OPM will continue to generally
operate the MSP Program as it
previously had in plan year 2014. The
regulatory changes in this proposed rule
are for purposes of policy clarification
and any proposed changes will have
minimal impact on the administration
of the Program. Administrative costs of
the rule are generated both within OPM
and by issuers offering MSP options.
The costs that MSP issuers may incur
are the same as those of QHPs and, as
stated in 45 CFR part 156, will include:
Accreditation, network adequacy
standards, and quality improvement
strategy reporting. The costs associated
with MSP certification offset the costs
that issuers would face were they to be
certified by the State, or HHS on behalf
of the State, to offer QHPs through the
Exchange. For the 2014 plan year, there
are approximately 371,000 enrolled in
MSP options and with an estimated
average monthly premium of $350,
premiums collected by MSP issuers for
consumers enrolled in MSP options is
are approximately $1.4 billion this year.
While the overall regulation and
Program have a significant economic
impact, this proposed rule provides for
no substantial changes to the Program
and will not be economically
significant. The economic impact of this
rule is not expected exceed the $100
million threshold; we therefore do not
assess costs and benefits as required by
the Executive Order.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. chapter 35; see 5 CFR part
1320) requires that the U.S. Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approve all collections of information
by a Federal agency from the public
before they can be implemented.
Respondents are not required to respond
to any collection of information unless
it displays a current valid OMB control
number. OPM is not proposing any
additional collections from MSP issuers
or applicants seeking to become MSP
issuers in this proposed rule. OPM
continues to expect fewer than ten
responsible entities to respond to all of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
the collections noted above. For that
reason alone, the existing collections are
exempt from the Paperwork Reduction
Act under 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)(i).
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA) 29 requires agencies to prepare an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis to
describe the impact of the proposed rule
on small entities, unless the head of the
agency can certify that the rule would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The RFA generally defines a
‘‘small entity’’ as—(1) a proprietary firm
meeting the size standards of the Small
Business Administration (SBA); (2) a
not-for-profit organization that is not
dominant in its field; or (3) a small
government jurisdiction with a
population of less than 50,000. States
and individuals are not included in the
definition of ‘‘small entity.’’
The RFA requires agencies to analyze
options for regulatory relief of small
businesses, if a proposed rule has a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. For purposes
of the RFA, small entities include small
businesses, small non-profit
organizations, and small government
jurisdictions. Small businesses are those
with sizes below thresholds established
by the SBA. With respect to health
insurers, the SBA size standard is $7.0
million in annual receipts.30
OPM does not think that small
businesses with annual receipts less
than $7.0 million would likely have
sufficient economies of scale to become
MSP issuers or be part of a group of
MSP issuers. Similarly, while the
Director must enter into an MSP
Program contract with at least one nonprofit entity, OPM does not think that
small non-profit organizations would
likely have sufficient economies of scale
to become MSP issuers or be part of a
group of MSP issuers.
OPM does not think that this
proposed rule would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small businesses with annual
receipts less than $7.0 million, because
there are only a few health insurance
issuers that could be considered small
businesses. Moreover, while the
Director must enter into an MSP
29 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
to the SBA size standards, entities
with average annual receipts of $7 million or less
would be considered small entities for North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
Code 524114 (Direct Health and Medical Insurance
Carriers) (for more information, see ‘‘Table of Size
Standards Matched To North American Industry
Classification System Codes,’’ effective March 26,
2012, U.S. Small Business Administration, available
at https://www.sba.gov).
30 According
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69809
contract with at least one non-profit
entity, OPM does not think that this
proposed rule would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small non-profit
organizations, because few health
insurance issuers are small non-profit
organizations.
OPM incorporates by reference
previous analysis by HHS, which
provides some insight into the number
of health insurance issuers that could be
small entities. Particularly, as discussed
by HHS in the Medical Loss Ratio
interim final rule (75 FR 74918), few, if
any, issuers are small enough to fall
below the size thresholds for small
business established by the SBA. In that
rule, HHS used a data set created from
2009 NAIC Health and Life Blank
annual financial statement data to
develop an updated estimate of the
number of small entities that offer
comprehensive major medical coverage
in the individual and group markets.
For purposes of that analysis, HHS used
total Accident and Health earned
premiums as a proxy for annual
receipts. HHS estimated that there are
28 small entities with less than $7
million in accident and health earned
premiums offering individual or group
comprehensive major medical coverage.
OPM concurs with this HHS analysis,
and, thus, does not think that this
proposed rule would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Based on the foregoing, OPM is not
preparing an analysis for the RFA
because OPM has determined, and the
Director certifies, that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
VII. Unfunded Mandates
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) 31 requires that agencies assess
anticipated costs and benefits and take
certain other actions before issuing a
proposed rule (and subsequent final
rule) that includes any Federal mandate
that may result in expenditures in any
one year by a State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million in 1995
dollars, updated annually for inflation.
In 2014, that threshold is approximately
$141 million. UMRA does not address
the total cost of a rule. Rather, it focuses
on certain categories of costs, mainly
those ‘‘Federal mandate’’ costs resulting
from: (1) Imposing enforceable duties on
State, local, or tribal governments, or on
the private sector; or (2) increasing the
31 Public
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
Law 104–4.
24NOP1
69810
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
stringency of conditions in, or
decreasing the funding of, State, local,
or tribal governments under entitlement
programs.
This proposed rule does not place any
Federal mandates on State, local, or
Tribal governments, or on the private
sector. This proposed rule would
modify the MSP Program, a voluntary
federal program that provides health
insurance issuers the opportunity to
contact with OPM to offer MSP options
on the Exchanges. Section 3 of UMRA
excludes from the definition of ‘‘Federal
mandate’’ duties that arise from
participation in a voluntary Federal
program. Accordingly, no analysis
under UMRA is required.
VIII. Federalism
Executive Order 13132 outlines
fundamental principles of federalism,
and requires the adherence to specific
criteria by Federal agencies in the
process of their formulation and
implementation of policies that have
‘‘substantial direct effects’’ on the
States, the relationship between the
national government and States, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Federal agencies
promulgating regulations that have
these federalism implications must
consult with State and local officials,
and describe the extent of their
consultation and the nature of the
concerns of State and local officials in
the preamble to the regulation.
This proposed regulation has
federalism implications, because it has
direct effects on the States, the
relationship between the national
government and States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of
government. In particular, under
§ 800.114, OPM may deem a State law
to be inconsistent with section 1334 of
the Affordable Care Act, and, thus,
inapplicable to an MSP option or MSP
issuer. However, in OPM’s view, the
federalism implications of this proposed
regulation are substantially mitigated
because, OPM expects that the vast
majority of States have laws that are
consistent with section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act. Furthermore,
§ 800.116 sets forth a process for dispute
resolution if a State seeks to challenge
OPM’s determination that a State law is
inapplicable to an MSP option or MSP
issuer.
In compliance with the requirement
of Executive Order 13132 that agencies
examine closely any policies that may
have federalism implications or limit
the policy making discretion of the
States, OPM has engaged in efforts to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
consult with and work cooperatively
with affected State and local officials,
including attending meetings of the
NAIC and consulting with State
insurance officials on an individual
basis. It is expected OPM will continue
act in a similar fashion in enforcing the
Affordable Care Act requirements.
Throughout the process of
administering the MSP Program and
developing this proposed regulation,
OPM has attempted to balance the
States’ interests in regulating health
insurance issuers, and the statutory
requirement to provide two MSP
options in all Exchanges in the every
States and the District of Columbia. By
doing so, it is OPM’s view that it has
complied with the requirements of
Executive Order 13132.
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in section 8(a) of Executive Order
13132, and by the signature affixed to
this proposed regulation, OPM certifies
that it has complied with the
requirements of Executive Order 13132
for the attached regulation in a
meaningful and timely manner.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 800
Administrative practice and
procedure, Health facilities, Health
insurance, Health professions, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Office of Personnel Management.
Katherine Archuleta,
Director.
Accordingly, the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management is proposing to
revise part 800 to title 45, Code of
Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 800—MULTI-STATE PLAN
PROGRAM
Subpart A—General Provisions and
Definitions
Sec.
800.10 Basis and scope.
800.20 Definitions.
Subpart B—Multi-State Plan Program Issuer
Requirements
800.101 General requirements.
800.102 Compliance with Federal law.
800.103 Authority to contract with issuers.
800.104 Phased expansion, etc.
800.105 Benefits.
800.106 Cost-sharing limits, advance
payments of premium tax credits, and
cost-sharing reductions.
800.107 Levels of coverage.
800.108 Assessments and user fees.
800.109 Network adequacy.
800.110 Service area.
800.111 Accreditation requirement.
800.112 Reporting requirements.
800.113 Benefit plan material or
information.
800.114 Compliance with applicable State
law.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
800.115
800.116
Level playing field.
Process for dispute resolution.
Subpart C—Premiums, Rating Factors,
Medical Loss Ratios, and Risk Adjustment
800.201 General requirements.
800.202 Rating factors.
800.203 Medical loss ratio.
800.204 Reinsurance, risk corridors, and
risk adjustment.
Subpart D—Application and Contracting
Procedures
800.301 Application process.
800.302 Review of applications.
800.303 MSP Program contracting.
800.304 Term of the contract.
800.305 Contract renewal process.
800.306 Nonrenewal.
Subpart E—Compliance
800.401 Contract performance.
800.402 Contract quality assurance.
800.403 Fraud and abuse.
800.404 Compliance actions.
800.405 Reconsideration of compliance
actions.
Subpart F—Appeals by Enrollees of Denials
of Claims for Payment or Service
800.501 General requirements.
800.502 MSP issuer internal claims and
appeals.
800.503 External review.
800.504 Judicial review.
Subpart G—Miscellaneous
800.601 Reservation of authority.
800.602 Consumer choice with respect to
certain services.
800.603 Disclosure of information.
Authority: Sec. 1334 of Pub. L. 111–148,
124 Stat. 119; Pub. L. 111–152, 124 Stat. 1029
(42 U.S.C. 18054).
Subpart A—General Provisions and
Definitions
§ 800.10
Basis and scope.
(a) Basis. This part is based on the
following sections of title I of the
Affordable Care Act:
1001. Amendments to the Public
Health Service Act.
1302. Essential Health Benefits
Requirements.
1311. Affordable Choices of Health
Benefit Plans.
1324. Level Playing Field.
1334. Multi-State Plans.
1341. Transitional Reinsurance
Program for Individual Market in Each
State.
1342. Establishment of Risk Corridors
for Plans in Individual and Small Group
Markets.
1343. Risk Adjustment.
(b) Scope. This part establishes
standards for health insurance issuers to
contract with the United States Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) to offer
Multi-State Plan (MSP) options to
provide health insurance coverage on
Exchanges for each State. It also
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
hospital or medical service policy or
certificate, hospital or medical service
plan contract, or health maintenance
organization contract offered by a health
insurance issuer. Health insurance
coverage includes group health
insurance coverage, individual health
§ 800.20 Definitions.
insurance coverage, and short-term,
For purposes of this part:
limited duration insurance.
Actuarial value (AV) has the meaning
Health insurance issuer or issuer
given that term in 45 CFR 156.20.
means an insurance company, insurance
Affordable Care Act means the Patient service, or insurance organization
Protection and Affordable Care Act
(including a health maintenance
(Pub. L. 111–148), as amended by the
organization) that is required to be
Health Care and Education
licensed to engage in the business of
Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111– insurance in a State and that is subject
152).
to State law that regulates insurance
Applicant means an issuer or group of (within the meaning of section 514(b)(2)
issuers that has submitted an
of the Employee Retirement Income
application to OPM to be considered for Security Act (ERISA)). This term does
participation in the Multi-State Plan
not include a group health plan as
Program.
defined in 45 CFR 146.145(a).
Benefit plan material or information
HHS means the United States
means explanations or descriptions,
Department of Health and Human
whether printed or electronic, that
Services.
describe a health insurance issuer’s
Level of coverage means one of four
products. The term does not include a
standardized actuarial values of plan
policy or contract for health insurance
coverage as defined by section
coverage.
1302(d)(1) of the Affordable Care Act.
Cost sharing has the meaning given
Licensure means the authorization
that term in 45 CFR 155.20.
obtained from the appropriate State
Director means the Director of the
official or regulatory authority to offer
United States Office of Personnel
health insurance coverage in the State.
Management.
Multi-State Plan Program issuer or
EHB-benchmark plan has the meaning MSP issuer means a health insurance
given that term in 45 CFR 156.20.
issuer or group of issuers (as defined in
Exchange means a governmental
this section) that has a contract with
agency or non-profit entity that meets
OPM to offer health plans pursuant to
the applicable requirements of 45 CFR
section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act
part 155 and makes qualified health
and meets the requirements of this part.
plans (QHPs) and MSP options available
Multi-State Plan option or MSP option
to qualified individuals and qualified
means a discrete pairing of a package of
employers. Unless otherwise identified, benefits with particular cost sharing
this term refers to State Exchanges,
(which does not include premium rates
regional Exchanges, subsidiary
or premium rate quotes) that is offered
Exchanges, and a Federally-facilitated
pursuant to a contract with OPM
Exchange.
pursuant to section 1334 of the
Federal Employees Health Benefits
Affordable Care Act and meets the
Program or FEHB Program means the
requirements of 45 CFR part 800.
health benefits program administered by
Multi-State Plan Program or MSP
the United States Office of Personnel
Program means the program
Management pursuant to chapter 89 of
administered by OPM pursuant to
title 5, United States Code.
section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act.
Group of issuers means:
Nationally licensed service mark
(1) A group of health insurance
means a word, name, symbol, or device,
issuers that are affiliated either by
or any combination thereof, that an
common ownership and control or by
issuer or group of issuers uses
common use of a nationally licensed
consistently nationwide to identify
service mark (as defined in this section); itself.
or
Non-profit entity means:
(2) An affiliation of health insurance
(1) An organization that is
issuers and an entity that is not an
incorporated under State law as a nonissuer but that owns a nationally
profit entity and licensed under State
licensed service mark (as defined in this law as a health insurance issuer; or
(2) A group of health insurance
section).
issuers licensed under State law, a
Health insurance coverage means
substantial portion of which are
benefits consisting of medical care
(provided directly, through insurance or incorporated under State law as nonreimbursement, or otherwise) under any profit entities.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
establishes standards for appeal of a
decision by OPM affecting the issuer’s
participation in the MSP Program and
standards for an enrollee in an MSP
option to appeal denials of payment or
services by an MSP issuer.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69811
OPM means the United States Office
of Personnel Management.
Percentage of total allowed cost of
benefits has the meaning given that term
in 45 CFR 156.20.
Plan year means a consecutive 12month period during which a health
plan provides coverage for health
benefits. A plan year may be a calendar
year or otherwise.
Prompt payment means a requirement
imposed on a health insurance issuer to
pay a provider or enrollee for a claimed
benefit or service within a defined time
period, including the penalty or
consequence imposed on the issuer for
failure to meet the requirement.
Qualified Health Plan or QHP means
a health plan that has in effect a
certification that it meets the standards
described in subpart C of 45 CFR part
156 issued or recognized by each
Exchange through which such plan is
offered pursuant to the process
described in subpart K of 45 CFR part
155.
Rating means the process, including
rating factors, numbers, formulas,
methodologies, and actuarial
assumptions, used to set premiums for
a health plan.
Secretary means the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Human
Services.
SHOP means a Small Business Health
Options Program operated by an
Exchange through which a qualified
employer can provide its employees and
their dependents with access to one or
more qualified health plans (QHPs).
Silver plan variation has the meaning
given that term in 45 CFR 156.400.
Small employer means, in connection
with a group health plan with respect to
a calendar year and a plan year, an
employer who employed an average of
at least one but not more than 100
employees on business days during the
preceding calendar year and who
employs at least one employee on the
first day of the plan year. In the case of
plan years beginning before January 1,
2016, a State may elect to define small
employer by substituting ‘‘50
employees’’ for ‘‘100 employees.’’
Standard plan has the meaning given
that term in 45 CFR 156.400.
State Insurance Commissioner means
the commissioner or other chief
insurance regulatory official of a State.
State means each of the 50 States or
the District of Columbia.
State-level issuer means a health
insurance issuer designated by the
Multi-State Plan (MSP) issuer to offer an
MSP option or MSP options. The Statelevel issuer may offer health insurance
coverage through an MSP option in all
or part of one or more States.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
69812
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Subpart B—Multi-State Plan Program
Issuer Requirements
§ 800.101
General requirements.
An MSP issuer must:
(a) Licensed. Be licensed as a health
insurance issuer in each State where it
offers health insurance coverage;
(b) Contract with OPM. Have a
contract with OPM pursuant to this part;
(c) Required levels of coverage. Offer
levels of coverage as required by
§ 800.107;
(d) Eligibility and enrollment. MSP
options and MSP issuers must meet the
same requirements for eligibility,
enrollment, and termination of coverage
as those that apply to QHPs and QHP
issuers pursuant to 45 CFR part 155,
subparts D, E, and H, and 45 CFR
156.250, 156.260, 156.265, 156.270, and
156.285;
(e) Applicable to each MSP issuer.
Ensure that each of its MSP options
meets the requirements of this part;
(f) Compliance. Comply with all
standards set forth in this part;
(g) OPM direction and other legal
requirements. Timely comply with OPM
instructions and directions and with
other applicable law; and
(h) Other requirements. Meet such
other requirements as determined
appropriate by OPM, in consultation
with HHS, pursuant to section
1334(b)(4) of the Affordable Care Act.
(i) Non-discrimination. MSP options
and MSP issuers must comply with
applicable Federal and State nondiscrimination laws, including the
standards set forth in 45 CFR 156.125
and 156.200(e).
§ 800.102
Compliance with Federal law.
(a) Public Health Service Act. As a
condition of participation in the MSP
Program, an MSP issuer must comply
with applicable provisions of part A of
title XXVII of the PHS Act. Compliance
shall be determined by the Director.
(b) Affordable Care Act. As a
condition of participation in the MSP
Program, an MSP issuer must comply
with applicable provisions of title I of
the Affordable Care Act. Compliance
shall be determined by the Director.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.103
issuers.
Authority to contract with
(a) General. OPM may enter into
contracts with health insurance issuers
to offer at least two MSP options on
Exchanges and SHOPs in each State,
without regard to any statutes that
would otherwise require competitive
bidding.
(b) Non-profit entity. In entering into
contracts with health insurance issuers
to offer MSP options, OPM will enter
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
into a contract with at least one nonprofit entity as defined in § 800.20.
(c) Group of issuers. Any contract to
offer MSP options may be with a group
of issuers as defined in § 800.20.
(d) Individual and group coverage.
The contracts will provide for
individual health insurance coverage
and for group health insurance coverage
for small employers.
§ 800.104
Phased expansion, etc.
(a) Phase-in. OPM may enter into a
contract with a health insurance issuer
to offer MSP options if the health
insurance issuer agrees that:
(1) With respect to the first year for
which the health insurance issuer offers
MSP options, the health insurance
issuer will offer MSP options in at least
60 percent of the States;
(2) With respect to the second such
year, the health insurance issuer will
offer the MSP options in at least 70
percent of the States;
(3) With respect to the third such
year, the health insurance issuer will
offer the MSP options in at least 85
percent of the States; and
(4) With respect to each subsequent
year, the health insurance issuer will
offer the MSP options in all States.
(b) Partial coverage within a State. (1)
OPM may enter into a contract with an
MSP issuer even if the MSP issuer’s
MSP options for a State cover fewer
than all the service areas specified for
that State pursuant to § 800.110.
(2) If an issuer offers both an MSP
option and QHP on the same Exchange,
an MSP issuer must offer MSP coverage
in a service area or areas that is equal
to the greater of:
(i) The QHP service area defined by
the issuer or,
(ii) The service area specified for that
State pursuant to § 800.110 covered by
the issuer’s QHP.
(c) Participation in SHOPs. (1) An
MSP issuer’s participation in the
Federally-facilitated SHOP must be
consistent with the requirements for
QHP issuers specified in 45 CFR
156.200(g).
(2) An MSP issuer must comply with
State standards governing participation
in State-based SHOPs, consistent with
§ 800.114. For these State-based SHOP
standards, OPM retains discretion to
allow an MSP issuer to phase-in SHOP
participation in States pursuant to
section 1334(e) of the Affordable Care
Act.
(d) Licensed where offered. OPM may
enter into a contract with an MSP issuer
who is not licensed in every State,
provided that the issuer is licensed in
every State where it offers MSP coverage
through any Exchanges in that State and
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
demonstrates to OPM that it is making
a good faith effort to become licensed in
every State consistent with the
timeframe in paragraph (a) of this
section.
§ 800.105
Benefits.
(a) Package of benefits. (1) An MSP
issuer must offer a package of benefits
that includes the essential health
benefits (EHB) described in section 1302
of the Affordable Care Act for each MSP
option within a State.
(2) The package of benefits referred to
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section must
comply with section 1302 of the
Affordable Care Act, as well as any
applicable standards set by OPM and
any applicable standards set by HHS.
(b) Package of benefits options. (1) An
MSP issuer must offer at least one
uniform package of benefits in each
State that is substantially equal to:
(i) The EHB-benchmark plan in each
State in which it operates; or
(ii) Any EHB-benchmark plan selected
by OPM under paragraph (c) of this
section.
(2) An issuer applying to participate
in the MSP Program may select either or
both of the package of benefits options
described in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section in its application. In each State,
the issuer may choose one EHBbenchmark for each product it offers.
(3) An MSP issuer must comply with
any State standards relating to
substitution of benchmark benefits or
standard benefit designs.
(c) OPM selection of benchmark
plans. (1) The OPM-selected EHBbenchmark plans are the three largest
Federal Employees Health Benefits
(FEHB) Program plan options, as
identified by HHS pursuant to section
1302(b) of the Affordable Care Act, and
as supplemented pursuant to paragraphs
(c)(2) through (c)(4) of this section.
(2) Any EHB-benchmark plan selected
by OPM under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section lacking coverage of pediatric
oral services or pediatric vision services
must be supplemented by the addition
of the entire category of benefits from
the largest Federal Employee Dental and
Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP)
dental or vision plan options,
respectively, pursuant to 45 CFR
156.110(b) and section 1302(b) of the
Affordable Care Act.
(3) In all States where an MSP issuer
uses the OPM-selected EHB-benchmark
plan, the MSP issuer may manage
formularies around the needs of
anticipated or actual users, subject to
approval by OPM.
(4) An MSP issuer must follow State
definitions where the State specifically
defines the habilitative services category
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
pursuant to 45 CFR 156.110(f) or any
Federal definitions where HHS
specifically defines habilitative services.
In the case of any State that does not
define this category and absent a clearly
applicable Federal definition, if any
OPM-selected EHB-benchmark plan
lacks coverage of habilitative services
and devices, OPM may determine what
habilitative services are to be included
in that EHB-benchmark plan.
(5) Any EHB-benchmark plan selected
by OPM under paragraph (c)(1) of this
section must include, for each State, any
State-required benefits enacted before
December 31, 2011, that are included in
the State’s EHB-benchmark plan as
described in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section, or specific to the market in
which the plan is offered.
(d) OPM approval. An MSP issuer’s
package of benefits, including its
formulary, must be submitted for
approval by OPM, which will review a
package of benefits proposed by an MSP
issuer and determine if it is
substantially equal to an EHBbenchmark plan described in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section, pursuant to
standards set forth by OPM and any
applicable standards set forth by HHS,
including 45 CFR 156.115, 156.122, and
156.125.
(e) State payments for additional
State-required benefits. If a State
requires that benefits in addition to the
benchmark package be offered to MSP
enrollees in that State, then pursuant to
section 1334(c)(2) of the Affordable Care
Act, the State must defray the cost of
such additional benefits by making
payments either to the enrollee or to the
MSP issuer on behalf of the enrollee.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.106 Cost-sharing limits, advance
payments of premium tax credits, and costsharing reductions.
(a) Cost-sharing limits. For each MSP
option it offers, an MSP issuer must
ensure that the cost-sharing provisions
of the MSP option complies with
section 1302(c) of the Affordable Care
Act, as well as any applicable standards
set by OPM or HHS.
(b) Advance payments of premium tax
credits and cost-sharing reductions. For
each MSP option it offers, an MSP
issuer must ensure that an eligible
individual receives the benefit of
advance payments of premium tax
credits under section 36B of the Internal
Revenue Code and the cost-sharing
reductions under section 1402 of the
Affordable Care Act. An MSP issuer
must also comply with any applicable
standards set by OPM or HHS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
§ 800.107
Levels of coverage.
(a) Silver and gold levels of coverage
required. An MSP issuer must offer at
least one MSP option at the silver level
of coverage and at least one MSP option
at the gold level of coverage on each
Exchange in which the issuer is certified
to offer an MSP option pursuant to a
contract with OPM.
(b) Bronze or platinum metal levels of
coverage permitted. Pursuant to a
contract with OPM, an MSP issuer may
offer one or more MSP options at the
bronze level of coverage or the platinum
level of coverage, or both, on any
Exchange or SHOP in any State.
(c) Child-only plans. For each level of
coverage, the MSP issuer must offer a
child-only MSP options at the same
level of coverage as any health
insurance coverage offered to
individuals who, as of the beginning of
the plan year, have not attained the age
of 21.
(d) Plan variations for the reduction
or elimination of cost-sharing. An MSP
issuer must comply with section 1402 of
the Affordable Care Act, as well as any
applicable standards set by OPM or
HHS.
(e) OPM approval. An MSP issuer
must submit the levels of coverage plans
and plan variations to OPM for review
and approval by OPM.
§ 800.108
Assessments and user fees.
(a) Discretion to charge assessment
and user fees. Beginning in plan year
2015, OPM may require an MSP issuer
to pay an assessment or user fee as a
condition of participating in the MSP
Program.
(b) Determination of amount. The
amount of the assessment or user fee
charged by OPM for a plan year is the
amount determined necessary by OPM
to meet the costs of OPM’s functions
under the Affordable Care Act for a plan
year, including but not limited to such
functions as entering into contracts
with, certifying, recertifying,
decertifying, and overseeing MSP
options and MSP issuers for that plan
year. The amount of the assessment or
user fee charged by OPM will be offset
against the assessment or user fee
amount required by any State-based
Exchange or Federally-facilitated
Exchange such that the total of all
assessments and user fees paid by the
MSP issuer for the year for the MSP
option shall be no greater than nor less
than the amount of the assessment or
user fee paid by QHP issuers in that
State-based Exchange or Federallyfacilitated Exchange for that year.
(c) Process for collecting MSP
assessment or user fees. OPM may
require an MSP issuer to make payment
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69813
of the MSP Program assessment or user
fee amount directly to OPM, or may
establish other mechanisms for the
collection process.
§ 800.109
Network adequacy.
(a) General requirement. An MSP
issuer must ensure that the provider
network of each of its MSP options, as
available to all enrollees, meets the
following standards:
(1) Maintains a network that is
sufficient in number and types of
providers to assure that all services will
be accessible without unreasonable
delay;
(2) Is consistent with the network
adequacy provisions of section 2702(c)
of the Public Health Service Act; and
(3) Includes essential community
providers in compliance with 45 CFR
156.235.
(b) Provider directory. An MSP issuer
must make its provider directory for an
MSP option available to the Exchange
for publication online pursuant to
guidance from the Exchange and to
potential enrollees in hard copy, upon
request. In the provider directory, an
MSP issuer must identify providers that
are not accepting new patients. An MSP
issuer must also comply with any
additional standards related to provider
directories set by HHS for QHP issuers.
(c) OPM guidance. OPM will issue
guidance containing the criteria and
standards that it will use to determine
the adequacy of a provider network.
§ 800.110
Service area.
An MSP issuer must offer an MSP
option within one or more service areas
in a State defined by each Exchange
pursuant to 45 CFR 155.1055. If an
Exchange permits issuers to define their
service areas, an MSP issuer must obtain
OPM’s approval for its proposed service
areas. Pursuant to § 800.104, OPM may
enter into a contract with an MSP issuer
even if the MSP issuer’s MSP options
for a State cover fewer than all the
service areas specified for that State.
MSP options will follow the same
standards for service areas for QHPs
pursuant to 45 CFR 155.1055.
§ 800.111
Accreditation requirement.
(a) General requirement. An MSP
issuer must be or become accredited
consistently with the requirements for
QHP issuers specified in section 1311 of
the Affordable Care Act and 45 CFR
156.275(a)(1).
(b) Release of survey. An MSP issuer
must authorize the accrediting entity
that accredits the MSP issuer to release
to OPM and to the Exchange a copy of
its most recent accreditation survey,
together with any survey-related
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
69814
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
information that OPM or an Exchange
may require, such as corrective action
plans and summaries of findings.
(c) Timeframe for accreditation. An
MSP issuer that is not accredited as of
the date that it enters into a contract
with OPM must become accredited
within the timeframe established by
OPM as authorized by 45 CFR 155.1045.
§ 800.112
Reporting requirements.
(a) OPM specification of reporting
requirements. OPM will specify the data
and information that must be reported
by an MSP issuer, including data
permitted or required by the Affordable
Care Act and such other data as OPM
may determine necessary for the
oversight and administration of the MSP
Program. OPM will also specify the
form, manner, processes, and frequency
for the reporting of data and
information. The Director may require
that MSP issuers submit claims payment
and enrollment data to facilitate OPM’s
oversight and administration of the MSP
Program in a manner similar to the
FEHB Program.
(b) Quality and quality improvement
standards. An MSP issuer must comply
with any standards required by OPM for
reporting quality and quality
improvement activities, including but
not limited to implementation of a
quality improvement strategy,
disclosure of quality measures to
enrollees and prospective enrollees,
reporting of pediatric quality measures,
and implementation of rating and
enrollee satisfaction surveys, which will
be similar to standards under section
1311(c)(1)(E), (H), and (I), (c)(3), and
(c)(4) of the Affordable Care Act.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.113 Benefit plan material or
information.
(a) Compliance with Federal and State
law. An MSP issuer must comply with
Federal and State laws relating to
benefit plan material or information,
including the provisions of this section
and guidance issued by OPM specifying
its standards, process, and timeline for
approval of benefit plan material or
information.
(b) General standards for MSP
applications and notices. An MSP
issuer must provide all applications and
notices to enrollees in accordance with
the standards described in 45 CFR
155.205(c). OPM may establish
additional standards to meet the needs
of MSP enrollees.
(c) Accuracy. An MSP issuer is
responsible for the accuracy of its
benefit plan material or information.
(d) Truthful, not misleading, no
material omissions, and plain language.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
All benefit plan material or information
must be:
(1) Truthful, not misleading, and
without material omissions; and
(2) Written in plain language, as
defined in section 1311(e)(3)(B) of the
Affordable Care Act.
(e) Uniform explanation of coverage
documents and standardized
definitions. An MSP issuer must comply
with the provisions of section 2715 of
the PHS Act and regulations issued to
implement that section.
(f) OPM review and approval of
benefit plan material or information.
OPM may request an MSP issuer to
submit to OPM benefit plan material or
information, as defined in § 800.20.
OPM reserves the right to review and
approve benefit plan material or
information to ensure that an MSP
issuer complies with Federal and State
laws, and the standards prescribed by
OPM with respect to benefit plan
material or information.
(g) Statement on certification by OPM.
An MSP issuer may include a statement
in its benefit plan material or
information that:
(1) OPM has certified the MSP option
as eligible to be offered on the
Exchange; and
(2) OPM monitors the MSP option for
compliance with all applicable law.
§ 800.114 Compliance with applicable
State law.
(a) Compliance with State law. An
MSP issuer must, with respect to each
of its MSP options, generally comply
with State law pursuant to section
1334(b)(2) of the Affordable Care Act.
However, the MSP options and MSP
issuers are not subject to State laws that:
(1) Are inconsistent with section 1334
of the Affordable Care Act or this part;
(2) Prevent the application of a
requirement of part A of title XXVII of
the PHS Act; or
(3) Prevent the application of a
requirement of title I of the Affordable
Care Act.
(b) Determination of inconsistency.
After consultation with the State and
HHS, OPM reserves the right to
determine, in its judgment, as
effectuated through an MSP Program
contract, these regulations, or OPM
guidance, whether the standards set
forth in paragraph (a) of this section are
satisfied with respect to particular State
laws.
§ 800.115
Level playing field.
An MSP issuer must, with respect to
each of its MSP options, meet the
following requirements in order to
ensure a level playing field, subject to
§ 800.114:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(a) Guaranteed renewal. Guarantee
that an enrollee can renew enrollment
in an MSP option in compliance with
sections 2703 and 2742 of the PHS Act;
(b) Rating. In proposing premiums for
OPM approval, use only the rating
factors permitted under section 2701 of
the PHS Act and State law;
(c) Preexisting conditions. Not impose
any preexisting condition exclusion and
comply with section 2704 of the PHS
Act;
(d) Non-discrimination. Comply with
section 2705 of the PHS Act;
(e) Quality improvement and
reporting. Comply with all Federal and
State quality improvement and
reporting requirements. Quality
improvement and reporting means
quality improvement as defined in
section 1311(h) of the Affordable Care
Act and quality improvement plans or
strategies required under State law, and
quality reporting as defined in section
2717 of the PHS Act and section 1311(g)
of the Affordable Care Act. Quality
improvement also includes activities
such as, but not limited to,
implementation of a quality
improvement strategy, disclosure of
quality measures to enrollees and
prospective enrollees, and reporting of
pediatric quality measures, which will
be similar to standards under section
1311(c)(1)(E), (H), and (I) of the
Affordable Care Act;
(f) Fraud and abuse. Comply with all
Federal and State fraud and abuse laws;
(g) Licensure. Be licensed in every
State in which it offers an MSP option;
(h) Solvency and financial
requirements. Comply with the solvency
standards set by each State in which it
offers an MSP option;
(i) Market conduct. Comply with the
market conduct standards of each State
in which it offers an MSP option;
(j) Prompt payment. Comply with
applicable State law in negotiating the
terms of payment in contracts with its
providers and in making payments to
claimants and providers;
(k) Appeals and grievances. Comply
with Federal standards under section
2719 of the PHS Act for appeals and
grievances relating to adverse benefit
determinations, as described in subpart
F of this part;
(l) Privacy and confidentiality.
Comply with all Federal and State
privacy and security laws and
requirements, including any standards
required by OPM in guidance or
contract, which will be similar to the
standards contained in 45 CFR part 164
and applicable State law; and
(m) Benefit plan material or
information. Comply with Federal and
State law, including § 800.113.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.116
Process for dispute resolution.
(a) Determinations about applicability
of State law under section 1334(b)(2) of
the Affordable Care Act. In the event of
a dispute about the applicability to an
MSP option or MSP issuer of a State
law, the State may request that OPM
reconsider a determination that an MSP
option or MSP issuer is not subject to
such State law.
(b) Required demonstration. A State
making a request under paragraph (a) of
this section must demonstrate that the
State law at issue:
(1) Is not inconsistent with section
1334 of the Affordable Care Act or this
part;
(2) Does not prevent the application of
a requirement of part A of title XXVII of
the PHS Act; and
(3) Does not prevent the application of
a requirement of title I of the Affordable
Care Act.
(c) Request for review. The request
must be in writing and include contact
information, including the name,
telephone number, email address, and
mailing address of the person or persons
whom OPM may contact regarding the
request for review. The request must be
in such form, contain such information,
and be submitted in such manner and
within such timeframe as OPM may
prescribe.
(1) The requester may submit to OPM
any relevant information to support its
request.
(2) OPM may obtain additional
information relevant to the request from
any source as it may, in its judgment,
deem necessary. OPM will provide the
requester with a copy of any additional
information it obtains and provide an
opportunity for the requester to respond
(including by submission of additional
information or explanation).
(3) OPM will issue a written decision
within 60 calendar days after receiving
the written request, or after the due date
for a response under paragraph (c)(2) of
this section, whichever is later, unless a
different timeframe is agreed upon.
(4) OPM’s written decision will
constitute final agency action that is
subject to review under the
Administrative Procedure Act in the
appropriate U.S. district court. Such
review is limited to the record that was
before OPM when OPM made its
decision.
Subpart C—Premiums, Rating Factors,
Medical Loss Ratios, and Risk
Adjustment
§ 800.201
General requirements.
(a) Premium negotiation. OPM will
negotiate annually with an MSP issuer,
on a State by State basis, the premiums
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
for each MSP option offered by that
issuer in that State. Such negotiations
may include negotiations about the costsharing provisions of an MSP option.
(b) Duration. Premiums will remain in
effect for the plan year.
(c) Guidance on rate development.
OPM will issue guidance addressing
methods for the development of
premiums for the MSP Program. That
guidance will follow State rating
standards generally applicable in a
State, to the greatest extent practicable.
(d) Calculation of actuarial value. An
MSP issuer must calculate actuarial
value in the same manner as QHP
issuers under section 1302(d) of the
Affordable Care Act, as well as any
applicable standards set by OPM or
HHS.
(e) OPM rate review process. An MSP
issuer must participate in the rate
review process established by OPM to
negotiate rates for MSP options. The rate
review process established by OPM will
be similar to the process established by
HHS pursuant to section 2794 of the
PHS Act and disclosure and review
standards established under 45 CFR part
154.
(f) State effective rate review. With
respect to its MSP options, an MSP
issuer is subject to a State’s rate review
process, including a State’s Effective
Rate Review Program established by
HHS pursuant to section 2794 of the
PHS Act and 45 CFR part 154. In the
event HHS is reviewing rates for a State
pursuant to section 2794 of the PHS Act,
HHS will defer to OPM’s judgment
regarding the MSP options’ proposed
rate increase. If a State withholds
approval of an MSP option and OPM
determines, in its discretion, that the
State’s action would prevent OPM from
administrating the MSP Program, OPM
retains authority to make the final
decision to approve rates for
participation in the MSP Program,
notwithstanding the absence of State
approval.
(g) Single risk pool. An MSP issuer
must consider all enrollees in an MSP
option to be in the same risk pool as all
enrollees in all other health plans in the
individual market or the small group
market, respectively, in compliance
with section 1312(c) of the Affordable
Care Act, 45 CFR 156.80, and any
applicable Federal or State laws and
regulations implementing that section.
§ 800.202
Rating factors.
(a) Permissible rating factors. In
proposing premiums for each MSP
option, an MSP issuer must use only the
rating factors permitted under section
2701 of the PHS Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69815
(b) Application of variations based on
age or tobacco use. Rating variations
permitted under section 2701 of the
PHS Act must be applied by an MSP
issuer based on the portion of the
premium attributable to each family
member covered under the coverage in
accordance with any applicable Federal
or State laws and regulations
implementing section 2701(a) of the
PHS Act.
(c) Age rating. For age rating, an MSP
issuer must use the ratio established by
the State in which the MSP option is
offered, if it is less than 3:1.
(1) Age bands. An MSP issuer must
use the uniform age bands established
under HHS regulations implementing
section 2701(a) of the PHS Act.
(2) Age curves. An MSP issuer must
use the age curves established under
HHS regulations implementing section
2701(a) of the PHS Act, or age curves
established by a State pursuant to HHS
regulations.
(d) Rating areas. An MSP issuer must
use the rating areas appropriate to the
State in which the MSP option is offered
and established under HHS regulations
implementing section 2701(a) if the PHS
Act.
(e) Tobacco rating. An MSP issuer
must apply tobacco use as a rating factor
in accordance with any applicable
Federal or State laws and regulations
implementing section 2701(a) of the
PHS Act.
(f) Wellness programs. An MSP issuer
must comply with any applicable
Federal or State laws and regulations
implementing section 2705 of the PHS
Act.
§ 800.203
Medical loss ratio.
(a) Required medical loss ratio. An
MSP issuer must attain:
(1) The medical loss ratio (MLR)
required under section 2718 of the PHS
Act and regulations promulgated by
HHS; and
(2) Any MSP-specific MLR that OPM
may set in the best interests of MSP
enrollees or that is necessary to be
consistent with a State’s requirements
with respect to MLR.
(b) Consequences of not attaining
required medical loss ratio. If an MSP
issuer fails to attain an MLR set forth in
paragraph (a) of this section, OPM may
take any appropriate action, including
but not limited to intermediate
sanctions, such as suspension of
marketing, decertifying an MSP option
in one or more States, or terminating an
MSP issuer’s contract pursuant to
§ 800.404.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
69816
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
§ 800.204 Reinsurance, risk corridors, and
risk adjustment.
(a) Transitional reinsurance program.
An MSP issuer must comply with
section 1341 of the Affordable Care Act,
45 CFR part 153, and any applicable
Federal or State regulations under
section 1341 that set forth requirements
to implement the transitional
reinsurance program for the individual
market.
(b) Temporary risk corridors program.
An MSP issuer must comply with
section 1342 of the Affordable Care Act,
45 CFR part 153, and any applicable
Federal regulations under section 1342
that set forth requirements to implement
the risk corridor program.
(c) Risk adjustment program. An MSP
issuer must comply with section 1343 of
the Affordable Care Act, 45 CFR part
153, and any applicable Federal or State
regulations under section 1343 that set
forth requirements to implement the
risk adjustment program.
Subpart D—Application and
Contracting Procedures
§ 800.301
Application process.
(a) Acceptance of applications.
Without regard to 41 U.S.C. 6101(b)–(d),
or any other statute requiring
competitive bidding, OPM may consider
annual applications from health
insurance issuers, including groups of
health insurance issuers as defined in
§ 800.20, to participate in the MSP
Program. If OPM determines that it is
not beneficial for the MSP Program to
consider new issuer applications for an
upcoming year, OPM will issue a notice
to that effect. Each existing MSP issuer
may complete a renewal application
annually.
(b) Form and manner of applications.
An applicant must submit to OPM, in
the form and manner and in accordance
with the timeline specified by OPM, the
information requested by OPM for
determining whether an applicant meets
the requirements of this part.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.302
Review of applications.
(a) Determinations. OPM will
determine if an applicant meets the
requirements of this part. If OPM
determines that an applicant meets the
requirements of this part, OPM may
accept the applicant to enter into
contract negotiations with OPM to
participate in the MSP Program.
(b) Requests for additional
information. OPM may request
additional information from an
applicant before making a decision
about whether to enter into contract
negotiations with that applicant to
participate in the MSP Program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
(c) Declination of application. If, after
reviewing an application to participate
in the MSP Program, OPM declines to
enter into contract negotiations with the
applicant, OPM will inform the
applicant in writing of the reasons for
that decision.
(d) Discretion. The decision whether
to enter into contract negotiations with
a health insurance issuer who has
applied to participate in the MSP
Program is committed to OPM’s
discretion.
(e) Impact on future applications.
OPM’s declination of an application to
participate in the MSP Program will not
preclude the applicant from submitting
an application for a subsequent year to
participate in the MSP Program.
§ 800.303
MSP Program contracting.
(a) Participation in MSP Program. To
become an MSP issuer, the applicant
and the Director or the Director’s
designee must sign a contract that meets
the requirements of this part.
(b) Standard contract. OPM will
establish a standard contract for the
MSP Program.
(c) Premiums. OPM and the applicant
will negotiate the premiums for an MSP
option for each plan year in accordance
with the provisions of subpart C of this
part.
(d) Benefit packages. OPM must
approve the applicant’s benefit packages
for an MSP option.
(e) Additional terms and conditions.
OPM may elect to negotiate with an
applicant such additional terms,
conditions, and requirements that:
(1) Are in the interests of MSP
enrollees; or
(2) OPM determines to be appropriate.
(f) Certification to offer health
insurance coverage.
(1) For each plan year, an MSP
Program contract will specify MSP
options that OPM has certified, the
specific package of benefits authorized
to be offered on each Exchange, and the
premiums to be charged for each
package of benefits on each Exchange.
(2) An MSP issuer may not offer an
MSP option on an Exchange unless its
MSP Program contract with OPM
includes a certification authorizing the
MSP issuer to offer the MSP option on
that Exchange in accordance with
paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
§ 800.304
Term of the contract.
(a) Term of a contract. The term of the
contract will be specified in the MSP
Program contract and must be for a
period of at least the 12 consecutive
months defined as the plan year.
(b) Plan year. The plan year is a
consecutive 12-month period during
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
which an MSP option provides coverage
for health benefits. A plan year may be
a calendar year or otherwise.
§ 800.305
Contract renewal process.
(a) Renewal. To continue participating
in the MSP Program, an MSP issuer
must provide to OPM, in the form and
manner and in accordance with the
timeline prescribed by OPM, the
information requested by OPM for
determining whether the MSP issuer
continues to meet the requirements of
this part.
(b) OPM decision. Subject to
paragraph (c) of this section, OPM will
renew the MSP Program contract of an
MSP issuer who timely submits the
information described in paragraph (a).
(c) OPM discretion not to renew. OPM
may decline to renew the contract of an
MSP issuer if:
(1) OPM and the MSP issuer fail to
agree on premiums and benefits for an
MSP option for the subsequent plan
year;
(2) The MSP issuer has engaged in
conduct described in § 800.404(a); or
(3) OPM determines that the MSP
issuer will be unable to comply with a
material provision of section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act or this part.
(d) Failure to agree on premiums and
benefits. Except as otherwise provided
in this part, if an MSP issuer has
complied with paragraph (a) of this
section and OPM and the MSP issuer
fail to agree on premiums and benefits
for an MSP option on one or more
Exchanges for the subsequent plan year
by the date required by OPM, either
party may provide notice of nonrenewal
pursuant to § 800.306, or OPM may in
its discretion withdraw the certification
of that MSP option on the Exchange or
Exchanges for that plan year. In
addition, if OPM and the MSP issuer fail
to agree on benefits and premiums for
an MSP option on one or more
Exchanges by the date set by OPM and
in the event of no action (no notice of
nonrenewal or renewal) by either party,
the MSP Program contract will be
renewed and the existing premiums and
benefits for that MSP option on that
Exchange or Exchanges will remain in
effect for the subsequent plan year.
§ 800.306
Nonrenewal.
(a) Nonrenewal. Nonrenewal may
pertain to the MSP issuer or the Statelevel issuer. The circumstances under
which nonrenewal may occur are:
(1) Nonrenewal of contract. As used
in this subpart and subpart E of this
part, ‘‘nonrenewal of contract’’ means a
decision by either OPM or an MSP
issuer not to renew an MSP Program
contract.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(2) Nonrenewal of participation. As
used in this subpart and subpart E of
this part, ‘‘nonrenewal of participation’’
means a decision by OPM, an MSP
issuer, or a State-level issuer not to
renew a State-level issuer’s participation
in a MSP Program contract.
(b) Notice required. Either OPM or an
MSP issuer may decline to renew an
MSP Program contract by providing a
written notice of nonrenewal to the
other party.
(c) MSP issuer responsibilities. The
MSP issuer’s written notice of
nonrenewal must be made in
accordance with its MSP Program
contract with OPM. The MSP issuer also
must comply with any requirements
regarding the termination of a plan that
are applicable to a QHP offered on an
Exchange on which the MSP option was
offered, including a requirement to
provide advance written notice of
termination to enrollees. MSP issuers
shall provide written notice to enrollees
in accordance with § 800.404(d).
Subpart E—Compliance
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.401
Contract performance.
(a) General. An MSP issuer must
perform an MSP Program contract with
OPM in accordance with the
requirements of section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act and this part. The
MSP issuer must continue to meet such
requirements while under an MSP
Program contract with OPM.
(b) Specific requirements for issuers.
In addition to the requirements
described in paragraph (a) of this
section, each MSP issuer must:
(1) Have, in the judgment of OPM, the
financial resources to carry out its
obligations under the MSP Program;
(2) Keep such reasonable financial
and statistical records, and furnish to
OPM such reasonable financial and
statistical reports with respect to the
MSP option or the MSP issuer, as may
be requested by OPM;
(3) Permit representatives of OPM
(including the OPM Office of Inspector
General), the U.S. Government
Accountability Office, and any other
applicable Federal Government auditing
entities to audit and examine its records
and accounts that pertain, directly or
indirectly, to the MSP option at such
reasonable times and places as may be
designated by OPM or the U.S.
Government Accountability Office;
(4) Timely submit to OPM a properly
completed and signed novation or
change-of-name agreement in
accordance with subpart 42.12 of 48
CFR part 42;
(5) Perform the MSP Program contract
in accordance with prudent business
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
practices, as described in paragraph (c)
of this section; and
(6) Not perform the MSP Program
contract in accordance with poor
business practices, as described in
paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) Prudent business practices. OPM
will consider an MSP issuer’s specific
circumstances and facts in using its
discretion to determine compliance
with paragraph (b)(5) of this section. For
purposes of paragraph (b)(5) of this
section, prudent business practices
include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(1) Timely compliance with OPM
instructions and directives;
(2) Legal and ethical business and
health care practices;
(3) Compliance with the terms of the
MSP Program contract, regulations, and
statutes;
(4) Timely and accurate adjudication
of claims or rendering of medical
services;
(5) Operating a system for accounting
for costs incurred under the MSP
Program contract, which includes
segregating and pricing MSP option
medical utilization and allocating
indirect and administrative costs in a
reasonable and equitable manner;
(6) Maintaining accurate accounting
reports of costs incurred in the
administration of the MSP Program
contract;
(7) Applying performance standards
for assuring contract quality as outlined
at § 800.402; and
(8) Establishing and maintaining a
system of internal controls that provides
reasonable assurance that:
(i) The provision and payments of
benefits and other expenses comply
with legal, regulatory, and contractual
guidelines;
(ii) MSP funds, property, and other
assets are safeguarded against waste,
loss, unauthorized use, or
misappropriation; and
(iii) Data is accurately and fairly
disclosed in all reports required by
OPM.
(d) Poor business practices. OPM will
consider an MSP issuer’s specific
circumstances and facts in using its
discretion to determine compliance
with paragraph (b)(6) of this section. For
purposes of paragraph (b)(6) of this
section, poor business practices include,
but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Using fraudulent or unethical
business or health care practices or
otherwise displaying a lack of business
integrity or honesty;
(2) Repeatedly or knowingly
providing false or misleading
information in the rate setting process;
(3) Failing to comply with OPM
instructions and directives;
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69817
(4) Having an accounting system that
is incapable of separately accounting for
costs incurred under the contract and/
or that lacks the internal controls
necessary to fulfill the terms of the
contract;
(5) Failing to ensure that the MSP
issuer properly pays or denies claims,
or, if applicable, provides medical
services that are inconsistent with
standards of good medical practice; and
(6) Entering into contracts or
employment agreements with providers,
provider groups, or health care workers
that include provisions or financial
incentives that directly or indirectly
create an inducement to limit or restrict
communication about medically
necessary services to any individual
covered under the MSP Program.
Financial incentives are defined as
bonuses, withholds, commissions, profit
sharing or other similar adjustments to
basic compensation (e.g., service fee,
capitation, salary) which have the effect
of limiting or reducing communication
about appropriate medically necessary
services.
(e) Performance escrow account. OPM
may require MSP issuers to pay an
assessment into an escrow account to
ensure contract compliance and benefit
MSP enrollees.
§ 800.402
Contract quality assurance.
(a) General. This section prescribes
general policies and procedures to
ensure that services acquired under
MSP Program contracts conform to the
contract’s quality requirements.
(b) Internal controls. OPM may
periodically evaluate the contractor’s
system of internal controls under the
quality assurance program required by
the contract and will acknowledge in
writing if the system is inconsistent
with the requirements set forth in the
contract. OPM’s reviews do not
diminish the contractor’s obligation to
implement and maintain an effective
and efficient system to apply the
internal controls.
(c) Performance standards. (1) OPM
will issue specific performance
standards for MSP Program contracts
and will inform MSP issuers of the
applicable performance standards prior
to negotiations for the contract year.
OPM may benchmark its standards
against standards generally accepted in
the insurance industry. OPM may
authorize nationally recognized
standards to be used to fulfill this
requirement.
(2) MSP issuers must comply with the
performance standards issued pursuant
to this section.
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
69818
§ 800.403
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Fraud and abuse.
(a) Program required. An MSP issuer
must conduct a program to assess its
vulnerability to fraud and abuse as well
as to address such vulnerabilities.
(b) Fraud detection system. An MSP
issuer must operate a system designed
to detect and eliminate fraud and abuse
by employees and subcontractors of the
MSP issuer, by providers furnishing
goods or services to MSP enrollees, and
by MSP enrollees.
(c) Submission of information. An
MSP issuer must provide to OPM such
information or assistance as may be
necessary for the agency to carry out the
duties and responsibilities, including
those of the Office of Inspector General
as specified in sections 4 and 6 of the
Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C.
App.). An MSP issuer must provide any
requested information in the form,
manner, and timeline prescribed by
OPM.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.404
Compliance actions.
(a) Causes for OPM compliance
actions. The following constitute cause
for OPM to impose a compliance action
described in paragraph (b) of this
section against an MSP issuer:
(1) Failure by the MSP issuer to meet
the requirements set forth in
§ 800.401(a) and (b);
(2) An MSP issuer’s sustained failure
to perform the MSP Program contract in
accordance with prudent business
practices, as described in § 800.401(c);
(3) A pattern of poor conduct or
evidence of poor business practices
such as those described in § 800.401(d);
or
(4) Such other violations of law or
regulation as OPM may determine,
including pursuant to its authority
under §§ 800.102 and 800.114.
(b) Compliance actions. (1) OPM may
impose a compliance action against an
MSP issuer at any time during the
contract term if it determines that the
MSP issuer is not in compliance with
applicable law, this part, or the terms of
its contract with OPM.
(2) Compliance actions may include,
but are not limited to:
(i) Establishment and implementation
of a corrective action plan;
(ii) Imposition of intermediate
sanctions, such as suspensions of
marketing;
(iii) Performance incentives;
(iv) Reduction of service area or areas;
(v) Withdrawal of the certification of
the MSP option or options offered on
one or more Exchanges;
(vi) Nonrenewal of participation;
(vii) Nonrenewal of contract; and
(viii) Withdrawal of approval or
termination of the MSP Program
contract.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
(c) Notice of compliance action. (1)
OPM must notify an MSP issuer in
writing of a compliance action under
this section. Such notice must indicate
the specific compliance action
undertaken and the reason for the
compliance action.
(2) For compliance actions listed in
§ 800.404(b)(2)(v) through (b)(2)(viii),
such notice must include a statement
that the MSP issuer is entitled to request
a reconsideration of OPM’s
determination to impose a compliance
action pursuant to § 800.405.
(3) Upon imposition of a compliance
action listed in paragraphs (b)(2)(iv)
through (b)(2)(vii) of this section, OPM
must notify the State Insurance
Commissioner(s) and Exchange officials
in the State or States in which the
compliance action is effective.
(d) Notice to enrollees. If the contract
is terminated, if OPM withdraws
certification of an MSP option, or if a
State-level issuer’s participation in the
MSP Program contract is not renewed,
as described in §§ 800.306 and
800.404(b)(2) or any situation in which
an MSP option is no longer available to
enrollees, the MSP issuer must comply
with any State or Exchange
requirements regarding discontinuing a
particular type of coverage that are
applicable to a QHP offered on the
Exchange on which the MSP option was
offered including a requirement to
provide advance written notice before
the coverage will be discontinued. If a
State or Exchange does not have
requirements about advance notice to
enrollees, the MSP issuer must inform
current MSP enrollees in writing of the
discontinuance of the MSP option no
later than 90 days prior to discontinuing
the MSP option, unless OPM determines
that there is good cause for less than 90
days’ notice.
(e) Definition. As used in this subpart,
‘‘termination’’ means a decision by OPM
to cancel an MSP Program contract prior
to the end of its contract term. The term
includes OPM’s withdrawal of approval
of an MSP Program contract.
§ 800.405
actions.
Reconsideration of compliance
(a) Right to request reconsideration.
An MSP issuer may request that OPM
reconsider a determination to impose
one of the following compliance actions:
(1) Withdrawal of the certification of
the MSP option or options offered on
one or more Exchanges;
(2) Nonrenewal of participation;
(3) Nonrenewal of contract; or
(4) Termination of the MSP Program
contract.
(b) Request for reconsideration and/or
hearing. (1) An MSP issuer with a right
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to request reconsideration specified in
paragraph (a) of this section may request
a hearing in which OPM will reconsider
its determination to impose a
compliance action.
(2) A request under this section must
be in writing and contain contact
information, including the name,
telephone number, email address, and
mailing address of the person or persons
whom OPM may contact regarding a
request for a hearing with respect to the
reconsideration. The request must be in
such form, contain such information,
and be submitted in such manner as
OPM may prescribe.
(3) The request must be received by
OPM within 15 calendar days after the
date of the MSP issuer’s receipt of the
notice of compliance action. The MSP
issuer may request that OPM’s
reconsideration allow a representative
of the MSP issuer to appear personally
before OPM.
(4) A request under this section must
include a detailed statement of the
reasons that the MSP issuer disagrees
with OPM’s imposition of the
compliance action, and may include any
additional information that will assist
OPM in rendering a final decision under
this section.
(5) OPM may obtain additional
information relevant to the request from
any source as it may, in its judgment,
deem necessary. OPM will provide the
MSP issuer with a copy of any
additional information it obtains and
provide an opportunity for the MSP
issuer to respond (including by
submitting additional information or
explanation).
(6) OPM’s reconsideration and
hearing, if requested, may be conducted
by the Director or a representative
designated by the Director who did not
participate in the initial decision that is
the subject of the request for review.
(c) Notice of final decision. OPM will
notify the MSP issuer, in writing, of
OPM’s final decision on the MSP
issuer’s request for reconsideration and
the specific reasons for that final
decision. OPM’s written decision will
constitute final agency action that is
subject to review under the
Administrative Procedure Act in the
appropriate U.S. district court. Such
review is limited to the record that was
before OPM when it made its decision.
Subpart F—Appeals by Enrollees of
Denials of Claims for Payment or
Service
§ 800.501
General requirements.
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this
subpart:
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 226 / Monday, November 24, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(1) Adverse benefit determination has
the meaning given that term in 45 CFR
147.136(a)(2)(i).
(2) Claim means a request for:
(i) Payment of a health-related bill; or
(ii) Provision of a health-related
service or supply.
(b) Applicability. This subpart applies
to enrollees and to other individuals or
entities who are acting on behalf of an
enrollee and who have the enrollee’s
specific written consent to pursue a
remedy of an adverse benefit
determination.
§ 800.502
appeals.
MSP issuer internal claims and
(a) Processes. MSP issuers must
comply with the internal claims and
appeals processes applicable to group
health plans and health insurance
issuers under 45 CFR 147.136(b).
(b) Timeframes and notice of
determination. An MSP issuer must
provide written notice to an enrollee of
its determination on a claim brought
under paragraph (a) of this section
according to the timeframes and
notification rules under 45 CFR
147.136(b) and (e), including the
timeframes for urgent claims. If the MSP
issuer denies a claim (or a portion of the
claim), the enrollee may appeal the
adverse benefit determination to the
MSP issuer in accordance with 45 CFR
147.136(b).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 800.503
External review.
(a) External review by OPM. OPM will
conduct external review of adverse
benefit determinations using a process
similar to OPM review of disputed
claims under 5 CFR 890.105(e), subject
to the standards and timeframes set
forth in 45 CFR 147.136(d).
(b) Notice. Notices to MSP enrollees
regarding external review under
paragraph (a) of this section must
comply with 45 CFR 147.136(e), and are
subject to review and approval by OPM.
(c) Issuer obligation. An MSP issuer
must pay a claim or provide a healthrelated service or supply pursuant to
OPM’s final decision or the final
decision of an independent review
organization without delay, regardless
of whether the plan or issuer intends to
seek judicial review of the external
review decision and unless or until
there is a judicial decision otherwise.
§ 800.504
Judicial review.
(a) OPM’s written decision under the
external review process established
under § 800.503(a) will constitute final
agency action that is subject to review
under the Administrative Procedure Act
in the appropriate U.S. district court. A
decision made by an independent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 21, 2014
Jkt 235001
review organization under the process
established under § 800.503(a) is not
within OPM’s discretion and therefore
is not final agency action.
(b) Judicial review under paragraph
(a) of this section is limited to the record
that was before OPM when OPM made
its decision.
Subpart G—Miscellaneous
§ 800.601
Reservation of authority.
OPM reserves the right to implement
and supplement these regulations with
written operational guidelines.
§ 800.602 Consumer choice with respect
to certain services.
(a) Assured availability of varied
coverage. Consistent with § 800.104,
OPM will ensure that at least one of the
MSP issuers on each Exchange in each
State offers at least one MSP option that
does not provide coverage of services
described in section 1303(b)(1)(B)(i) of
the Affordable Care Act.
(b) State opt-out. An MSP issuer may
not offer abortion coverage in any State
where such coverage of abortion
services is prohibited by State law.
(c) Notice to enrollees—(1) Notice of
exclusion. The MSP issuer must provide
notice to consumers prior to enrollment
when non-excepted abortion services
are not a covered benefit in a State
where such coverage of such abortion
services is permitted by State law, in the
form, manner, and timeline prescribed
by OPM.
(2) Notice of coverage. If an MSP
issuer chooses to offer an MSP option
that covers non-excepted abortion
services, in addition to an MSP option
that does not provide coverage for these
services, the MSP issuer must provide
notice to consumers prior to enrollment
that non-excepted abortion services are
a covered benefit, in a manner
consistent with 45 CFR 147.200(a)(3), to
meet the requirements of 45 CFR
156.280(f). OPM may provide guidance
on the form, manner, and timeline for
this notice.
(3) OPM review and approval of
notices. OPM may require an MSP
issuer to submit to OPM such notices.
OPM reserves the right to review and
approve these consumer notices to
ensure that an MSP issuer complies
with Federal and State laws, and the
standards prescribed by OPM with
respect to § 800.602.
§ 800.603
Disclosure of information.
(a) Disclosure to certain entities. OPM
may provide information relating to the
activities of MSP issuers or State-level
issuers to a State Insurance
Commissioner or Director of a Statebased Exchange.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69819
(b) Conditions of when to disclose.
OPM shall only make a disclosure
described in this section to the extent
that such disclosure is:
(1) Necessary or appropriate to permit
OPM’s Director, a State Insurance
Commissioner, or Director of a Statebased Exchange to administer and
enforce laws applicable to an MSP
issuer or State-level issuer over which it
has jurisdiction, or
(2) Otherwise in the best interests of
enrollees or potential enrollees in MSP
options.
(c) Confidentiality of information.
OPM will take appropriate steps to
cause the recipient of this information
to preserve the information as
confidential.
[FR Doc. 2014–27793 Filed 11–21–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–63–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
RIN 0648–BE55
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery Off the Southern
Atlantic States; Amendment 29
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
The South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council) has
submitted Amendment 29 to the Fishery
Management Plan for the SnapperGrouper Fishery of the South Atlantic
Region (FMP) for review, approval, and
implementation by NMFS. Amendment
29 proposes actions to update the
Council’s acceptable biological catch
(ABC) control rule to incorporate
methodology for determining the ABC
of unassessed species; adjust ABCs for
14 unassessed snapper-grouper species
through application of the updated ABC
control rule; adjust annual catch limits
(ACLs) and recreational annual catch
targets (ACTs)for four snapper-grouper
species and three species complexes
based on revised ABCs; and revise
management measures for gray
triggerfish to modify minimum size
limits, establish a commercial split
season, and specify a commercial trip
limit.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 23, 2015.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24NOP1.SGM
24NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69802-69819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27793]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
45 CFR Part 800
RIN 3206-AN12
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Establishment of the
Multi-State Plan Program for the Affordable Insurance Exchanges
AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a
proposed rule to implement modifications to the Multi-State Plan (MSP)
Program based on the experience of the Program to date. OPM established
the MSP Program pursuant to section 1334 of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010, referred to collectively as the Affordable
Care Act. This proposed rule clarifies the approach used to enforce the
applicable requirements of the Affordable Care Act with respect to
health insurance issuers that contract with OPM to offer MSP options.
This proposed rule amends MSP standards related to coverage area,
benefits, and certain contracting provisions under section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act. This document also makes non-substantive technical
changes.
DATES: Comments are due on or before December 24, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Regulation Identifier
Number (RIN) 3206-AN12 using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail, Hand Delivery or Courier: National Healthcare Operations,
Healthcare and Insurance, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E
Street NW., Room 3468, Washington, DC 20415.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cameron Stokes by telephone at (202)
606-2128, by FAX at (202) 606-4430, or by email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act (Pub. L. 111-148), as amended by the Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-152), together known as the
Affordable Care Act, provides for the establishment of Affordable
Insurance Exchanges, or ``Exchanges'' (also called Health Insurance
Marketplaces, or ``Marketplaces''), where individuals and small
businesses can purchase qualified coverage. The Exchanges provide
competitive marketplaces for individuals and small employers to compare
available private health insurance options based on price, quality, and
other factors. The Exchanges enhance competition in the health
insurance market, improve choice of affordable health insurance, and
give individuals and small businesses purchasing power comparable to
that of large businesses. The Multi-State Plan (MSP) Program was
created pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act to increase
competition by offering high-quality health insurance coverage sold in
multiple States on the Exchanges. The U.S. Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is proposing this regulation to modify the standards
set forth for the MSP Program under 45 CFR part 800 that was published
as final rule on March 11, 2013 (78 FR 15560). This proposed rule will
clarify OPM's intent in administering the Program as well as make
regulatory changes in order to expand issuer participation and
offerings in the Program to meet the goal of increasing competition.
Abbreviations
EHB Essential Health Benefits
FEHBA Federal Employees Health Benefits Act
FEHB Program Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
MSP Multi-State Plan
NAIC National Association of Insurance Commissioners
OPM U.S. Office of Personnel Management
PHS Act Public Health Service Act
QHP Qualified Health Plan
SHOP Small Business Health Options Program
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Affordable Insurance Exchanges
B. Objectives of the Multi-State Plan Program
C. Review of U.S. Office of Personnel Management's Role in
Contracting Under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
D. Overview of the Multi-State Plan Program's Statutory
Requirements
E. Stakeholder Interaction
II. Proposed Regulatory Approach
A. Overview of Regulatory Approach
B. Governing Law
III. Provisions of the Proposed Regulation
A. General Provisions and Definitions
B. Multi-State Plan Issuer Requirements
C. Application and Contracting Procedures
D. Compliance
E. Miscellaneous
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
VII. Unfunded Mandates
VIII. Federalism
I. Background
Section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act created the Multi-State
Plan (MSP) Program to foster competition in the individual and small
group health insurance markets on the Exchanges (also called Health
Insurance Exchanges or Marketplaces) based on price, quality, and
benefit delivery. The Affordable Care Act directs the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) to contract with private health insurance
issuers to offer at least two MSP options on each of the Exchanges in
the States and the District of Columbia.\1\ \2\ The law
[[Page 69803]]
allows MSP issuers to phase in coverage.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Multi-State Plan option or MSP option means a discrete
pairing of a package of benefits with particular cost sharing (which
does not include premium rates or premium rate quotes) that is
offered under a contract with OPM.
\2\ Note that the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
(HHS) determined that State-specific requirements in the ACA do not
apply to U.S. territories, and thus territories are not required to
establish Exchanges. See Letter to Commissioner Gregory R. Francis,
Division of Banking & Insurance, St. Croix, Virgin Islands, from
Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services, July 16, 2014.
\3\ Multi-State Plan issuer or MSP issuer means a health
insurance issuer or group of issuers that has a contract with OPM to
offer MSP options pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable Care
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2014 plan year, OPM contracted with one group of issuers to
offer more than 150 MSP options in 31 States, including the District of
Columbia. Approximately 371,000 individuals have enrolled in an MSP
option to date. OPM added a second group of issuers for plan year 2015
and the MSP Program will expand into five additional States for a total
of 36 States. The Program will offer more than 200 MSP options on the
Exchanges during the 2015 plan year to further competition and expand
choices available to individuals, families, and small businesses.
A. Affordable Insurance Exchanges
The Affordable Care Act established the Exchanges where individuals
and small businesses can purchase qualified coverage. The Exchanges
provide competitive marketplaces for individuals and small businesses
to compare health insurance coverage based on price, quality, and other
factors. The goals of the Exchanges are to enhance competition in the
health insurance market, improve choice of affordable health insurance,
and provide individuals and small businesses purchasing power
comparable to that of large businesses.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to modify the MSP Program
final rule published March 11, 2013.\4\ Proposed changes to the
regulation include clarifications to the process by which OPM
administers the MSP Program, pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable
Care Act, and revisions to select sections of the regulation that
establish standards and requirements applicable to MSP options and MSP
issuers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Establishment of
the Multi-State Plan Program for the Affordable Insurance Exchanges,
78 FR 15560 (Mar. 11, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Objectives of the Multi-State Plan Program
MSP options were among several private health insurance coverage
options offered on the Exchanges beginning in 2014. MSP options differ
from QHPs in that MSP options are certified by OPM to be offered on an
Exchange through the MSP Program application process and signing of a
contract with OPM. In administering the MSP Program, OPM focuses on
several important objectives:
To ensure a choice of at least two options for high-
quality health insurance coverage on each Exchange;
To promote competition on the Exchanges to the benefit of
all consumers;
To provide strong, effective contractual oversight of the
issuers that offer MSP options; and
To work cooperatively with States and HHS to ensure a
level playing field between QHP issuers and MSP issuers.
Pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act, the Director
of OPM sets standards for the MSP Program. Under section 1334(b)(2),
MSP issuers generally are also required to comply with requirements of
State law not inconsistent with requirements in section 1334. OPM
accordingly aligns standards for the MSP Program with the standards set
for QHPs and QHP issuers by States, HHS, and the Exchanges. In certain
unique and specific circumstances, MSP Program standards differ from
QHP requirements. OPM will continue to ensure that to the extent that
any of the rules governing MSP options and MSP issuers differ from
those governing QHPs and QHP issuers, the standards afford the MSP
options and MSP issuers neither a competitive advantage nor
disadvantage with respect to other plans offered on the Exchange. OPM
will continue to administer the MSP Program in a manner that is
sensitive to the significant State and Federal interests affected by
the MSP Program and informed by input from a broad array of
stakeholders. Accordingly, OPM appreciates the ongoing coordination and
cooperation with States and HHS in the administration of the MSP
Program.
C. Review of OPM's Role in Contracting Under the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program
Enacted in 1959, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act (FEHBA)
established health benefits for Federal employees, annuitants, and
their dependents. More than eight million employees, annuitants, and
their family members have coverage under the Federal Employees Health
Benefits (FEHB) Program. Enrollees can choose fee-for-service plans
with preferred providers, local Health Maintenance Organizations,
consumer-driven health plans, or high-deductible health plans in the
FEHB Program. Among these options are six nationwide plans, each of
which offers coverage in all 50 States and the District of Columbia.
For the 2014 and 2015 plan years, OPM negotiated with issuers to
participate in the MSP Program. The process was guided by our
experience in the FEHB Program, although it differed in certain
respects from the FEHB Program process to account for the differences
between the large group market, where OPM solely operated prior to the
MSP Program, and the individual and small group markets served by the
Exchanges.
D. Overview of the MSP Program's Statutory Requirements
Section 1334(a)(1) of the Affordable Care Act requires OPM to
``enter into contracts with health insurance issuers, (which may
include a group of health insurance issuers affiliated either by common
ownership and control or by the common use of a nationally licensed
service mark) . . . to offer at least 2 multi-State qualified health
plans through each Exchange in each State.'' \5\ The Director has the
authority to implement and administer the MSP Program ``in a manner
similar to the manner in which the Director implements the contracting
provisions with respect to carriers under the Federal Employees Health
Benefit Program.'' \6\ Further, OPM may enter into these contracts
without regard to competitive bidding laws.\7\ Each MSP Program
contract must be for a term of at least one year, but can be
automatically renewable in the absence of a notice of termination from
either the MSP issuer or OPM.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(1).
\6\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(4).
\7\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(1).
\8\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The statute grants to OPM the authority to certify MSP options.\9\
Any MSP options offered under a contract negotiated with OPM are
``deemed to be certified by an Exchange for purposes of section
1311(d)(4)(A)'' of the Affordable Care Act and would not need to apply
separately for certification on each Exchange,\10\ as outlined at 45
CFR 155.1010(b)(1). The Director is authorized to withdraw approval of
an MSP Program contract after notice and opportunity for a hearing.\11\
The Director also has the authority to negotiate with each MSP issuer
``(A) a medical loss ratio; (B) a profit margin; (C) the premiums to be
charged; and (D) such other terms and conditions of coverage as are in
the interests of enrollees in such plans.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(d).
\10\ Id.
\11\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(7).
\12\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MSP issuers are required to be licensed in each State in which they
offer an MSP option \13\ and be ``subject
[[Page 69804]]
to all requirements of State law not inconsistent with this section
[1334], including the standards and requirements that a State imposes
that do not prevent the application of a requirement of part A of title
XXVII of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) or a requirement of
this title [I of the Affordable Care Act].'' \14\ The Affordable Care
Act directs that MSP issuers must comply with the minimum standards for
FEHB Program carriers under section 8902(e) of title 5 of the United
States Code to the extent that the standards do not conflict with
provisions of title I of the Affordable Care Act.\15\ Congress also
authorized OPM to establish additional standards for MSP options that
OPM, in consultation with HHS, deems ``appropriate.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(b)(2).
\14\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(b)(2).
\15\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(b)(3).
\16\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Stakeholder Interaction
To assess the level of interest in the MSP Program, and to
ascertain feedback from stakeholders about the program, OPM issued a
Request for Information June 16, 2011.\17\ OPM received 19 responses
representing the views of 39 groups and organizations. Responses came
from health insurance issuers (including issuers of dental and vision
insurance), employer organizations, labor organizations, consumer
groups, patient organizations, and provider associations. On December
5, 2012, OPM published a notice of proposed rulemaking (77 FR 72582)
establishing the MSP Program at part 800 of title 45, Code of Federal
Regulations. OPM received about 350 comments from a wide variety of
entities and individuals. Since publishing the final rule, OPM
conducted presentations and met with numerous stakeholders to seek
feedback on the implementation of the MSP Program. Stakeholder groups
included representatives from the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC), States, tribal entities, consumer advocacy
groups, health insurance issuers, provider associations, and trade
groups. OPM also convened groups of individuals--representing the
general public as well as consumer advocates--to solicit input on
branding and marketing of the MSP Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The Request for Information is available at https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=677e422dd3f2bc983cb985eb73995b63&tab=core&_cview=1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM is also in the process of establishing an MSP Program Advisory
Board, the purpose of which will be to ``provide recommendations on the
activities'' of the MSP Program.\18\ A ``significant percentage of the
members'' of the MSP Program Advisory Board will be enrollees in an MSP
option or representatives of such enrollees.\19\ Members of the MSP
Program Advisory Board will exchange information, ideas, and
recommendations regarding OPM's administration of the MSP Program. OPM
values the participation of diverse stakeholders and encourages them to
submit comments on this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Affordable Care Act section 1334(h).
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Proposed Regulatory Approach
A. Overview of Regulatory Approach
OPM's approach to the development of this proposed regulation seeks
to:
Support a program that will attract additional issuers and
thus, offer a greater selection of MSP options on each Exchange in
every State and the District of Columbia.
Balance State and Federal regulatory interests in a manner
that will enable MSP issuers to offer viable plans on the Exchanges.
Ensure a level playing field such that neither MSP options
nor plans offered by non-MSP issuers are advantaged or disadvantaged on
the Exchanges.
OPM seeks comment on whether these proposed changes to this
regulation satisfy our goals. We are republishing the unchanged
sections of the regulation to provide context for the proposed changes
as well as to include non-substantive technical corrections.
B. Governing Law
The Affordable Care Act generally requires that the MSP Program be
governed by all State and Federal laws that apply to QHPs. The Act,
however, grants discretion to the Director to administer the MSP
Program in a manner that fulfills OPM's statutory responsibility to
ensure that there are at least two issuers offering MSP options on each
Exchange in every State and the District of Columbia. OPM recognizes
that potential MSP issuers seek administrative simplicity and some
uniformity of standards in the MSP Program. Accordingly, in unusual
circumstances, it may be necessary for the Director to adopt standards
or requirements for the MSP Program that differ from standards and
requirements applicable to QHPs under either State or Federal law. This
proposed regulation, however, reflects the Director's continued
intention for the MSP options and MSP issuers to generally adhere to
all State and Federal laws applicable to QHPs and QHP issuers, except
to the extent any such laws are inconsistent with section 1334. We
propose to continue to implement these regulations in OPM guidance and
OPM's contracts with MSP issuers.
III. Provisions of the Proposed Regulation
A. Subpart A--General Provisions and Definitions
Definitions (Sec. 800.20)
We seek comments on a definition for ``group of issuers'' that was
defined in the final rule. We are specifically interested in whether
this definition allows for alternative structures, such as
decentralized health insurance issuers or organizations, to join
together as potential applicants to offer MSP options. Under the
definition in the MSP Program final rule, a ``group of issuers,'' for
purposes of the MSP Program, may include: (1) A group of health
insurance issuers who are affiliated either by common ownership and
control or by common use of a nationally licensed service mark (as
defined in Sec. 800.20); or (2) an affiliation of health insurance
issuers and an entity that is not an issuer but owns a nationally
licensed service mark.\20\ We are making an editorial correction to
this definition under (1) to state that ``health insurance issuers that
are affiliated.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 78 FR 15588.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We propose to add the definition for ``Multi-State Plan option,''
which may also be referred to as ``MSP option.'' We propose the
definition of ``MSP option'' as a discrete pairing of a package of
benefits with particular cost sharing (which does not include premium
rates or premium rate quotes) that is offered pursuant to a contract
with OPM pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act and meets
the requirements of 45 CFR part 800. We also propose to remove the
definition of ``Multi-State Plan.'' The term ``Multi-State Plan
option'' is more precise and avoids the confusion of the varying
definitions of the word ``plan'' in the context of health insurance. In
the past two years, OPM refined how to use the term ``Multi-State
Plan.'' It is our intention to not apply the term ``Multi-State Plan''
as a general concept, but instead as a specific descriptor used under
this Program. OPM registered the term ``Multi-State Plan'' as a mark
with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,\21\ and we intend to enforce
its exclusive use under this Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ U.S. Reg. No. 4599136.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also propose to add a definition for State-level issuer. This
definition is consistent with the statutory concept of
[[Page 69805]]
contracting with a group of issuers, and our experience reviewing MSP
applications and negotiating contracts with MSP issuers. We propose to
define a State-level issuer as a health insurance issuer designated by
the MSP issuer to offer an MSP option or MSP options. The State-level
issuer may offer health insurance coverage through one or more MSP
options in all or part of one or more States.
OPM invites comments on the proposed changes to the definitions
under 45 CFR 800.20.
B. Subpart B--Multi-State Plan Issuer Requirements
Phased Expansion: Coverage in All States; Coverage State-Wide; and SHOP
(Sec. 800.104)
Section 1334(e) of the Affordable Care Act provides for OPM to
phase expansion of an issuer's participation in the MSP Program. In the
final rule, OPM largely codified the statutory language for the phase-
in standards and set standards for coverage within a State,
participation in the Small Business Health Insurance Options Program
(SHOP), and licensure. Since the publication of the final rule, OPM
gained valuable insight and feedback from MSP issuers and potential MSP
issuer applicants.
Coverage in All States
Under Sec. 800.104(a) of the final rule, OPM established a
standard that it may enter into a contract with a health insurance
issuer to offer MSP options if the health insurance issuer agrees to a
phased expansion of coverage in States. We request comment on how we
may expand participation in the Program to meet the goal of increasing
competition while balancing consumers' needs for coverage across an
entire State. OPM conducted outreach to potential MSP issuers and is
engaged in ongoing discussions with current MSP issuers to address
expansion of access to MSP options for consumers throughout the
country. These issuers have expressed significant concern about the
challenges of rapidly expanding access to MSP coverage both within and
across State lines.
The text of section 1334 is clear in its intent that the primary
purpose of the MSP Program is to promote competition on Exchanges by
contracting with issuers to offer coverage in each State. Section 1334
contemplates interest from private health insurance issuers in
participating in the Program; however, there is no requirement for
health insurance issuers to participate in the Program. The statute
sets forth standards to guide the exercise of this contracting
authority, noting that section 1334(b)(1) contemplates offering
coverage in every State and the District of Columbia, and outlining a
framework within which participation in the MSP Program is a feasible
and attractive business activity. Such standards include the provisions
under subsections (b) and (e) on offering coverage in every State. OPM
intends to ensure that MSP coverage is available as expansively and as
soon as practicable, but recognizes the operational challenges issuers
may face.
OPM has discretion over how we may implement and expand the MSP
Program. We request comment on timeframes and other appropriate
parameters within which an MSP issuer could reasonably expand
participation in the Program. For example, a MSP issuer may be expected
to expand to a certain number of states within a specified timeframe.
In addition, we request comment on how OPM may encourage MSP issuers to
expedite their participation on the Exchanges in which there is limited
competition. At this time, we do not propose any changes to the
regulatory text.
State-Wide Coverage
The final rule established a standard for MSP coverage in a State
under Sec. 800.104(b) that permits OPM to enter into a contract with
an issuer that offers coverage in part of a State, but not necessarily
the entire State. Most, but not all, of the MSP options available to
consumers in plan years 2014 and 2015 provide coverage statewide.
In some circumstances, issuers in particular States have not
consistently been able to offer statewide MSP coverage. Based on
discussions with potential MSP issuers, we believe some of the
challenges to providing statewide coverage in all States will continue
to impede expansion or participation in the Program. One of these
challenges is the licensing agreements for use of a nationally licensed
service mark among the group of issuers participating in the MSP
Program.\22\ Section 1334 requires that a group of issuers offering MSP
coverage must be affiliated in one of a few specific ways, including
common use of a nationally licensed service mark. Antitrust and other
laws that limit the permissible scope of interaction among issuers may
make it difficult for a group of issuers under the MSP Program to
coordinate nationally. OPM is sensitive to these constraints and
recognizes that they may hinder development and implementation of
issuers' plans to offer statewide MSP coverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 45 CFR 800.20. (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM is committed to a goal of statewide coverage in the MSP
Program, and intends to continue working with MSP issuers and potential
MSP issuers to develop productive and ambitious approaches to achieving
statewide coverage. In clarifying the status of the Program and how we
are implementing the standards set under Sec. 800.104, we propose to
delete the standard for an MSP issuer to submit a plan to become
statewide. In lieu of requiring a plan, OPM intends to negotiate with
MSP issuers to determine their MSP coverage area. In the MSP Program
contract negotiation process, we will consider the MSP issuers'
capacity to provide statewide coverage. OPM will take into account many
factors when assessing an MSP issuer's capacity for offering statewide
coverage (e.g., other business commitments, financials, Exchange QHP
standards, and OPM's dialogue with State regulators). In addition, OPM
will assess consumers' needs for coverage, including ensuring that MSP
issuers' proposed service areas have been established without regard to
racial, ethnic, language, or health status-related factors listed in
section 2705(a) of the PHS Act, or other factors that exclude specific
high-utilizing, high-cost, or medically underserved populations.
SHOP Coverage
The final rule established flexibility in SHOP participation for
MSP issuers in Sec. 800.104(c) by establishing a policy for
participation consistent with standards set for QHP issuers.
Specifically, we adopted standards that require MSP issuers to
generally comply with standards in 45 CFR 156.200(g) and with State
standards for SHOP participation if the State has set a standard that
requires QHP issuers to participate. This policy provided OPM
discretion to provide MSP issuers flexibility during the initial years
of the Program to phase into the SHOP in a State-based Exchange. OPM
provided that an MSP issuer may meet the requirements of 45 CFR
156.200(g)(3) if a State-level issuer or any other issuer in the same
issuer group affiliated with an MSP issuer provides coverage on the
Federally-facilitated SHOP. We discussed this policy in-depth in the
final rule.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 78 FR 15565.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1334 requires OPM to contract for coverage to be offered on
each Exchange in each State, offering individual or small group
coverage.
[[Page 69806]]
Based on our current experience implementing the Program, a number
of challenges prevent issuer participation in the MSP Program,
including timing and resources. Very few MSP issuers have offered MSP
SHOP options in these initial years of the Program. We solicit comment
on when MSP issuers should be required to participate on the SHOPs.
Benefits (Sec. 800.105)
The final rule adopted requirements in Sec. 800.105(a) that an MSP
issuer must offer a uniform package of benefits for each MSP option
within a State and that the package of benefits must comply with
section 1302 of the Affordable Care Act, as well as standards set by
OPM and any applicable standards set by HHS.
In Sec. 800.105(b), OPM finalized a rule that allowed MSP issuers
to offer a package of benefits in all States that is substantially
equal to either (1) each State's Essential Health Benefits (EHB)-
benchmark plan in each State in which it operates; or (2) any EHB-
benchmark plan selected by OPM. In response to comments received on the
proposed rule, OPM clarified that the option chosen must be applied
uniformly in each State in which the MSP issuer proposes to offer MSP
options.
OPM continues to conduct outreach to potential MSP issuers and
encourages ongoing discussions with current MSP issuers in hopes of
expanding the Program. OPM interprets the discretion afforded to the
Director under section 1334(a) of the Affordable Care Act, such that he
or she may administer the Program in a way to attract issuers to the
Program and grow the Program to meet the goal of increasing
competition. By applying the Director's discretion to offer flexibility
in the selection of the package of benefits, OPM hopes to reduce the
number of obstacles and increase competition and consumer choice while
maintaining benefit standards and protections
After completing two application cycles for the MSP Program and
administering the Program since January 2014, OPM is proposing to
adjust the approach to the selection of the package of benefits to
allow for more flexibility to attract issuers to the MSP Program with
the expectation of expanding competition on the Exchanges. OPM is
requesting public comment on this approach. This flexibility would
allow an MSP issuer to make benchmark selections on a State-by-State
basis. The issuer would also be able to offer two or more MSP options
in each State, for example, one using the State-selected benchmark and
one using the OPM-selected benchmark. OPM believes that allowing this
flexibility will enable coalition building across issuers in different
States, so that they can work together toward MSP options that meets
the MSP Program standards. For example, an MSP issuer or potential
issuer that chooses to offer an OPM-selected benchmark plan in one
State may want to partner with another MSP issuer or potential issuer
that would choose to offer a State EHB-benchmark plan in another State.
We seek comments on whether this would have the desired effect of
encouraging participation without causing consumer confusion or
segmenting of risk.
In Sec. 800.105(c)(1), OPM finalized the selection of EHB-
benchmark plans. OPM selected the three largest FEHB Program plan
options by enrollment that are open to Federal employees and
annuitants. These FEHB Program benchmark plans were identified by HHS
pursuant to section 1302(b) of the Affordable Care Act. On July 3,
2012, HHS identified the three largest FEHB Program plan options, as of
March 31, 2012, as Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) Standard Option; BCBS
Basic Option; and Government Employees Health Association (GEHA)
Standard Option.\24\ OPM will continue to offer flexibility to MSP
issuers to select among these benchmark options based on their business
strategies and perceived needs of MSP enrollees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Essential
Health Benefits: List of the Largest Three Small Group Products by
State, available at https://cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/largest-smgroup-products-7-2-2012.pdf.PDF (July 3, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Sec. 800.105(c)(2), OPM finalized the requirement that any OPM-
selected EHB-benchmark plan lacking coverage of pediatric oral services
or pediatric vision services must be supplemented by the addition of
the entire category of benefits from the largest Federal Employee
Dental and Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP) dental or vision plan
option, respectively, pursuant to 45 CFR 156.110(b) and section 1302(b)
of the Affordable Care Act. On July 3, 2012, HHS identified the largest
FEDVIP dental and vision plan options, as of March 31, 2012, to be,
respectively, MetLife Federal Dental Plan High Option and FEP
BlueVision High Option.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM is proposing to add a clarification in the new Sec.
800.105(c)(3). Based on outreach with potential MSP issuers and ongoing
discussions with current MSP issuers, there is confusion about the
prescription drug formulary standards of OPM-selected benchmarks. As is
done in the FEHB Program, OPM will work with MSP issuers to negotiate a
formulary that best manages the needs of MSP enrollees while focusing
on managing costs and ensuring access. In addition, OPM will ensure
that MSP issuers comply with any HHS standards related to drug
formularies for QHPs and are not discriminatory in the formulary's
design. OPM sees large variations in the formulary structures in the
FEHB Program, and there are ongoing changes in the use of managed
formularies. OPM also seeks comment on the feasibility of substituting
an OPM-selected benchmark plan formulary with the formulary from the
respective State's EHB-benchmark plan. This approach would promote
consistency in benefits to enhance portability while maintaining a
level playing field. By working with MSP issuers to build flexibility
in the management of formularies, OPM believes the formulary will be
seen as an opportunity to build a plan around the needs of enrollees
while clarifying formulary requirements with the OPM-selected
benchmarks.
In the final rule at Sec. 800.105(c)(3), proposed to be
republished as Sec. 800.105(c)(4), OPM finalized the use of State
definitions for habilitative services where the State chooses to
specifically define this category pursuant to 45 CFR 156.110(f). In
this section of the final rule, OPM also reserved the authority to
determine what to include in this category for the OPM-selected
benchmarks where the State has not defined it and no definition exists
in the OPM-selected benchmark. OPM is proposing to change this section
to apply a Federal definition of habilitative services, should HHS
choose to define the term.
We propose to renumber Sec. 800.105(c)(4) to Sec. 800.105(c)(5).
We are not proposing changes to this standard.
In Sec. 800.105(d), OPM finalized the rule that an MSP issuer's
package of benefits, including its formulary, must be submitted to and
approved by OPM, which will determine whether a package of benefits
proposed by an MSP issuer is substantially equal to an EHB-benchmark
plan. OPM also plans to review an MSP issuer's package of benefits for
discriminatory benefit design, consistently with section 1302(b)(4) of
the Affordable Care Act and 45 CFR 156.110(d), 156.110(e), and 156.125,
and will work closely with States and HHS to identify and investigate
any potentially discriminatory or otherwise noncompliant benefit design
in MSP options.
In Sec. 800.105(e), OPM finalized the rule that the cost of
benefits required by
[[Page 69807]]
the State in addition to those in the benchmark package would be
assumed by the State. This policy was consistent with section
1334(c)(2) of the Affordable Care Act. OPM now proposes to change
``assume'' to ``defray'' to make the language align with the language
in the statute.
Assessments and User Fees (Sec. 800.108)
OPM has authority to collect MSP Program user fees, and continues
to preserve its discretion to collect an MSP Program user fee. We wish
to clarify that OPM may begin collecting the fee as early as plan year
2015. The user fee may be used to fund OPM activities directly related
to MSP Program certification, administration, and operational costs. We
currently estimate that any assessment or fee would be no more than 0.2
percent of premiums. In the Federally-facilitated Exchange, OPM is
coordinating with HHS regarding the collection of user fees, so that
issuers would not be affected operationally. We are revising the
regulatory text to allow for flexibility in the process for collecting
MSP Program assessments or user fees. We solicit comments on the
process for collecting user fees in the State-based Exchanges. We also
seek comments on the use of these fees.
Network Adequacy (Sec. 800.109)
We are proposing to add that an MSP issuer must also comply with
any additional standards related to provider directories set by HHS for
QHP issuers.
Accreditation (Sec. 800.111)
We revised the reference to the specific section in the Code of
Federal Regulations to 45 CFR 156.275(a)(1) to be more precise.
Level Playing Field (Sec. 800.115)
We revised the regulatory text to clarify that all the areas listed
under section 1324 of the Affordable Care Act are subject to Sec.
800.114. In addition, we are making a technical correction to Sec.
800.114(l) to change a reference to 45 CFR part 162 to 45 CFR part 164.
C. Subpart D--Application and Contracting Procedures
Application Process (Sec. 800.301)
In Sec. 800.301, OPM provided that health insurance issuers may
submit applications to OPM for participation in the MSP Program. If OPM
decided not to consider new applications for the upcoming year, it
would issue a notice indicating so. This section also specified that
applications would meet the form, manner, and timeframes prescribed by
OPM.
The edit to Sec. 800.301(a) is a technical correction that more
accurately describes that OPM determines annually whether new issuer
applications should be considered to participate in the MSP Program.
This correction is meant to distinguish new applications from renewal
applications. OPM's discretion over whether to consider issuer
applications pertains to new issuers that want to apply to participate
in the MSP Program for the first time. Issuers that already participate
in the MSP Program, and would like to continue participating, may
submit a renewal application to OPM on an annual basis. OPM will
determine annually whether a renewal application is required.
MSP Contracting (Sec. 800.303)
In Sec. 800.303, OPM provided that an applicant must execute a
contract with OPM to become an MSP issuer; that OPM would establish a
standard contract for the MSP Program; that OPM and an applicant would
negotiate premiums for each plan year; that OPM would review for
approval an applicant's benefit packages; that OPM may negotiate
additional contractual terms and conditions; and that MSP issuers would
be certified to offer MSP coverage on Exchanges.
The edit to Sec. 800.303(f) is a technical correction to clarify
that the MSP Program contract specifies that OPM certifies the MSP
options that are authorized to provide coverage. We also propose a
technical correction to Sec. 800.303(f)(2) consistent with the edit to
(f)(1) to provide that MSP options must be certified in order to be
offered on an Exchange. These edits more accurately describe the
information that is reflected in the MSP Program contract with respect
to OPM's certification process.
Nonrenewal (Sec. 800.306)
The proposed language for Sec. 800.306(a) serves to clarify two
different nonrenewal concepts. The term ``nonrenewal'' as described in
the current rule more accurately describes nonrenewal of an MSP Program
contract because it pertains to the MSP issuer. Therefore, we propose
the term ``nonrenewal of contract'' to clarify this concept.
Additionally, there are instances where a State-level issuer may choose
not to renew its participation in the MSP Program contract, even though
the MSP issuer (of which the State-level issuer is a part) will
continue to contract with OPM. The current regulatory language does not
contemplate this latter concept. Therefore, we propose the term
``nonrenewal of participation'' to describe such concept. By
distinguishing the two types of nonrenewal, the rule will better align
with the terms described in the MSP Program contract, which already
distinguishes these concepts. Despite this distinction, the notice
requirements and MSP issuer responsibilities as provided in subsections
(b) and (c) respectively, are still applicable. In subsection Sec.
300.306(c), with respect to providing notice of termination to
enrollees, we propose to reference Sec. 800.404(d) instead of
duplicating the explanation of the requirements in this section. This
will ensure consistency across the MSP Program.
D. Subpart E--Compliance
Contract Performance (Sec. 800.401)
In addition to other MSP contract performance requirements, Sec.
800.401 paragraphs (b)(5)-(6), (c), and (d) require an MSP issuer to
perform its obligations under an MSP Program contract using prudent
business practices that emphasize ethical standards and compliance with
OPM directives and other applicable laws, regulations, and MSP contract
provisions. The section prohibits fraud, waste, abuse, and deceptive
business practices. It also requires an MSP issuer to adjudicate claims
promptly and maintain a system that accurately accounts for costs
occurring under the MSP Program. Although this section lists numerous
prudent and poor business practices, we did not intend them to be
exhaustive. In addition, because industry standards and State markets
are evolving constantly, we address business practice standards in each
MSP Program contract. Therefore, we are clarifying that OPM will
consider an MSP issuer's specific circumstances and facts in using its
discretion to determine if an MSP issuer has fulfilled its obligations
pursuant to this section. We seek comment on these issues.
Contract Quality Assurance (Sec. 800.402)
OPM proposes corrections to Sec. 800.402 paragraphs (b) and (c).
In paragraph (b), OPM proposes to clarify that it ``may,'' instead of
``will,'' periodically evaluate a contractor's system of internal
controls. OPM also clarifies in paragraph (b) that it will only
acknowledge in writing when the contractor's system of internal
controls is inconsistent with the MSP Program contract requirements. In
paragraph (c), OPM will correct a drafting error and clarify that MSP
issuers must comply with the performance standards issued ``pursuant''
to this section.
[[Page 69808]]
Compliance Actions (Sec. 800.404)
OPM proposes to make technical edits to Sec. 800.404 paragraphs
(a), (b), (c) and (d). In paragraph (a)(4), we clarify that OPM may
initiate a compliance action for violations of law or regulation as OPM
may determine, ``including pursuant to its authority under Sec. Sec.
800.102 and 800.114.'' This revision more accurately reflects OPM's
approach to enforcement and compliance.
In paragraph (b), we clarify that OPM may withdraw certification of
the MSP option or options for noncompliance with applicable law or the
MSP contract. Consistent with new paragraph 800.306(a)(2), we add
``nonrenewal of participation'' as a compliance action. Accordingly, we
renumber the two subsequent compliance actions. We also revised
``Nonrenewal of the MSPP contract'' to ``Nonrenewal of contract'' to be
consistent with the term as defined in new paragraph 800.306(a)(1). We
revise paragraph (c)(2) to include nonrenewal of participation as a
compliance action for which OPM must notify the MSP issuer of its right
to reconsideration.
Paragraph (d) requires an MSP issuer to comply with State and
Exchange requirements regarding termination of a plan when an MSP
Program contract is terminated or when OPM withdraws certification.
Absent State or Exchange requirements, the MSP issuer must provide
enrollees 90 days' notice. If a State or Exchange has a requirement to
provide enrollees notice of more than 90 days, then the MSP issuer must
comply with that standard. We clarify that these requirements are
triggered in the event that one of the following occurs: The MSP
Program contract is terminated, OPM withdraws certification of an MSP
option, or if a State-level issuer's participation is not renewed.
Reconsideration of Compliance Actions (Sec. 800.405)
OPM proposes technical edits and corrections to section 800.405.
Section 800.405 describes the compliance actions for which the MSP
issuer may request reconsideration. We correct paragraph (a)(1) to
reflect that an MSP issuer may request reconsideration upon withdrawal
of certification of the MSP option or options offered on an Exchange.
Consistent with the approach 800.404(b), we revise (a)(2) to allow an
MSP issuer to request reconsideration of the nonrenewal of
participation of a State-level issuer. We renumber the subsequent
paragraphs accordingly.
E. Subpart G--Miscellaneous
Consumer Choice With Respect to Certain Services (Sec. 800.602)
Section 1334(a)(6) of the Affordable Care Act requires OPM to
contract with at least one MSP issuer that excludes coverage of
abortion services, except in the case of rape or incest, or when the
life of the woman would be endangered. In the MSP Program final rule,
we codified the statutory language and provided sub-regulatory guidance
to MSP issuer applicants on how to meet this requirement in their
benefit proposals.
For the 2014 and 2015 plan years, OPM operationalized this policy
by requiring each MSP issuer to offer at least one silver MSP option
and one gold MSP option that excludes these services in each State in
which it was under contract. MSP issuers also had discretion to cover
these services if the issuer offered additional MSP options on the
Exchange.
Consumers, State regulators, and other stakeholders expressed to
OPM the desire to have greater transparency with regard to MSP options
that exclude non-excepted abortion services.\26\ Section 2715 of the
PHS Act requires group health plans and health insurance issuers of
group or individual health insurance coverage to provide ``a summary of
benefits and coverage explanation that accurately describes the
benefits and coverage under the applicable plan or coverage to
applicants, enrollees, and policyholders or certificate holders.'' \27\
MSP issuers are required to notify consumers who purchase an MSP option
that covers non-excepted abortion services of such coverage as part of
the SBC at time of enrollment.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ These are services for which Federal funding is prohibited.
\27\ PHS Act section 2715(a) (2012).
\28\ 45 CFR 156.280(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are proposing to add a new paragraph (c) to Sec. 800.602 that
would require an MSP issuer to provide disclosure of coverage or
exclusion of this benefit before a consumer enrolls in an MSP option.
In addition, OPM will reserve the authority to review and approve these
MSP notices and materials. OPM requests comments on the form and manner
for the disclosure. Note that the question of how this coverage should
be disclosed is not unique to MSP options; the Departments of Health
and Human Services, Labor, and Treasury intend to issue guidance on the
Summary of Benefits and Coverage in the future.
Disclosure of Information (Sec. 800.603)
In order to effectively implement and operationalize the MSP
Program, there may be circumstances in which OPM would share
information with State entities, including State Departments of
Insurance and Exchanges. The sharing of information is intended to keep
such entities informed and to reflect OPM's approach to compliance. The
addition of this new section clarifies that OPM may use its discretion
and authority to disclose information to such State entities. In all
cases, OPM will adhere to any applicable privacy and security standards
for the disclosure of such information.
Technical Changes to 45 CFR Part 800
In addition to the changes proposed for the specific sections of
the regulation, we also propose technical corrections to streamline the
use of ``MSP'' throughout the rules. The changes are not substantive to
our policy. These changes apply to all sections and include the
following:
``MSPP'' will be replaced with ``MSP Program;''
``MSPP issuer'' will be replaced with ``MSP issuer;''
``MSP'' will be replaced with ``MSP option'' when
referring to the plan that makes up the specific package of benefits
and associated cost-sharing; and
``MSPP contract'' will be replaced with ``MSP Program
contract.''
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
OPM has examined the impact of this proposed rule as required by
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30,
1993) and Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review (January 18, 2011). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct
agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). A regulatory impact analysis must be prepared for major
rules with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in
any 1 year adjusted for inflation). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action that is
likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more in
any one year or adversely affect in a material way a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
[[Page 69809]]
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
government or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
Executive Order 12866.
OPM will continue to generally operate the MSP Program as it
previously had in plan year 2014. The regulatory changes in this
proposed rule are for purposes of policy clarification and any proposed
changes will have minimal impact on the administration of the Program.
Administrative costs of the rule are generated both within OPM and by
issuers offering MSP options. The costs that MSP issuers may incur are
the same as those of QHPs and, as stated in 45 CFR part 156, will
include: Accreditation, network adequacy standards, and quality
improvement strategy reporting. The costs associated with MSP
certification offset the costs that issuers would face were they to be
certified by the State, or HHS on behalf of the State, to offer QHPs
through the Exchange. For the 2014 plan year, there are approximately
371,000 enrolled in MSP options and with an estimated average monthly
premium of $350, premiums collected by MSP issuers for consumers
enrolled in MSP options is are approximately $1.4 billion this year.
While the overall regulation and Program have a significant economic
impact, this proposed rule provides for no substantial changes to the
Program and will not be economically significant. The economic impact
of this rule is not expected exceed the $100 million threshold; we
therefore do not assess costs and benefits as required by the Executive
Order.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35; see 5
CFR part 1320) requires that the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) approve all collections of information by a Federal agency from
the public before they can be implemented. Respondents are not required
to respond to any collection of information unless it displays a
current valid OMB control number. OPM is not proposing any additional
collections from MSP issuers or applicants seeking to become MSP
issuers in this proposed rule. OPM continues to expect fewer than ten
responsible entities to respond to all of the collections noted above.
For that reason alone, the existing collections are exempt from the
Paperwork Reduction Act under 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)(i).
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) \29\ requires agencies to
prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis to describe the
impact of the proposed rule on small entities, unless the head of the
agency can certify that the rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA generally
defines a ``small entity'' as--(1) a proprietary firm meeting the size
standards of the Small Business Administration (SBA); (2) a not-for-
profit organization that is not dominant in its field; or (3) a small
government jurisdiction with a population of less than 50,000. States
and individuals are not included in the definition of ``small entity.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief
of small businesses, if a proposed rule has a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. For purposes of the RFA, small
entities include small businesses, small non-profit organizations, and
small government jurisdictions. Small businesses are those with sizes
below thresholds established by the SBA. With respect to health
insurers, the SBA size standard is $7.0 million in annual receipts.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ According to the SBA size standards, entities with average
annual receipts of $7 million or less would be considered small
entities for North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
Code 524114 (Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carriers) (for more
information, see ``Table of Size Standards Matched To North American
Industry Classification System Codes,'' effective March 26, 2012,
U.S. Small Business Administration, available at https://www.sba.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPM does not think that small businesses with annual receipts less
than $7.0 million would likely have sufficient economies of scale to
become MSP issuers or be part of a group of MSP issuers. Similarly,
while the Director must enter into an MSP Program contract with at
least one non-profit entity, OPM does not think that small non-profit
organizations would likely have sufficient economies of scale to become
MSP issuers or be part of a group of MSP issuers.
OPM does not think that this proposed rule would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses with annual
receipts less than $7.0 million, because there are only a few health
insurance issuers that could be considered small businesses. Moreover,
while the Director must enter into an MSP contract with at least one
non-profit entity, OPM does not think that this proposed rule would
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
non-profit organizations, because few health insurance issuers are
small non-profit organizations.
OPM incorporates by reference previous analysis by HHS, which
provides some insight into the number of health insurance issuers that
could be small entities. Particularly, as discussed by HHS in the
Medical Loss Ratio interim final rule (75 FR 74918), few, if any,
issuers are small enough to fall below the size thresholds for small
business established by the SBA. In that rule, HHS used a data set
created from 2009 NAIC Health and Life Blank annual financial statement
data to develop an updated estimate of the number of small entities
that offer comprehensive major medical coverage in the individual and
group markets. For purposes of that analysis, HHS used total Accident
and Health earned premiums as a proxy for annual receipts. HHS
estimated that there are 28 small entities with less than $7 million in
accident and health earned premiums offering individual or group
comprehensive major medical coverage. OPM concurs with this HHS
analysis, and, thus, does not think that this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Based on the foregoing, OPM is not preparing an analysis for the
RFA because OPM has determined, and the Director certifies, that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
VII. Unfunded Mandates
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) \31\
requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits and take
certain other actions before issuing a proposed rule (and subsequent
final rule) that includes any Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures in any one year by a State, local, or tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million in 1995
dollars, updated annually for inflation. In 2014, that threshold is
approximately $141 million. UMRA does not address the total cost of a
rule. Rather, it focuses on certain categories of costs, mainly those
``Federal mandate'' costs resulting from: (1) Imposing enforceable
duties on State, local, or tribal governments, or on the private
sector; or (2) increasing the
[[Page 69810]]
stringency of conditions in, or decreasing the funding of, State,
local, or tribal governments under entitlement programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Public Law 104-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule does not place any Federal mandates on State,
local, or Tribal governments, or on the private sector. This proposed
rule would modify the MSP Program, a voluntary federal program that
provides health insurance issuers the opportunity to contact with OPM
to offer MSP options on the Exchanges. Section 3 of UMRA excludes from
the definition of ``Federal mandate'' duties that arise from
participation in a voluntary Federal program. Accordingly, no analysis
under UMRA is required.
VIII. Federalism
Executive Order 13132 outlines fundamental principles of
federalism, and requires the adherence to specific criteria by Federal
agencies in the process of their formulation and implementation of
policies that have ``substantial direct effects'' on the States, the
relationship between the national government and States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. Federal agencies promulgating regulations that have these
federalism implications must consult with State and local officials,
and describe the extent of their consultation and the nature of the
concerns of State and local officials in the preamble to the
regulation.
This proposed regulation has federalism implications, because it
has direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national
government and States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of government. In particular,
under Sec. 800.114, OPM may deem a State law to be inconsistent with
section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act, and, thus, inapplicable to an
MSP option or MSP issuer. However, in OPM's view, the federalism
implications of this proposed regulation are substantially mitigated
because, OPM expects that the vast majority of States have laws that
are consistent with section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act.
Furthermore, Sec. 800.116 sets forth a process for dispute resolution
if a State seeks to challenge OPM's determination that a State law is
inapplicable to an MSP option or MSP issuer.
In compliance with the requirement of Executive Order 13132 that
agencies examine closely any policies that may have federalism
implications or limit the policy making discretion of the States, OPM
has engaged in efforts to consult with and work cooperatively with
affected State and local officials, including attending meetings of the
NAIC and consulting with State insurance officials on an individual
basis. It is expected OPM will continue act in a similar fashion in
enforcing the Affordable Care Act requirements. Throughout the process
of administering the MSP Program and developing this proposed
regulation, OPM has attempted to balance the States' interests in
regulating health insurance issuers, and the statutory requirement to
provide two MSP options in all Exchanges in the every States and the
District of Columbia. By doing so, it is OPM's view that it has
complied with the requirements of Executive Order 13132.
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in section 8(a) of Executive
Order 13132, and by the signature affixed to this proposed regulation,
OPM certifies that it has complied with the requirements of Executive
Order 13132 for the attached regulation in a meaningful and timely
manner.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 800
Administrative practice and procedure, Health facilities, Health
insurance, Health professions, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Office of Personnel Management.
Katherine Archuleta,
Director.
Accordingly, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is proposing
to revise part 800 to title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
PART 800--MULTI-STATE PLAN PROGRAM
Subpart A--General Provisions and Definitions
Sec.
800.10 Basis and scope.
800.20 Definitions.
Subpart B--Multi-State Plan Program Issuer Requirements
800.101 General requirements.
800.102 Compliance with Federal law.
800.103 Authority to contract with issuers.
800.104 Phased expansion, etc.
800.105 Benefits.
800.106 Cost-sharing limits, advance payments of premium tax
credits, and cost-sharing reductions.
800.107 Levels of coverage.
800.108 Assessments and user fees.
800.109 Network adequacy.
800.110 Service area.
800.111 Accreditation requirement.
800.112 Reporting requirements.
800.113 Benefit plan material or information.
800.114 Compliance with applicable State law.
800.115 Level playing field.
800.116 Process for dispute resolution.
Subpart C--Premiums, Rating Factors, Medical Loss Ratios, and Risk
Adjustment
800.201 General requirements.
800.202 Rating factors.
800.203 Medical loss ratio.
800.204 Reinsurance, risk corridors, and risk adjustment.
Subpart D--Application and Contracting Procedures
800.301 Application process.
800.302 Review of applications.
800.303 MSP Program contracting.
800.304 Term of the contract.
800.305 Contract renewal process.
800.306 Nonrenewal.
Subpart E--Compliance
800.401 Contract performance.
800.402 Contract quality assurance.
800.403 Fraud and abuse.
800.404 Compliance actions.
800.405 Reconsideration of compliance actions.
Subpart F--Appeals by Enrollees of Denials of Claims for Payment or
Service
800.501 General requirements.
800.502 MSP issuer internal claims and appeals.
800.503 External review.
800.504 Judicial review.
Subpart G--Miscellaneous
800.601 Reservation of authority.
800.602 Consumer choice with respect to certain services.
800.603 Disclosure of information.
Authority: Sec. 1334 of Pub. L. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119; Pub. L.
111-152, 124 Stat. 1029 (42 U.S.C. 18054).
Subpart A--General Provisions and Definitions
Sec. 800.10 Basis and scope.
(a) Basis. This part is based on the following sections of title I
of the Affordable Care Act:
1001. Amendments to the Public Health Service Act.
1302. Essential Health Benefits Requirements.
1311. Affordable Choices of Health Benefit Plans.
1324. Level Playing Field.
1334. Multi-State Plans.
1341. Transitional Reinsurance Program for Individual Market in
Each State.
1342. Establishment of Risk Corridors for Plans in Individual and
Small Group Markets.
1343. Risk Adjustment.
(b) Scope. This part establishes standards for health insurance
issuers to contract with the United States Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) to offer Multi-State Plan (MSP) options to provide
health insurance coverage on Exchanges for each State. It also
[[Page 69811]]
establishes standards for appeal of a decision by OPM affecting the
issuer's participation in the MSP Program and standards for an enrollee
in an MSP option to appeal denials of payment or services by an MSP
issuer.
Sec. 800.20 Definitions.
For purposes of this part:
Actuarial value (AV) has the meaning given that term in 45 CFR
156.20.
Affordable Care Act means the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act (Pub. L. 111-148), as amended by the Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-152).
Applicant means an issuer or group of issuers that has submitted an
application to OPM to be considered for participation in the Multi-
State Plan Program.
Benefit plan material or information means explanations or
descriptions, whether printed or electronic, that describe a health
insurance issuer's products. The term does not include a policy or
contract for health insurance coverage.
Cost sharing has the meaning given that term in 45 CFR 155.20.
Director means the Director of the United States Office of
Personnel Management.
EHB-benchmark plan has the meaning given that term in 45 CFR
156.20.
Exchange means a governmental agency or non-profit entity that
meets the applicable requirements of 45 CFR part 155 and makes
qualified health plans (QHPs) and MSP options available to qualified
individuals and qualified employers. Unless otherwise identified, this
term refers to State Exchanges, regional Exchanges, subsidiary
Exchanges, and a Federally-facilitated Exchange.
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program or FEHB Program means the
health benefits program administered by the United States Office of
Personnel Management pursuant to chapter 89 of title 5, United States
Code.
Group of issuers means:
(1) A group of health insurance issuers that are affiliated either
by common ownership and control or by common use of a nationally
licensed service mark (as defined in this section); or
(2) An affiliation of health insurance issuers and an entity that
is not an issuer but that owns a nationally licensed service mark (as
defined in this section).
Health insurance coverage means benefits consisting of medical care
(provided directly, through insurance or reimbursement, or otherwise)
under any hospital or medical service policy or certificate, hospital
or medical service plan contract, or health maintenance organization
contract offered by a health insurance issuer. Health insurance
coverage includes group health insurance coverage, individual health
insurance coverage, and short-term, limited duration insurance.
Health insurance issuer or issuer means an insurance company,
insurance service, or insurance organization (including a health
maintenance organization) that is required to be licensed to engage in
the business of insurance in a State and that is subject to State law
that regulates insurance (within the meaning of section 514(b)(2) of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)). This term does
not include a group health plan as defined in 45 CFR 146.145(a).
HHS means the United States Department of Health and Human
Services.
Level of coverage means one of four standardized actuarial values
of plan coverage as defined by section 1302(d)(1) of the Affordable
Care Act.
Licensure means the authorization obtained from the appropriate
State official or regulatory authority to offer health insurance
coverage in the State.
Multi-State Plan Program issuer or MSP issuer means a health
insurance issuer or group of issuers (as defined in this section) that
has a contract with OPM to offer health plans pursuant to section 1334
of the Affordable Care Act and meets the requirements of this part.
Multi-State Plan option or MSP option means a discrete pairing of a
package of benefits with particular cost sharing (which does not
include premium rates or premium rate quotes) that is offered pursuant
to a contract with OPM pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable Care
Act and meets the requirements of 45 CFR part 800.
Multi-State Plan Program or MSP Program means the program
administered by OPM pursuant to section 1334 of the Affordable Care
Act.
Nationally licensed service mark means a word, name, symbol, or
device, or any combination thereof, that an issuer or group of issuers
uses consistently nationwide to identify itself.
Non-profit entity means:
(1) An organization that is incorporated under State law as a non-
profit entity and licensed under State law as a health insurance
issuer; or
(2) A group of health insurance issuers licensed under State law, a
substantial portion of which are incorporated under State law as non-
profit entities.
OPM means the United States Office of Personnel Management.
Percentage of total allowed cost of benefits has the meaning given
that term in 45 CFR 156.20.
Plan year means a consecutive 12-month period during which a health
plan provides coverage for health benefits. A plan year may be a
calendar year or otherwise.
Prompt payment means a requirement imposed on a health insurance
issuer to pay a provider or enrollee for a claimed benefit or service
within a defined time period, including the penalty or consequence
imposed on the issuer for failure to meet the requirement.
Qualified Health Plan or QHP means a health plan that has in effect
a certification that it meets the standards described in subpart C of
45 CFR part 156 issued or recognized by each Exchange through which
such plan is offered pursuant to the process described in subpart K of
45 CFR part 155.
Rating means the process, including rating factors, numbers,
formulas, methodologies, and actuarial assumptions, used to set
premiums for a health plan.
Secretary means the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human
Services.
SHOP means a Small Business Health Options Program operated by an
Exchange through which a qualified employer can provide its employees
and their dependents with access to one or more qualified health plans
(QHPs).
Silver plan variation has the meaning given that term in 45 CFR
156.400.
Small employer means, in connection with a group health plan with
respect to a calendar year and a plan year, an employer who employed an
average of at least one but not more than 100 employees on business
days during the preceding calendar year and who employs at least one
employee on the first day of the plan year. In the case of plan years
beginning before January 1, 2016, a State may elect to define small
employer by substituting ``50 employees'' for ``100 employees.''
Standard plan has the meaning given that term in 45 CFR 156.400.
State Insurance Commissioner means the commissioner or other chief
insurance regulatory official of a State.
State means each of the 50 States or the District of Columbia.
State-level issuer means a health insurance issuer designated by
the Multi-State Plan (MSP) issuer to offer an MSP option or MSP
options. The State-level issuer may offer health insurance coverage
through an MSP option in all or part of one or more States.
[[Page 69812]]
Subpart B--Multi-State Plan Program Issuer Requirements
Sec. 800.101 General requirements.
An MSP issuer must:
(a) Licensed. Be licensed as a health insurance issuer in each
State where it offers health insurance coverage;
(b) Contract with OPM. Have a contract with OPM pursuant to this
part;
(c) Required levels of coverage. Offer levels of coverage as
required by Sec. 800.107;
(d) Eligibility and enrollment. MSP options and MSP issuers must
meet the same requirements for eligibility, enrollment, and termination
of coverage as those that apply to QHPs and QHP issuers pursuant to 45
CFR part 155, subparts D, E, and H, and 45 CFR 156.250, 156.260,
156.265, 156.270, and 156.285;
(e) Applicable to each MSP issuer. Ensure that each of its MSP
options meets the requirements of this part;
(f) Compliance. Comply with all standards set forth in this part;
(g) OPM direction and other legal requirements. Timely comply with
OPM instructions and directions and with other applicable law; and
(h) Other requirements. Meet such other requirements as determined
appropriate by OPM, in consultation with HHS, pursuant to section
1334(b)(4) of the Affordable Care Act.
(i) Non-discrimination. MSP options and MSP issuers must comply
with applicable Federal and State non-discrimination laws, including
the standards set forth in 45 CFR 156.125 and 156.200(e).
Sec. 800.102 Compliance with Federal law.
(a) Public Health Service Act. As a condition of participation in
the MSP Program, an MSP issuer must comply with applicable provisions
of part A of title XXVII of the PHS Act. Compliance shall be determined
by the Director.
(b) Affordable Care Act. As a condition of participation in the MSP
Program, an MSP issuer must comply with applicable provisions of title
I of the Affordable Care Act. Compliance shall be determined by the
Director.
Sec. 800.103 Authority to contract with issuers.
(a) General. OPM may enter into contracts with health insurance
issuers to offer at least two MSP options on Exchanges and SHOPs in
each State, without regard to any statutes that would otherwise require
competitive bidding.
(b) Non-profit entity. In entering into contracts with health
insurance issuers to offer MSP options, OPM will enter into a contract
with at least one non-profit entity as defined in Sec. 800.20.
(c) Group of issuers. Any contract to offer MSP options may be with
a group of issuers as defined in Sec. 800.20.
(d) Individual and group coverage. The contracts will provide for
individual health insurance coverage and for group health insurance
coverage for small employers.
Sec. 800.104 Phased expansion, etc.
(a) Phase-in. OPM may enter into a contract with a health insurance
issuer to offer MSP options if the health insurance issuer agrees that:
(1) With respect to the first year for which the health insurance
issuer offers MSP options, the health insurance issuer will offer MSP
options in at least 60 percent of the States;
(2) With respect to the second such year, the health insurance
issuer will offer the MSP options in at least 70 percent of the States;
(3) With respect to the third such year, the health insurance
issuer will offer the MSP options in at least 85 percent of the States;
and
(4) With respect to each subsequent year, the health insurance
issuer will offer the MSP options in all States.
(b) Partial coverage within a State. (1) OPM may enter into a
contract with an MSP issuer even if the MSP issuer's MSP options for a
State cover fewer than all the service areas specified for that State
pursuant to Sec. 800.110.
(2) If an issuer offers both an MSP option and QHP on the same
Exchange, an MSP issuer must offer MSP coverage in a service area or
areas that is equal to the greater of:
(i) The QHP service area defined by the issuer or,
(ii) The service area specified for that State pursuant to Sec.
800.110 covered by the issuer's QHP.
(c) Participation in SHOPs. (1) An MSP issuer's participation in
the Federally-facilitated SHOP must be consistent with the requirements
for QHP issuers specified in 45 CFR 156.200(g).
(2) An MSP issuer must comply with State standards governing
participation in State-based SHOPs, consistent with Sec. 800.114. For
these State-based SHOP standards, OPM retains discretion to allow an
MSP issuer to phase-in SHOP participation in States pursuant to section
1334(e) of the Affordable Care Act.
(d) Licensed where offered. OPM may enter into a contract with an
MSP issuer who is not licensed in every State, provided that the issuer
is licensed in every State where it offers MSP coverage through any
Exchanges in that State and demonstrates to OPM that it is making a
good faith effort to become licensed in every State consistent with the
timeframe in paragraph (a) of this section.
Sec. 800.105 Benefits.
(a) Package of benefits. (1) An MSP issuer must offer a package of
benefits that includes the essential health benefits (EHB) described in
section 1302 of the Affordable Care Act for each MSP option within a
State.
(2) The package of benefits referred to in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section must comply with section 1302 of the Affordable Care Act, as
well as any applicable standards set by OPM and any applicable
standards set by HHS.
(b) Package of benefits options. (1) An MSP issuer must offer at
least one uniform package of benefits in each State that is
substantially equal to:
(i) The EHB-benchmark plan in each State in which it operates; or
(ii) Any EHB-benchmark plan selected by OPM under paragraph (c) of
this section.
(2) An issuer applying to participate in the MSP Program may select
either or both of the package of benefits options described in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section in its application. In each State, the
issuer may choose one EHB-benchmark for each product it offers.
(3) An MSP issuer must comply with any State standards relating to
substitution of benchmark benefits or standard benefit designs.
(c) OPM selection of benchmark plans. (1) The OPM-selected EHB-
benchmark plans are the three largest Federal Employees Health Benefits
(FEHB) Program plan options, as identified by HHS pursuant to section
1302(b) of the Affordable Care Act, and as supplemented pursuant to
paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(4) of this section.
(2) Any EHB-benchmark plan selected by OPM under paragraph (c)(1)
of this section lacking coverage of pediatric oral services or
pediatric vision services must be supplemented by the addition of the
entire category of benefits from the largest Federal Employee Dental
and Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP) dental or vision plan options,
respectively, pursuant to 45 CFR 156.110(b) and section 1302(b) of the
Affordable Care Act.
(3) In all States where an MSP issuer uses the OPM-selected EHB-
benchmark plan, the MSP issuer may manage formularies around the needs
of anticipated or actual users, subject to approval by OPM.
(4) An MSP issuer must follow State definitions where the State
specifically defines the habilitative services category
[[Page 69813]]
pursuant to 45 CFR 156.110(f) or any Federal definitions where HHS
specifically defines habilitative services. In the case of any State
that does not define this category and absent a clearly applicable
Federal definition, if any OPM-selected EHB-benchmark plan lacks
coverage of habilitative services and devices, OPM may determine what
habilitative services are to be included in that EHB-benchmark plan.
(5) Any EHB-benchmark plan selected by OPM under paragraph (c)(1)
of this section must include, for each State, any State-required
benefits enacted before December 31, 2011, that are included in the
State's EHB-benchmark plan as described in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section, or specific to the market in which the plan is offered.
(d) OPM approval. An MSP issuer's package of benefits, including
its formulary, must be submitted for approval by OPM, which will review
a package of benefits proposed by an MSP issuer and determine if it is
substantially equal to an EHB-benchmark plan described in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section, pursuant to standards set forth by OPM and any
applicable standards set forth by HHS, including 45 CFR 156.115,
156.122, and 156.125.
(e) State payments for additional State-required benefits. If a
State requires that benefits in addition to the benchmark package be
offered to MSP enrollees in that State, then pursuant to section
1334(c)(2) of the Affordable Care Act, the State must defray the cost
of such additional benefits by making payments either to the enrollee
or to the MSP issuer on behalf of the enrollee.
Sec. 800.106 Cost-sharing limits, advance payments of premium tax
credits, and cost-sharing reductions.
(a) Cost-sharing limits. For each MSP option it offers, an MSP
issuer must ensure that the cost-sharing provisions of the MSP option
complies with section 1302(c) of the Affordable Care Act, as well as
any applicable standards set by OPM or HHS.
(b) Advance payments of premium tax credits and cost-sharing
reductions. For each MSP option it offers, an MSP issuer must ensure
that an eligible individual receives the benefit of advance payments of
premium tax credits under section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code and
the cost-sharing reductions under section 1402 of the Affordable Care
Act. An MSP issuer must also comply with any applicable standards set
by OPM or HHS.
Sec. 800.107 Levels of coverage.
(a) Silver and gold levels of coverage required. An MSP issuer must
offer at least one MSP option at the silver level of coverage and at
least one MSP option at the gold level of coverage on each Exchange in
which the issuer is certified to offer an MSP option pursuant to a
contract with OPM.
(b) Bronze or platinum metal levels of coverage permitted. Pursuant
to a contract with OPM, an MSP issuer may offer one or more MSP options
at the bronze level of coverage or the platinum level of coverage, or
both, on any Exchange or SHOP in any State.
(c) Child-only plans. For each level of coverage, the MSP issuer
must offer a child-only MSP options at the same level of coverage as
any health insurance coverage offered to individuals who, as of the
beginning of the plan year, have not attained the age of 21.
(d) Plan variations for the reduction or elimination of cost-
sharing. An MSP issuer must comply with section 1402 of the Affordable
Care Act, as well as any applicable standards set by OPM or HHS.
(e) OPM approval. An MSP issuer must submit the levels of coverage
plans and plan variations to OPM for review and approval by OPM.
Sec. 800.108 Assessments and user fees.
(a) Discretion to charge assessment and user fees. Beginning in
plan year 2015, OPM may require an MSP issuer to pay an assessment or
user fee as a condition of participating in the MSP Program.
(b) Determination of amount. The amount of the assessment or user
fee charged by OPM for a plan year is the amount determined necessary
by OPM to meet the costs of OPM's functions under the Affordable Care
Act for a plan year, including but not limited to such functions as
entering into contracts with, certifying, recertifying, decertifying,
and overseeing MSP options and MSP issuers for that plan year. The
amount of the assessment or user fee charged by OPM will be offset
against the assessment or user fee amount required by any State-based
Exchange or Federally-facilitated Exchange such that the total of all
assessments and user fees paid by the MSP issuer for the year for the
MSP option shall be no greater than nor less than the amount of the
assessment or user fee paid by QHP issuers in that State-based Exchange
or Federally-facilitated Exchange for that year.
(c) Process for collecting MSP assessment or user fees. OPM may
require an MSP issuer to make payment of the MSP Program assessment or
user fee amount directly to OPM, or may establish other mechanisms for
the collection process.
Sec. 800.109 Network adequacy.
(a) General requirement. An MSP issuer must ensure that the
provider network of each of its MSP options, as available to all
enrollees, meets the following standards:
(1) Maintains a network that is sufficient in number and types of
providers to assure that all services will be accessible without
unreasonable delay;
(2) Is consistent with the network adequacy provisions of section
2702(c) of the Public Health Service Act; and
(3) Includes essential community providers in compliance with 45
CFR 156.235.
(b) Provider directory. An MSP issuer must make its provider
directory for an MSP option available to the Exchange for publication
online pursuant to guidance from the Exchange and to potential
enrollees in hard copy, upon request. In the provider directory, an MSP
issuer must identify providers that are not accepting new patients. An
MSP issuer must also comply with any additional standards related to
provider directories set by HHS for QHP issuers.
(c) OPM guidance. OPM will issue guidance containing the criteria
and standards that it will use to determine the adequacy of a provider
network.
Sec. 800.110 Service area.
An MSP issuer must offer an MSP option within one or more service
areas in a State defined by each Exchange pursuant to 45 CFR 155.1055.
If an Exchange permits issuers to define their service areas, an MSP
issuer must obtain OPM's approval for its proposed service areas.
Pursuant to Sec. 800.104, OPM may enter into a contract with an MSP
issuer even if the MSP issuer's MSP options for a State cover fewer
than all the service areas specified for that State. MSP options will
follow the same standards for service areas for QHPs pursuant to 45 CFR
155.1055.
Sec. 800.111 Accreditation requirement.
(a) General requirement. An MSP issuer must be or become accredited
consistently with the requirements for QHP issuers specified in section
1311 of the Affordable Care Act and 45 CFR 156.275(a)(1).
(b) Release of survey. An MSP issuer must authorize the accrediting
entity that accredits the MSP issuer to release to OPM and to the
Exchange a copy of its most recent accreditation survey, together with
any survey-related
[[Page 69814]]
information that OPM or an Exchange may require, such as corrective
action plans and summaries of findings.
(c) Timeframe for accreditation. An MSP issuer that is not
accredited as of the date that it enters into a contract with OPM must
become accredited within the timeframe established by OPM as authorized
by 45 CFR 155.1045.
Sec. 800.112 Reporting requirements.
(a) OPM specification of reporting requirements. OPM will specify
the data and information that must be reported by an MSP issuer,
including data permitted or required by the Affordable Care Act and
such other data as OPM may determine necessary for the oversight and
administration of the MSP Program. OPM will also specify the form,
manner, processes, and frequency for the reporting of data and
information. The Director may require that MSP issuers submit claims
payment and enrollment data to facilitate OPM's oversight and
administration of the MSP Program in a manner similar to the FEHB
Program.
(b) Quality and quality improvement standards. An MSP issuer must
comply with any standards required by OPM for reporting quality and
quality improvement activities, including but not limited to
implementation of a quality improvement strategy, disclosure of quality
measures to enrollees and prospective enrollees, reporting of pediatric
quality measures, and implementation of rating and enrollee
satisfaction surveys, which will be similar to standards under section
1311(c)(1)(E), (H), and (I), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of the Affordable Care
Act.
Sec. 800.113 Benefit plan material or information.
(a) Compliance with Federal and State law. An MSP issuer must
comply with Federal and State laws relating to benefit plan material or
information, including the provisions of this section and guidance
issued by OPM specifying its standards, process, and timeline for
approval of benefit plan material or information.
(b) General standards for MSP applications and notices. An MSP
issuer must provide all applications and notices to enrollees in
accordance with the standards described in 45 CFR 155.205(c). OPM may
establish additional standards to meet the needs of MSP enrollees.
(c) Accuracy. An MSP issuer is responsible for the accuracy of its
benefit plan material or information.
(d) Truthful, not misleading, no material omissions, and plain
language. All benefit plan material or information must be:
(1) Truthful, not misleading, and without material omissions; and
(2) Written in plain language, as defined in section 1311(e)(3)(B)
of the Affordable Care Act.
(e) Uniform explanation of coverage documents and standardized
definitions. An MSP issuer must comply with the provisions of section
2715 of the PHS Act and regulations issued to implement that section.
(f) OPM review and approval of benefit plan material or
information. OPM may request an MSP issuer to submit to OPM benefit
plan material or information, as defined in Sec. 800.20. OPM reserves
the right to review and approve benefit plan material or information to
ensure that an MSP issuer complies with Federal and State laws, and the
standards prescribed by OPM with respect to benefit plan material or
information.
(g) Statement on certification by OPM. An MSP issuer may include a
statement in its benefit plan material or information that:
(1) OPM has certified the MSP option as eligible to be offered on
the Exchange; and
(2) OPM monitors the MSP option for compliance with all applicable
law.
Sec. 800.114 Compliance with applicable State law.
(a) Compliance with State law. An MSP issuer must, with respect to
each of its MSP options, generally comply with State law pursuant to
section 1334(b)(2) of the Affordable Care Act. However, the MSP options
and MSP issuers are not subject to State laws that:
(1) Are inconsistent with section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act
or this part;
(2) Prevent the application of a requirement of part A of title
XXVII of the PHS Act; or
(3) Prevent the application of a requirement of title I of the
Affordable Care Act.
(b) Determination of inconsistency. After consultation with the
State and HHS, OPM reserves the right to determine, in its judgment, as
effectuated through an MSP Program contract, these regulations, or OPM
guidance, whether the standards set forth in paragraph (a) of this
section are satisfied with respect to particular State laws.
Sec. 800.115 Level playing field.
An MSP issuer must, with respect to each of its MSP options, meet
the following requirements in order to ensure a level playing field,
subject to Sec. 800.114:
(a) Guaranteed renewal. Guarantee that an enrollee can renew
enrollment in an MSP option in compliance with sections 2703 and 2742
of the PHS Act;
(b) Rating. In proposing premiums for OPM approval, use only the
rating factors permitted under section 2701 of the PHS Act and State
law;
(c) Preexisting conditions. Not impose any preexisting condition
exclusion and comply with section 2704 of the PHS Act;
(d) Non-discrimination. Comply with section 2705 of the PHS Act;
(e) Quality improvement and reporting. Comply with all Federal and
State quality improvement and reporting requirements. Quality
improvement and reporting means quality improvement as defined in
section 1311(h) of the Affordable Care Act and quality improvement
plans or strategies required under State law, and quality reporting as
defined in section 2717 of the PHS Act and section 1311(g) of the
Affordable Care Act. Quality improvement also includes activities such
as, but not limited to, implementation of a quality improvement
strategy, disclosure of quality measures to enrollees and prospective
enrollees, and reporting of pediatric quality measures, which will be
similar to standards under section 1311(c)(1)(E), (H), and (I) of the
Affordable Care Act;
(f) Fraud and abuse. Comply with all Federal and State fraud and
abuse laws;
(g) Licensure. Be licensed in every State in which it offers an MSP
option;
(h) Solvency and financial requirements. Comply with the solvency
standards set by each State in which it offers an MSP option;
(i) Market conduct. Comply with the market conduct standards of
each State in which it offers an MSP option;
(j) Prompt payment. Comply with applicable State law in negotiating
the terms of payment in contracts with its providers and in making
payments to claimants and providers;
(k) Appeals and grievances. Comply with Federal standards under
section 2719 of the PHS Act for appeals and grievances relating to
adverse benefit determinations, as described in subpart F of this part;
(l) Privacy and confidentiality. Comply with all Federal and State
privacy and security laws and requirements, including any standards
required by OPM in guidance or contract, which will be similar to the
standards contained in 45 CFR part 164 and applicable State law; and
(m) Benefit plan material or information. Comply with Federal and
State law, including Sec. 800.113.
[[Page 69815]]
Sec. 800.116 Process for dispute resolution.
(a) Determinations about applicability of State law under section
1334(b)(2) of the Affordable Care Act. In the event of a dispute about
the applicability to an MSP option or MSP issuer of a State law, the
State may request that OPM reconsider a determination that an MSP
option or MSP issuer is not subject to such State law.
(b) Required demonstration. A State making a request under
paragraph (a) of this section must demonstrate that the State law at
issue:
(1) Is not inconsistent with section 1334 of the Affordable Care
Act or this part;
(2) Does not prevent the application of a requirement of part A of
title XXVII of the PHS Act; and
(3) Does not prevent the application of a requirement of title I of
the Affordable Care Act.
(c) Request for review. The request must be in writing and include
contact information, including the name, telephone number, email
address, and mailing address of the person or persons whom OPM may
contact regarding the request for review. The request must be in such
form, contain such information, and be submitted in such manner and
within such timeframe as OPM may prescribe.
(1) The requester may submit to OPM any relevant information to
support its request.
(2) OPM may obtain additional information relevant to the request
from any source as it may, in its judgment, deem necessary. OPM will
provide the requester with a copy of any additional information it
obtains and provide an opportunity for the requester to respond
(including by submission of additional information or explanation).
(3) OPM will issue a written decision within 60 calendar days after
receiving the written request, or after the due date for a response
under paragraph (c)(2) of this section, whichever is later, unless a
different timeframe is agreed upon.
(4) OPM's written decision will constitute final agency action that
is subject to review under the Administrative Procedure Act in the
appropriate U.S. district court. Such review is limited to the record
that was before OPM when OPM made its decision.
Subpart C--Premiums, Rating Factors, Medical Loss Ratios, and Risk
Adjustment
Sec. 800.201 General requirements.
(a) Premium negotiation. OPM will negotiate annually with an MSP
issuer, on a State by State basis, the premiums for each MSP option
offered by that issuer in that State. Such negotiations may include
negotiations about the cost-sharing provisions of an MSP option.
(b) Duration. Premiums will remain in effect for the plan year.
(c) Guidance on rate development. OPM will issue guidance
addressing methods for the development of premiums for the MSP Program.
That guidance will follow State rating standards generally applicable
in a State, to the greatest extent practicable.
(d) Calculation of actuarial value. An MSP issuer must calculate
actuarial value in the same manner as QHP issuers under section 1302(d)
of the Affordable Care Act, as well as any applicable standards set by
OPM or HHS.
(e) OPM rate review process. An MSP issuer must participate in the
rate review process established by OPM to negotiate rates for MSP
options. The rate review process established by OPM will be similar to
the process established by HHS pursuant to section 2794 of the PHS Act
and disclosure and review standards established under 45 CFR part 154.
(f) State effective rate review. With respect to its MSP options,
an MSP issuer is subject to a State's rate review process, including a
State's Effective Rate Review Program established by HHS pursuant to
section 2794 of the PHS Act and 45 CFR part 154. In the event HHS is
reviewing rates for a State pursuant to section 2794 of the PHS Act,
HHS will defer to OPM's judgment regarding the MSP options' proposed
rate increase. If a State withholds approval of an MSP option and OPM
determines, in its discretion, that the State's action would prevent
OPM from administrating the MSP Program, OPM retains authority to make
the final decision to approve rates for participation in the MSP
Program, notwithstanding the absence of State approval.
(g) Single risk pool. An MSP issuer must consider all enrollees in
an MSP option to be in the same risk pool as all enrollees in all other
health plans in the individual market or the small group market,
respectively, in compliance with section 1312(c) of the Affordable Care
Act, 45 CFR 156.80, and any applicable Federal or State laws and
regulations implementing that section.
Sec. 800.202 Rating factors.
(a) Permissible rating factors. In proposing premiums for each MSP
option, an MSP issuer must use only the rating factors permitted under
section 2701 of the PHS Act.
(b) Application of variations based on age or tobacco use. Rating
variations permitted under section 2701 of the PHS Act must be applied
by an MSP issuer based on the portion of the premium attributable to
each family member covered under the coverage in accordance with any
applicable Federal or State laws and regulations implementing section
2701(a) of the PHS Act.
(c) Age rating. For age rating, an MSP issuer must use the ratio
established by the State in which the MSP option is offered, if it is
less than 3:1.
(1) Age bands. An MSP issuer must use the uniform age bands
established under HHS regulations implementing section 2701(a) of the
PHS Act.
(2) Age curves. An MSP issuer must use the age curves established
under HHS regulations implementing section 2701(a) of the PHS Act, or
age curves established by a State pursuant to HHS regulations.
(d) Rating areas. An MSP issuer must use the rating areas
appropriate to the State in which the MSP option is offered and
established under HHS regulations implementing section 2701(a) if the
PHS Act.
(e) Tobacco rating. An MSP issuer must apply tobacco use as a
rating factor in accordance with any applicable Federal or State laws
and regulations implementing section 2701(a) of the PHS Act.
(f) Wellness programs. An MSP issuer must comply with any
applicable Federal or State laws and regulations implementing section
2705 of the PHS Act.
Sec. 800.203 Medical loss ratio.
(a) Required medical loss ratio. An MSP issuer must attain:
(1) The medical loss ratio (MLR) required under section 2718 of the
PHS Act and regulations promulgated by HHS; and
(2) Any MSP-specific MLR that OPM may set in the best interests of
MSP enrollees or that is necessary to be consistent with a State's
requirements with respect to MLR.
(b) Consequences of not attaining required medical loss ratio. If
an MSP issuer fails to attain an MLR set forth in paragraph (a) of this
section, OPM may take any appropriate action, including but not limited
to intermediate sanctions, such as suspension of marketing,
decertifying an MSP option in one or more States, or terminating an MSP
issuer's contract pursuant to Sec. 800.404.
[[Page 69816]]
Sec. 800.204 Reinsurance, risk corridors, and risk adjustment.
(a) Transitional reinsurance program. An MSP issuer must comply
with section 1341 of the Affordable Care Act, 45 CFR part 153, and any
applicable Federal or State regulations under section 1341 that set
forth requirements to implement the transitional reinsurance program
for the individual market.
(b) Temporary risk corridors program. An MSP issuer must comply
with section 1342 of the Affordable Care Act, 45 CFR part 153, and any
applicable Federal regulations under section 1342 that set forth
requirements to implement the risk corridor program.
(c) Risk adjustment program. An MSP issuer must comply with section
1343 of the Affordable Care Act, 45 CFR part 153, and any applicable
Federal or State regulations under section 1343 that set forth
requirements to implement the risk adjustment program.
Subpart D--Application and Contracting Procedures
Sec. 800.301 Application process.
(a) Acceptance of applications. Without regard to 41 U.S.C.
6101(b)-(d), or any other statute requiring competitive bidding, OPM
may consider annual applications from health insurance issuers,
including groups of health insurance issuers as defined in Sec.
800.20, to participate in the MSP Program. If OPM determines that it is
not beneficial for the MSP Program to consider new issuer applications
for an upcoming year, OPM will issue a notice to that effect. Each
existing MSP issuer may complete a renewal application annually.
(b) Form and manner of applications. An applicant must submit to
OPM, in the form and manner and in accordance with the timeline
specified by OPM, the information requested by OPM for determining
whether an applicant meets the requirements of this part.
Sec. 800.302 Review of applications.
(a) Determinations. OPM will determine if an applicant meets the
requirements of this part. If OPM determines that an applicant meets
the requirements of this part, OPM may accept the applicant to enter
into contract negotiations with OPM to participate in the MSP Program.
(b) Requests for additional information. OPM may request additional
information from an applicant before making a decision about whether to
enter into contract negotiations with that applicant to participate in
the MSP Program.
(c) Declination of application. If, after reviewing an application
to participate in the MSP Program, OPM declines to enter into contract
negotiations with the applicant, OPM will inform the applicant in
writing of the reasons for that decision.
(d) Discretion. The decision whether to enter into contract
negotiations with a health insurance issuer who has applied to
participate in the MSP Program is committed to OPM's discretion.
(e) Impact on future applications. OPM's declination of an
application to participate in the MSP Program will not preclude the
applicant from submitting an application for a subsequent year to
participate in the MSP Program.
Sec. 800.303 MSP Program contracting.
(a) Participation in MSP Program. To become an MSP issuer, the
applicant and the Director or the Director's designee must sign a
contract that meets the requirements of this part.
(b) Standard contract. OPM will establish a standard contract for
the MSP Program.
(c) Premiums. OPM and the applicant will negotiate the premiums for
an MSP option for each plan year in accordance with the provisions of
subpart C of this part.
(d) Benefit packages. OPM must approve the applicant's benefit
packages for an MSP option.
(e) Additional terms and conditions. OPM may elect to negotiate
with an applicant such additional terms, conditions, and requirements
that:
(1) Are in the interests of MSP enrollees; or
(2) OPM determines to be appropriate.
(f) Certification to offer health insurance coverage.
(1) For each plan year, an MSP Program contract will specify MSP
options that OPM has certified, the specific package of benefits
authorized to be offered on each Exchange, and the premiums to be
charged for each package of benefits on each Exchange.
(2) An MSP issuer may not offer an MSP option on an Exchange unless
its MSP Program contract with OPM includes a certification authorizing
the MSP issuer to offer the MSP option on that Exchange in accordance
with paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
Sec. 800.304 Term of the contract.
(a) Term of a contract. The term of the contract will be specified
in the MSP Program contract and must be for a period of at least the 12
consecutive months defined as the plan year.
(b) Plan year. The plan year is a consecutive 12-month period
during which an MSP option provides coverage for health benefits. A
plan year may be a calendar year or otherwise.
Sec. 800.305 Contract renewal process.
(a) Renewal. To continue participating in the MSP Program, an MSP
issuer must provide to OPM, in the form and manner and in accordance
with the timeline prescribed by OPM, the information requested by OPM
for determining whether the MSP issuer continues to meet the
requirements of this part.
(b) OPM decision. Subject to paragraph (c) of this section, OPM
will renew the MSP Program contract of an MSP issuer who timely submits
the information described in paragraph (a).
(c) OPM discretion not to renew. OPM may decline to renew the
contract of an MSP issuer if:
(1) OPM and the MSP issuer fail to agree on premiums and benefits
for an MSP option for the subsequent plan year;
(2) The MSP issuer has engaged in conduct described in Sec.
800.404(a); or
(3) OPM determines that the MSP issuer will be unable to comply
with a material provision of section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act or
this part.
(d) Failure to agree on premiums and benefits. Except as otherwise
provided in this part, if an MSP issuer has complied with paragraph (a)
of this section and OPM and the MSP issuer fail to agree on premiums
and benefits for an MSP option on one or more Exchanges for the
subsequent plan year by the date required by OPM, either party may
provide notice of nonrenewal pursuant to Sec. 800.306, or OPM may in
its discretion withdraw the certification of that MSP option on the
Exchange or Exchanges for that plan year. In addition, if OPM and the
MSP issuer fail to agree on benefits and premiums for an MSP option on
one or more Exchanges by the date set by OPM and in the event of no
action (no notice of nonrenewal or renewal) by either party, the MSP
Program contract will be renewed and the existing premiums and benefits
for that MSP option on that Exchange or Exchanges will remain in effect
for the subsequent plan year.
Sec. 800.306 Nonrenewal.
(a) Nonrenewal. Nonrenewal may pertain to the MSP issuer or the
State-level issuer. The circumstances under which nonrenewal may occur
are:
(1) Nonrenewal of contract. As used in this subpart and subpart E
of this part, ``nonrenewal of contract'' means a decision by either OPM
or an MSP issuer not to renew an MSP Program contract.
[[Page 69817]]
(2) Nonrenewal of participation. As used in this subpart and
subpart E of this part, ``nonrenewal of participation'' means a
decision by OPM, an MSP issuer, or a State-level issuer not to renew a
State-level issuer's participation in a MSP Program contract.
(b) Notice required. Either OPM or an MSP issuer may decline to
renew an MSP Program contract by providing a written notice of
nonrenewal to the other party.
(c) MSP issuer responsibilities. The MSP issuer's written notice of
nonrenewal must be made in accordance with its MSP Program contract
with OPM. The MSP issuer also must comply with any requirements
regarding the termination of a plan that are applicable to a QHP
offered on an Exchange on which the MSP option was offered, including a
requirement to provide advance written notice of termination to
enrollees. MSP issuers shall provide written notice to enrollees in
accordance with Sec. 800.404(d).
Subpart E--Compliance
Sec. 800.401 Contract performance.
(a) General. An MSP issuer must perform an MSP Program contract
with OPM in accordance with the requirements of section 1334 of the
Affordable Care Act and this part. The MSP issuer must continue to meet
such requirements while under an MSP Program contract with OPM.
(b) Specific requirements for issuers. In addition to the
requirements described in paragraph (a) of this section, each MSP
issuer must:
(1) Have, in the judgment of OPM, the financial resources to carry
out its obligations under the MSP Program;
(2) Keep such reasonable financial and statistical records, and
furnish to OPM such reasonable financial and statistical reports with
respect to the MSP option or the MSP issuer, as may be requested by
OPM;
(3) Permit representatives of OPM (including the OPM Office of
Inspector General), the U.S. Government Accountability Office, and any
other applicable Federal Government auditing entities to audit and
examine its records and accounts that pertain, directly or indirectly,
to the MSP option at such reasonable times and places as may be
designated by OPM or the U.S. Government Accountability Office;
(4) Timely submit to OPM a properly completed and signed novation
or change-of-name agreement in accordance with subpart 42.12 of 48 CFR
part 42;
(5) Perform the MSP Program contract in accordance with prudent
business practices, as described in paragraph (c) of this section; and
(6) Not perform the MSP Program contract in accordance with poor
business practices, as described in paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) Prudent business practices. OPM will consider an MSP issuer's
specific circumstances and facts in using its discretion to determine
compliance with paragraph (b)(5) of this section. For purposes of
paragraph (b)(5) of this section, prudent business practices include,
but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Timely compliance with OPM instructions and directives;
(2) Legal and ethical business and health care practices;
(3) Compliance with the terms of the MSP Program contract,
regulations, and statutes;
(4) Timely and accurate adjudication of claims or rendering of
medical services;
(5) Operating a system for accounting for costs incurred under the
MSP Program contract, which includes segregating and pricing MSP option
medical utilization and allocating indirect and administrative costs in
a reasonable and equitable manner;
(6) Maintaining accurate accounting reports of costs incurred in
the administration of the MSP Program contract;
(7) Applying performance standards for assuring contract quality as
outlined at Sec. 800.402; and
(8) Establishing and maintaining a system of internal controls that
provides reasonable assurance that:
(i) The provision and payments of benefits and other expenses
comply with legal, regulatory, and contractual guidelines;
(ii) MSP funds, property, and other assets are safeguarded against
waste, loss, unauthorized use, or misappropriation; and
(iii) Data is accurately and fairly disclosed in all reports
required by OPM.
(d) Poor business practices. OPM will consider an MSP issuer's
specific circumstances and facts in using its discretion to determine
compliance with paragraph (b)(6) of this section. For purposes of
paragraph (b)(6) of this section, poor business practices include, but
are not limited to, the following:
(1) Using fraudulent or unethical business or health care practices
or otherwise displaying a lack of business integrity or honesty;
(2) Repeatedly or knowingly providing false or misleading
information in the rate setting process;
(3) Failing to comply with OPM instructions and directives;
(4) Having an accounting system that is incapable of separately
accounting for costs incurred under the contract and/or that lacks the
internal controls necessary to fulfill the terms of the contract;
(5) Failing to ensure that the MSP issuer properly pays or denies
claims, or, if applicable, provides medical services that are
inconsistent with standards of good medical practice; and
(6) Entering into contracts or employment agreements with
providers, provider groups, or health care workers that include
provisions or financial incentives that directly or indirectly create
an inducement to limit or restrict communication about medically
necessary services to any individual covered under the MSP Program.
Financial incentives are defined as bonuses, withholds, commissions,
profit sharing or other similar adjustments to basic compensation
(e.g., service fee, capitation, salary) which have the effect of
limiting or reducing communication about appropriate medically
necessary services.
(e) Performance escrow account. OPM may require MSP issuers to pay
an assessment into an escrow account to ensure contract compliance and
benefit MSP enrollees.
Sec. 800.402 Contract quality assurance.
(a) General. This section prescribes general policies and
procedures to ensure that services acquired under MSP Program contracts
conform to the contract's quality requirements.
(b) Internal controls. OPM may periodically evaluate the
contractor's system of internal controls under the quality assurance
program required by the contract and will acknowledge in writing if the
system is inconsistent with the requirements set forth in the contract.
OPM's reviews do not diminish the contractor's obligation to implement
and maintain an effective and efficient system to apply the internal
controls.
(c) Performance standards. (1) OPM will issue specific performance
standards for MSP Program contracts and will inform MSP issuers of the
applicable performance standards prior to negotiations for the contract
year. OPM may benchmark its standards against standards generally
accepted in the insurance industry. OPM may authorize nationally
recognized standards to be used to fulfill this requirement.
(2) MSP issuers must comply with the performance standards issued
pursuant to this section.
[[Page 69818]]
Sec. 800.403 Fraud and abuse.
(a) Program required. An MSP issuer must conduct a program to
assess its vulnerability to fraud and abuse as well as to address such
vulnerabilities.
(b) Fraud detection system. An MSP issuer must operate a system
designed to detect and eliminate fraud and abuse by employees and
subcontractors of the MSP issuer, by providers furnishing goods or
services to MSP enrollees, and by MSP enrollees.
(c) Submission of information. An MSP issuer must provide to OPM
such information or assistance as may be necessary for the agency to
carry out the duties and responsibilities, including those of the
Office of Inspector General as specified in sections 4 and 6 of the
Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.). An MSP issuer must
provide any requested information in the form, manner, and timeline
prescribed by OPM.
Sec. 800.404 Compliance actions.
(a) Causes for OPM compliance actions. The following constitute
cause for OPM to impose a compliance action described in paragraph (b)
of this section against an MSP issuer:
(1) Failure by the MSP issuer to meet the requirements set forth in
Sec. 800.401(a) and (b);
(2) An MSP issuer's sustained failure to perform the MSP Program
contract in accordance with prudent business practices, as described in
Sec. 800.401(c);
(3) A pattern of poor conduct or evidence of poor business
practices such as those described in Sec. 800.401(d); or
(4) Such other violations of law or regulation as OPM may
determine, including pursuant to its authority under Sec. Sec. 800.102
and 800.114.
(b) Compliance actions. (1) OPM may impose a compliance action
against an MSP issuer at any time during the contract term if it
determines that the MSP issuer is not in compliance with applicable
law, this part, or the terms of its contract with OPM.
(2) Compliance actions may include, but are not limited to:
(i) Establishment and implementation of a corrective action plan;
(ii) Imposition of intermediate sanctions, such as suspensions of
marketing;
(iii) Performance incentives;
(iv) Reduction of service area or areas;
(v) Withdrawal of the certification of the MSP option or options
offered on one or more Exchanges;
(vi) Nonrenewal of participation;
(vii) Nonrenewal of contract; and
(viii) Withdrawal of approval or termination of the MSP Program
contract.
(c) Notice of compliance action. (1) OPM must notify an MSP issuer
in writing of a compliance action under this section. Such notice must
indicate the specific compliance action undertaken and the reason for
the compliance action.
(2) For compliance actions listed in Sec. 800.404(b)(2)(v) through
(b)(2)(viii), such notice must include a statement that the MSP issuer
is entitled to request a reconsideration of OPM's determination to
impose a compliance action pursuant to Sec. 800.405.
(3) Upon imposition of a compliance action listed in paragraphs
(b)(2)(iv) through (b)(2)(vii) of this section, OPM must notify the
State Insurance Commissioner(s) and Exchange officials in the State or
States in which the compliance action is effective.
(d) Notice to enrollees. If the contract is terminated, if OPM
withdraws certification of an MSP option, or if a State-level issuer's
participation in the MSP Program contract is not renewed, as described
in Sec. Sec. 800.306 and 800.404(b)(2) or any situation in which an
MSP option is no longer available to enrollees, the MSP issuer must
comply with any State or Exchange requirements regarding discontinuing
a particular type of coverage that are applicable to a QHP offered on
the Exchange on which the MSP option was offered including a
requirement to provide advance written notice before the coverage will
be discontinued. If a State or Exchange does not have requirements
about advance notice to enrollees, the MSP issuer must inform current
MSP enrollees in writing of the discontinuance of the MSP option no
later than 90 days prior to discontinuing the MSP option, unless OPM
determines that there is good cause for less than 90 days' notice.
(e) Definition. As used in this subpart, ``termination'' means a
decision by OPM to cancel an MSP Program contract prior to the end of
its contract term. The term includes OPM's withdrawal of approval of an
MSP Program contract.
Sec. 800.405 Reconsideration of compliance actions.
(a) Right to request reconsideration. An MSP issuer may request
that OPM reconsider a determination to impose one of the following
compliance actions:
(1) Withdrawal of the certification of the MSP option or options
offered on one or more Exchanges;
(2) Nonrenewal of participation;
(3) Nonrenewal of contract; or
(4) Termination of the MSP Program contract.
(b) Request for reconsideration and/or hearing. (1) An MSP issuer
with a right to request reconsideration specified in paragraph (a) of
this section may request a hearing in which OPM will reconsider its
determination to impose a compliance action.
(2) A request under this section must be in writing and contain
contact information, including the name, telephone number, email
address, and mailing address of the person or persons whom OPM may
contact regarding a request for a hearing with respect to the
reconsideration. The request must be in such form, contain such
information, and be submitted in such manner as OPM may prescribe.
(3) The request must be received by OPM within 15 calendar days
after the date of the MSP issuer's receipt of the notice of compliance
action. The MSP issuer may request that OPM's reconsideration allow a
representative of the MSP issuer to appear personally before OPM.
(4) A request under this section must include a detailed statement
of the reasons that the MSP issuer disagrees with OPM's imposition of
the compliance action, and may include any additional information that
will assist OPM in rendering a final decision under this section.
(5) OPM may obtain additional information relevant to the request
from any source as it may, in its judgment, deem necessary. OPM will
provide the MSP issuer with a copy of any additional information it
obtains and provide an opportunity for the MSP issuer to respond
(including by submitting additional information or explanation).
(6) OPM's reconsideration and hearing, if requested, may be
conducted by the Director or a representative designated by the
Director who did not participate in the initial decision that is the
subject of the request for review.
(c) Notice of final decision. OPM will notify the MSP issuer, in
writing, of OPM's final decision on the MSP issuer's request for
reconsideration and the specific reasons for that final decision. OPM's
written decision will constitute final agency action that is subject to
review under the Administrative Procedure Act in the appropriate U.S.
district court. Such review is limited to the record that was before
OPM when it made its decision.
Subpart F--Appeals by Enrollees of Denials of Claims for Payment or
Service
Sec. 800.501 General requirements.
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this subpart:
[[Page 69819]]
(1) Adverse benefit determination has the meaning given that term
in 45 CFR 147.136(a)(2)(i).
(2) Claim means a request for:
(i) Payment of a health-related bill; or
(ii) Provision of a health-related service or supply.
(b) Applicability. This subpart applies to enrollees and to other
individuals or entities who are acting on behalf of an enrollee and who
have the enrollee's specific written consent to pursue a remedy of an
adverse benefit determination.
Sec. 800.502 MSP issuer internal claims and appeals.
(a) Processes. MSP issuers must comply with the internal claims and
appeals processes applicable to group health plans and health insurance
issuers under 45 CFR 147.136(b).
(b) Timeframes and notice of determination. An MSP issuer must
provide written notice to an enrollee of its determination on a claim
brought under paragraph (a) of this section according to the timeframes
and notification rules under 45 CFR 147.136(b) and (e), including the
timeframes for urgent claims. If the MSP issuer denies a claim (or a
portion of the claim), the enrollee may appeal the adverse benefit
determination to the MSP issuer in accordance with 45 CFR 147.136(b).
Sec. 800.503 External review.
(a) External review by OPM. OPM will conduct external review of
adverse benefit determinations using a process similar to OPM review of
disputed claims under 5 CFR 890.105(e), subject to the standards and
timeframes set forth in 45 CFR 147.136(d).
(b) Notice. Notices to MSP enrollees regarding external review
under paragraph (a) of this section must comply with 45 CFR 147.136(e),
and are subject to review and approval by OPM.
(c) Issuer obligation. An MSP issuer must pay a claim or provide a
health-related service or supply pursuant to OPM's final decision or
the final decision of an independent review organization without delay,
regardless of whether the plan or issuer intends to seek judicial
review of the external review decision and unless or until there is a
judicial decision otherwise.
Sec. 800.504 Judicial review.
(a) OPM's written decision under the external review process
established under Sec. 800.503(a) will constitute final agency action
that is subject to review under the Administrative Procedure Act in the
appropriate U.S. district court. A decision made by an independent
review organization under the process established under Sec.
800.503(a) is not within OPM's discretion and therefore is not final
agency action.
(b) Judicial review under paragraph (a) of this section is limited
to the record that was before OPM when OPM made its decision.
Subpart G--Miscellaneous
Sec. 800.601 Reservation of authority.
OPM reserves the right to implement and supplement these
regulations with written operational guidelines.
Sec. 800.602 Consumer choice with respect to certain services.
(a) Assured availability of varied coverage. Consistent with Sec.
800.104, OPM will ensure that at least one of the MSP issuers on each
Exchange in each State offers at least one MSP option that does not
provide coverage of services described in section 1303(b)(1)(B)(i) of
the Affordable Care Act.
(b) State opt-out. An MSP issuer may not offer abortion coverage in
any State where such coverage of abortion services is prohibited by
State law.
(c) Notice to enrollees--(1) Notice of exclusion. The MSP issuer
must provide notice to consumers prior to enrollment when non-excepted
abortion services are not a covered benefit in a State where such
coverage of such abortion services is permitted by State law, in the
form, manner, and timeline prescribed by OPM.
(2) Notice of coverage. If an MSP issuer chooses to offer an MSP
option that covers non-excepted abortion services, in addition to an
MSP option that does not provide coverage for these services, the MSP
issuer must provide notice to consumers prior to enrollment that non-
excepted abortion services are a covered benefit, in a manner
consistent with 45 CFR 147.200(a)(3), to meet the requirements of 45
CFR 156.280(f). OPM may provide guidance on the form, manner, and
timeline for this notice.
(3) OPM review and approval of notices. OPM may require an MSP
issuer to submit to OPM such notices. OPM reserves the right to review
and approve these consumer notices to ensure that an MSP issuer
complies with Federal and State laws, and the standards prescribed by
OPM with respect to Sec. 800.602.
Sec. 800.603 Disclosure of information.
(a) Disclosure to certain entities. OPM may provide information
relating to the activities of MSP issuers or State-level issuers to a
State Insurance Commissioner or Director of a State-based Exchange.
(b) Conditions of when to disclose. OPM shall only make a
disclosure described in this section to the extent that such disclosure
is:
(1) Necessary or appropriate to permit OPM's Director, a State
Insurance Commissioner, or Director of a State-based Exchange to
administer and enforce laws applicable to an MSP issuer or State-level
issuer over which it has jurisdiction, or
(2) Otherwise in the best interests of enrollees or potential
enrollees in MSP options.
(c) Confidentiality of information. OPM will take appropriate steps
to cause the recipient of this information to preserve the information
as confidential.
[FR Doc. 2014-27793 Filed 11-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-63-P