8–1–00 Vol. 65 No. 148 Tuesday August 1, 2000 Pages ...

4

8–1–00

Vol. 65 No. 148

Tuesday

August 1, 2000

Pages 46859–47242

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:52 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\01AUWS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 01AUWS

5

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000

The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday throughFriday, except official holidays, by the Office of the FederalRegister, National Archives and Records Administration,Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C.Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee ofthe Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent ofDocuments, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition.The Federal Register provides a uniform system for makingavailable to the public regulations and legal notices issued byFederal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations andExecutive Orders, Federal agency documents having generalapplicability and legal effect, documents required to be publishedby act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of publicinterest.Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of theFederal Register the day before they are published, unless theissuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documentscurrently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/fedreg.The seal of the National Archives and Records Administrationauthenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publicationestablished under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507,the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed.The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche.It is also available online at no charge as one of the databaseson GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office.The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under theauthority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Registeras the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions(44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. eachday the Federal Register is published and it includes both textand graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward.GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Registerdocuments as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (AdobePortable Document Format, including full text and all graphics),or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully checkretrieved material to ensure that documents were properlydownloaded.On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web accesscan also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet toswais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computerand modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then login as guest with no password.For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO AccessUser Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at(202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (tollfree) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday,except Federal holidays.The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paperedition is $638, or $697 for a combined Federal Register, FederalRegister Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA)subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Registerincluding the Federal Register Index and LSA is $253. Six monthsubscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The chargefor individual copies in paper form is $9.00 for each issue, or$9.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 foreach issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domesticpostage and handling. International customers please add 25% forforeign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable tothe Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO DepositAccount, VISA, MasterCard or Discover. Mail to: New Orders,Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA15250–7954.There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearingin the Federal Register.How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and thepage number. Example: 65 FR 12345.

SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES

PUBLICSubscriptions:

Paper or fiche 202–512–1800Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806

General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498Single copies/back copies:

Paper or fiche 512–1800Assistance with public single copies 512–1803

FEDERAL AGENCIESSubscriptions:

Paper or fiche 523–5243Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:52 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\01AUWS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 01AUWS

Contents Federal Register

III

Vol. 65, No. 148

Tuesday, August 1, 2000

Agricultural Marketing ServicePROPOSED RULESOranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos grown in—

Florida, 46879–46882

Agriculture DepartmentSee Agricultural Marketing ServiceSee Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Animal and Plant Health Inspection ServiceRULESExportation and importation of animals and animal

products:Horses from contagious equine meritis (CEM)-affected

countries—Spain; Spanish Pure Breed horses, 46859–46861

Antitrust DivisionNOTICESNational cooperative research notifications:

Digital Imaging Group, Inc., 46949J Consortium, Inc., 46949–46951OBI Consortium, Inc., 46951

Centers for Disease Control and PreventionNOTICESAgency information collection activities:

Submission for OMB review; comment request, 46935–46936

Meetings:Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control

Special Emphasis Panels, 46936

Coast GuardRULESDrawbridge operations:

New York, 46868–46872

Commerce DepartmentSee National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Trading CommissionNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 46886

Copyright Office, Library of CongressRULESUruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA):

Copyright restoration of certain Berne Convention andWorld Trade Organization works—

Restored copyrights, notices of intent to enforce;corrections procedure; correction, 46873

Corporation for National and Community ServiceNOTICESGrants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

Martin Luther King, Jr. Service Day Initiative, 46886–46890

Privacy Act:Systems of records, 46890–46905

Customs ServiceNOTICESIRS interest rates used in calculating interest on overdue

accounts and refunds, 47002–47003

Defense DepartmentSee Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

Drug Enforcement AdministrationNOTICESApplications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

Chiragene, Inc., 46951

Education DepartmentNOTICESMeetings:

Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation NationalCommittee, 46906

Employment and Training AdministrationNOTICESAdjustment assistance:

A.T. Cross Co., 46955Georgia Pacific Corp., 46955Lilly Industries, Inc., 46955Ray-Ban Sun Optics, 46955–46956Swiss Maid, Inc., et al., 46956–46958Tecumseh Products Co., 46958

Adjustment assistance and NAFTA transitional adjustmentassistance:

R. Daye Ltd. et al., 46953–46955Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

H-1B technical skill training programs, 46958–46969Minority colleges and universities workforce partnerships

and training strategies to address skill shortagesdemonstration program, 46969–46988

NAFTA transitional adjustment assistance:Chevron Products Co., 46988–46989ITT Industries, 46989Sagaz Industries, Inc., 46989

Energy DepartmentSee Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionNOTICESAgency information collection activities:


Meetings:Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory

Board—Kirtland Area Office (Sandia), NM, 46907

Powerplant and industrial fuel use; new electricpowerplant coal capability:

Self-certification filings—Freestone Power Generation, L.P., 46907PG&E Energy Trading-Power, L.P., 46907–46908

Environmental Protection AgencyRULESAir quality implementation plans; approval and

promulgation; various States:California, 46873–46875

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 00:46 Aug 01, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\01AUCN.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 01AUCN

IV Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Contents

NOTICESAir quality; prevention of significant deterioration (PSD);

Determinations—RockGen Energy Center, Christiana, WI, 46910–46911

Pesticide, food, and feed additive petitions:Natural Industries, Inc., et al., 46912–46916

Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.:Nippon Soda Co., Ltd., 46911–46912

Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:Civil rights; EPA assistance recipients administering

environmental permitting programs, andinvestigation of administrative complaintschallenging permits, 46916–46917

Executive Office of the PresidentSee Presidential DocumentsSee Trade Representative, Office of United States

Export Administration BureauNOTICESReports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:Crude oil imports; effect on national security; Commerce

Secretary’s report summary [Editorial Note: Thisdocument published at 65 FR 46427 in the FederalRegister of Friday, July 28, 2000, was inadvertentlylisted under the International Trade Administration.]

Export-Import BankNOTICESMeetings:

Advisory Committee, 46917

Federal Aviation AdministrationRULESAirworthiness directives:

Boeing, 46861–46862Boeing; correction, 46862–46864

NOTICESMeetings:

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee, 47001

Federal Bureau of InvestigationNOTICESAgency information collection activities:


Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 46917

Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 46910Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

Great Lakes Gas Transmission L.P., 46908–46909Kern River Gas Transmission Co., 46909Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC, 46909Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC et al.,

46909Midcoast Gas Transmission, Inc., 46910Mid Louisiana Gas Co., 46910Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C., 46910

Federal Railroad AdministrationPROPOSED RULESRailroad safety:

Locomotive horns use at highway-rail grade crossings;requirement for sounding

Congressional contacts, 46884

Federal Reserve SystemNOTICESAgency information collection activities:

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 46917–46920Submission for OMB review; comment request, 46920–

46921Meetings; Sunshine Act, 46921

Federal Trade CommissionNOTICESPremerger notification waiting periods; early terminations,

46921–46932Prohibited trade practices:

Establissements Delhaize Freres et Cie ‘‘Le Lion’’ S.A. etal., 46932–46935

Fish and Wildlife ServiceNOTICESComprehensive conservation plans; availability, etc.:

Necedah National Wildlife Refuge, WI, 46940–46941

Food and Drug AdministrationRULESHuman drugs:

Cold, cough, allergy, bronchodilator, and antiasthmaticproducts (OTC)—

Antitussive products containing camphor or menthol;final monograph, 46864–46868

NOTICESHarmonisation International Conference; guidelines

availability:Active pharmaceuticals ingredients; good manufacturing

practice, 46936–46937Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.:

Medical devices—Refractive implants; investigational device exemptions

and premarket approval applications, 46938

Health and Human Services DepartmentSee Centers for Disease Control and PreventionSee Food and Drug AdministrationSee Health Care Financing AdministrationSee Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

AdministrationNOTICESFederal claims; interest rates on overdue debts, 46935

Health Care Financing AdministrationRULESMedicare:

Hospital inpatient payments and graduate medicaleducation rates and costs; Balanced BudgetRefinement Act provisions, 47025–47054

Hospital inpatient prospective payment systems and 2001FY rates, 47053–47211

Immigration and Naturalization ServicePROPOSED RULESImmigration:

Aliens—Detention of aliens ordered removed, 46882


VFederal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Contents

NOTICESEnvironmental statements; notice of intent:

Arizona; border barriers for enforcement initiatives;implementation, 46953

Interior DepartmentSee Fish and Wildlife ServiceSee Land Management BureauSee Minerals Management ServiceSee National Park Service

Internal Revenue ServiceNOTICESAgency information collection activities:

Proposed collection; comment request, 47003Excise taxes:

Motor fuel; approved distribution terminals; controlnumbers, 47003–47022

Tax counseling program for elderly; application packages;availability, 47022–47023

International Trade CommissionNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 46947–46948

Justice DepartmentSee Antitrust DivisionSee Drug Enforcement AdministrationSee Federal Bureau of InvestigationSee Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNOTICESPollution control; consent judgments:

American Chemical Service, Inc., et al., 46948Harris County Municipal Utility District No. 50, TX,

46948Morgan-Skinner, Elsa, et al., 46948–46949Willamette Industries, Inc., 46949

Labor DepartmentSee Employment and Training Administration

Land Management BureauNOTICESAlaska Native claims selection:

Doyon, Ltd., 46941Environmental statements; availability, etc.:

Soledad Canyon Sand and Gravel Mining Project, LosAngeles County, CA, 46941–46942

Public land orders:Idaho, 46942

Library of CongressSee Copyright Office, Library of Congress

Minerals Management ServiceNOTICESAgency information collection activities:

Proposed collection; comment request, 46942–46944

National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationRULESAcquisition regulations:

Contract bundling, 46875–46877NOTICESAgency information collection activities:


National Archives and Records AdministrationNOTICESAgency records schedules; availability, 46991–46994Nixon Presidential historical materials; opening of

materials, 46994–46995

National Credit Union AdministrationNOTICESAgency information collection activities:

Submission for OMB review; comment request, 46995

National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationPROPOSED RULESConsumer information:

Passenger cars and light multipurpose passenger vehiclesand trucks; rollover prevention, 46884–46885

National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationRULESFishery conservation and management:

Atlantic highly migratory species—Pelagic longline management, 47213–47238

Northeastern United States fisheries—Scup, 46877Spiny dogfish, 46877–46878

PROPOSED RULESFishery conservation and management:

Atlantic highly migratory species—Bycatch reduction; biological opinion; environmental

impact statement; meetings, 46885

National Park ServiceNOTICESNative American human remains and associated funerary

objects:Casa Grande Ruins National Monument, Coolidge, AZ;

cultural items used by Tohono O’odham Nation ofArizona for Vikita ceremony, 46944–46945

Salinas Pueblo Missions National Monument,Mountainair, NM; inventory, 46945–46947

Nuclear Regulatory CommissionNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 46997Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:

Carolina Power & Light Co., 46995–46996Power Authority of State of New York, 46997

Office of United States Trade RepresentativeSee Trade Representative, Office of United States

Presidential DocumentsADMINISTRATIVE ORDERSAdministrative orders

Iraq; continuation of emergency (Notice of July 28, 2000),47241

Public Health ServiceSee Centers for Disease Control and PreventionSee Food and Drug AdministrationSee Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

Administration

Social Security AdministrationNOTICESPrivacy Act:

Systems of records, 46997–46999


VI Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Contents

State DepartmentNOTICESAgency information collection activities:

Proposed collection; comment request, 46999Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:

International collaborative projects in science andtechnology—

Egypt and United States, 46999

Substance Abuse and Mental Health ServicesAdministration

NOTICESFederal agency urine drug testing; certified laboratories

meeting minimum standards, list, 46938–46940

Surface Transportation BoardNOTICESRailroad services abandonment:

Union Pacific Railroad Co., 47001

Trade Representative, Office of United StatesNOTICESWorld Trade Organization:

Dispute settlement panel establishment requests—European Community; trademarks, trade-names, or

commercial names associated with businessesconfiscated without compensation by Cuba, 46999–47000

Transportation DepartmentSee Coast GuardSee Federal Aviation AdministrationSee Federal Railroad AdministrationSee National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationSee Surface Transportation Board

Treasury DepartmentSee Customs ServiceSee Internal Revenue Service

Uniformed Services University of the Health SciencesNOTICESMeetings; Sunshine Act, 46905

Veterans Affairs DepartmentPROPOSED RULESLoan guaranty:

Net value and pre-foreclosure debt waivers, 46882–46883

Separate Parts In This Issue

Part IIDepartment of Health and Human Services, Health Care

Financing Administration, 47025–47211

Part IIIDepartment of Commerce, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, 47213–47238

Part IVThe President, 47241

Reader AidsConsult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue forphone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders,and notice of recently enacted public laws.


CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in theReader Aids section at the end of this issue.

VIIFederal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Contents

3 CFRAdministrative Orders:Notices:July 28, 2000 ...................47241Executive Orders:12722 (See Notice of

July 28, 2000) ..............4724112724 (See Notice of

July 28, 2000) ..............47241

7 CFRProposed Rules:905...................................46879

8 CFRProposed Rules:212...................................46882236...................................46882241...................................46882

9 CFR93.....................................46859

14 CFR39 (2 documents) ............46862

21 CFR201...................................46864341...................................46864

33 CFR117 (2 documents) .........46868,

46870

37 CFR201...................................46873

38 CFRProposed Rules:36.....................................46882

40 CFR52.....................................46873

42 CFR410 (2 documents) .........47026,

47054412 (2 documents) .........47026,

47054413 (2 documents) .........47026,

47054482...................................47026485(2 documents)...........47026,

47054

48 CFR1807.................................468751819.................................46875

49 CFRProposed Rules:222...................................46884229...................................46884575...................................46884

50 CFR635...................................47214648 (2 documents) ..........46877Proposed Rules:635...................................46885

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:58 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\01AULS.LOC pfrm02 PsN: 01AULS

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains regulatory documents having generalapplicability and legal effect, most of whichare keyed to and codified in the Code ofFederal Regulations, which is published under50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold bythe Superintendent of Documents. Prices ofnew books are listed in the first FEDERALREGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

46859

Vol. 65, No. 148


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health InspectionService

9 CFR Part 93

[Docket No. 99–054–2]

Spanish Pure Breed Horses FromSpain

AGENCY: Animal and Plant HealthInspection Service, USDA.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the animalimport regulations to allow SpanishPure Breed horses from Spain to beimported into the United States underthe same preexport testing andquarantine conditions that apply tothoroughbred horses from regions inwhich contagious equine metritis existsor may exist. This action will relievesome restrictions on the importation ofSpanish Pure Breed horses into theUnited States while continuing toprotect against the introduction anddissemination of contagious equinemetritis.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 16, 2000.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.Gary S. Colgrove, Assistant Director,Sanitary Trade Issues Team, NationalCenter for Import and Export, VS,APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39,Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–8364.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 9 CFR part 93(referred to below as the regulations)prohibit or restrict the importation ofcertain animals into the United States toprevent the introduction ofcommunicable diseases of livestock andpoultry. Subpart C—Horses, §§ 93.300through 92.326 of the regulations,pertains to the importation of horses

into the United States. Section 93.301 ofthe regulations contains specificprovisions for the quarantine and testingof horses from regions affected withcontagious equine metritis (CEM), ahighly contagious bacterial venerealdisease that affects breeding andfertility. Section 93.301 also identifiesregions where CEM exists and regionsthat trade horses freely with thosewhere CEM exists without testing forCEM. Section 93.301 prohibits, withcertain exceptions, the importation ofhorses into the United States from thoseareas. The European Union—of whichSpain is a Member State—is listed in§ 93.301 as a region where CEM existsor may exist.

On April 3, 2000, we published in theFederal Register (65 FR 17455–17458,Docket No. 99–054–1) a proposal toamend the animal importationregulations by allowing Spanish PureBreed horses to be imported from Spaininto the United States under the sameconditions that apply to thoroughbredhorses from France, Germany, Ireland,and the United Kingdom. Specifically,the regulations previously provided thatSpanish Pure Breed horses other thangeldings, weanlings, and yearlings couldbe imported for permanent entry intothe United States only in accordancewith § 93.301(e), which requirespreexport testing, Federal quarantineupon arrival, and further quarantine ina State approved to receive horses fromlisted regions. Under the proposal,imported Spanish Pure Breed stallionsand mares that are more than 731 daysold—like thoroughbred horses fromFrance, Germany, Ireland, and theUnited Kingdom—that have testednegative for CEM in the country oforigin and have undergone Federalquarantine upon arrival in the UnitedStates would not be subject toadditional quarantine, testing, andtreatment within an approved State. Inaddition, we proposed to add Spain’sServicio de Cria Caballar y Remonta asa breed association specificallyapproved by the U.S. Department ofAgriculture to provide factual, currentinformation regarding the activities ofSpanish Pure Breed horses.

We solicited comments concerningour proposal for 60 days ending June 2,2000. We received one comment by thatdate. The commenter, an importer ofSpanish horses, expressed support forour proposal, stating that the proposed

changes would help his industry.However, the commenter also assertedthat our requirement that mares over 2years old undergo Federal quarantineupon arrival in the United States wasillogical and needlessly expensive, sinceSpanish veterinarians test and inspectthe animals for CEM prior to export, andSpain is considered free of the disease.

We are making no changes to the finalrule based on this comment. While weagree with the commenter that CEMpresents a negligible risk in importedSpanish Pure Breed horses, with certainexceptions, all horses intended forpermanent entry into the United Statesare also required to be detained underFederal quarantine while official testsfor dourine, glanders, equinepiroplasmosis, and equine infectiousanemia are conducted. The animalsmust test negative for all of thesediseases and be found by an Animal andPlant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)veterinarian to be free from any clinicalevidence of disease before they can bereleased from quarantine. Because of theserious nature of these diseases, webelieve that these requirements continueto be necessary to ensure that infectedhorses do not enter this country andjeopardize the health of the U.S. horsepopulation.

CEM is difficult to diagnose andcontrol, and infected horses of bothsexes are often asymptomatic. Repeatedsampling, at appropriate time intervals,constitutes the only satisfactory meansof determining CEM status in horses.Therefore, we also must continue torequire that all horses that have testedpositive for CEM prior to importation—despite the fact that they mustsubsequently have been treated, tested,and found negative for the diseasebefore being exported to the UnitedStates—undergo further quarantine,treatment, and repeated testing in aState approved to receive them uponcompletion of the Federal quarantine.Spanish Pure Breed horses that havetested positive for CEM prior to exportand, upon treatment and retesting, beenfound free of the disease would stillhave to undergo treatment within aState approved to receive such horses.However, this action will save importersof Spanish Pure Breed horses that havetested negative to the disease prior toexport and have undergone the requisiteFederal quarantine the additional costs

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 12:00 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 01AUR1

46860 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

that would be associated with further,in-State quarantine and testing.

Therefore, for the reasons given in theproposed rule and in this document, weare adopting the proposed rule as a finalrule, without change.

Effective Date

This is a substantive rule that relievesrestrictions and, pursuant to theprovisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be madeeffective less than 30 days afterpublication in the Federal Register. Byallowing Spanish Pure Breed horses tobe imported from Spain into the UnitedStates under the same conditions thatapply to thoroughbred horses fromcertain other regions where contagiousequine metritis exists or may exist, thisrule will make the importation ofSpanish Pure Breed horses lessexpensive for U.S. importers. We havedetermined that approximately 2 weeksare needed to ensure that APHISpersonnel at ports of entry receiveofficial notice of this change in theregulations. Therefore, theAdministrator of APHIS has determinedthat this rule should be made effective15 days after publication in the FederalRegister.

Executive Order 12866 and RegulatoryFlexibility Act

This rule has been reviewed underExecutive Order 12866. The rule hasbeen determined to be not significant forthe purposes of Executive Order 12866and, therefore, has not been reviewed bythe Office of Management and Budget.

This rule amends the regulations in 9CFR part 93 to allow Spanish PureBreed horses to be imported from Spaininto the United States under the sameconditions that apply to thoroughbredhorses from France, Germany, Ireland,and the United Kingdom. We are takingthis action in response to a request wehave received from Spain’s EquineBreeding Service to relieve some of therestrictions on the importation ofSpanish Pure Breed horses from Spainsince the life histories and medicalrecords of these horses can be certifiedby Spanish Government veterinarians.

In 1997, there were 375,218 farms inthe United States keeping 2,427,277horses of all kinds. Approximately79,516 farms sold 325,306 horses,receiving $1.03 billion in sale revenues.Approximately 98 percent of the farmsthat sold horses have less than $500,000in annual revenue and, therefore, areconsidered small entities by the U.S.Small Business Administration.

U.S. importers and breeders ofSpanish Pure Breed horses will beaffected by this rule. This rule will make

it less expensive for importers to importSpanish Pure Breed horses from Spain.

There are approximately 270 domesticbreeders of Spanish Pure Breed horsesin the United States, most of which arelikely to be small entities. In 1998, therewere approximately 2,500 Spanish PureBreed horses in the United States, andonly 225 foals were registered that year.

In 1995 and 1996, 4 horses (not all ofwhich were Spanish Pure Breed horses)were imported into the United Statesfrom Spain; there were 21 horses in1997, 39 in 1998, and 46 in 1999. Underthis rule, we estimate that the numberof Spanish Pure Breed horses importedinto the United States from Spain willmost likely increase to an average ofabout 60 per year, for the next 3 to 5years, with a maximum of 100 in anygiven year.

Currently, the demand for SpanishPure Breed horses in the United Statesis greater than can be supplied bydomestic breeders and the small numberof these horses imported from CostaRica, Mexico, and Spain. In 1997, 225Spanish Pure Breed foals wereregistered in the United States, while atotal of 50 were imported into theUnited States from all over the world,despite the high costs of shipping(approximately $5,000 per horse for airfreight plus insurance against mortality,figured at 1 percent of the horse’sdeclared value), quarantine, and testing.Because domestic Spanish Pure Breedhorses are less expensive than imports,the demand for domestic Spanish PureBreed horses should not decrease as aresult of this rule. This rule will helpsatisfy the growing demand for thehorses in the United States and make itless expensive for U.S. breeders andimporters to obtain them from Spain.

We do not expect domestic breedersof Spanish Pure Breed horses to beaffected by this rule, since the demandin the United States for Spanish PureBreed horses is greater than thedomestic supply and since domesticSpanish Pure Breed horses will still beless expensive than imported ones.

Under these circumstances, theAdministrator of APHIS has determinedthat this action will not have asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12988This final rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12988, CivilJustice Reform. This rule: (1) Preemptsall State and local laws and regulationsthat are inconsistent with this rule; (2)has no retroactive effect; and (3) doesnot require administrative proceedingsbefore parties may file suit in courtchallenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction ActIn accordance with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.), the information collection orrecordkeeping requirements included inthis rule have been approved by theOffice of Management and Budget(OMB) under OMB control number0579–0152.

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 93Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock,

Poultry and poultry products,Quarantine, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFRpart 93 as follows:

PART 93—IMPORTATION OF CERTAINANIMALS, BIRDS, AND POULTRY,AND CERTAIN ANIMAL, BIRD, ANDPOULTRY PRODUCTS;REQUIREMENTS FOR MEANS OFCONVEYANCE AND SHIPPINGCONTAINERS

1. The authority citation for part 93 isrevised to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306;21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b,134c, 134d, 134f, 136, and 136a; 31 U.S.C.9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.

2. Section 93.301 is amended asfollows:

a. In footnote 6, by adding the words‘‘Servicio de Cria Caballar y Remonta forSpain;’’ immediately after the word‘‘Department:’’.

b. By revising paragraph (c)(2)(v), theheading to paragraph (d), and theintroductory text in paragraph (d)(1).

c. In paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(D), the firstsentence, by removing the words ‘‘Forthoroughbred horses’’ and adding thewords ‘‘For Spanish Pure Breed horsesand thoroughbred horses’’ in their place.

d. In paragraph (d)(3), by removingthe words ‘‘Thoroughbred horses’’ andadding the words ‘‘Spanish Pure Breedhorses and thoroughbred horses’’ intheir place each time they appear.

§ 93.301 General prohibitions; exceptions.

* * * * *(c) * * *(2) * * *(v) Spanish Pure Breed horses

imported for permanent entry fromSpain or thoroughbred horses importedfor permanent entry from France,Germany, Ireland, or the UnitedKingdom if the horses meet therequirements of paragraph (d) of thissection;* * * * *

(d) Spanish Pure Breed horses fromSpain and thoroughbred horses fromFrance, Germany, Ireland, and theUnited Kingdom. (1) Spanish Pure Breed


46861Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

horses from Spain and thoroughbredhorses from France, Germany, Ireland,and the United Kingdom may beimported for permanent entry if thehorses meet the following requirements:* * * * *

Done in Washington, DC, this 25th day ofJuly 2000.Bobby R. Acord,Acting Administrator, Animal and PlantHealth Inspection Service.[FR Doc. 00–19380 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39[Docket No. 2000–NM–249–AD; Amendment39–11839; AD 95–19–08 R1]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BoeingModel 727–100 and –200 SeriesAirplanes Equipped With an EngineNose Cowl for Engine Numbers 1 and3, Installed in Accordance WithSupplemental Type Certificate (STC)SA4363NM

AGENCY: Federal AviationAdministration, DOT.ACTION: Final rule; request forcomments.

SUMMARY: This amendment revises anexisting airworthiness directive (AD),applicable to certain Boeing Model 727–100 and –200 series airplanes, thatcurrently requires replacing theattaching nutplates on certain enginenose cowls with washers and self-locking nuts. This amendment changesthe responsible office for approval of analternative method of compliance. Thisamendment is prompted by the transferof the supplemental type certificate. Theactions specified in this AD areintended to prevent the attach boltsfrom becoming loose, which couldresult in subsequent separation of thenose cowl from the engine.DATES: Effective August 16, 2000.

The incorporation by reference ofcertain publications, as listed in theregulations, was approved previously bythe Director of the Federal Register as ofOctober 20, 1995 (60 FR 48630,September 20, 1995).

Comments for inclusion in the RulesDocket must be received on or beforeOctober 2, 2000.ADDRESSES: Submit comments intriplicate to the Federal AviationAdministration (FAA), TransportAirplane Directorate, ANM–114,Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

249–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,Renton, Washington 98055–4056.Comments may be inspected at thislocation between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,Monday through Friday, except Federalholidays. Comments may be submittedvia fax to (425) 227–1232. Commentsmay also be sent via the Internet usingthe following address: [email protected]. Comments sentvia fax or the Internet must contain‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–249–AD’’ in thesubject line and need not be submittedin triplicate. Comments sent via theInternet as attached electronic files mustbe formatted in Microsoft Word 97 forWindows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced inthis AD may be obtained from VALSANPartnership Ltd., Aviation ProductsManagement, Product Support Office,39450 Third Street East, suite 121,Palmdale, California 93550.

This information may be examined atthe FAA, Transport AirplaneDirectorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,Renton, Washington; or at the FAA,Transport Airplane Directorate, LosAngeles Aircraft Certification Office,3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,California; or at the Office of the FederalRegister, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,suite 700, Washington, DC.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Michael E. O’Neil, Aerospace Engineer,Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA,Transport Airplane Directorate, LosAngeles Aircraft Certification Office,3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,California 90712–4137; telephone (562)627–5320; fax (562) 627–5210.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OnSeptember 7, 1995, the FAA issued AD95–19–08, amendment 39–9370 (60 FR48630, September 20, 1995), applicableto certain Boeing Model 727–100 and–200 series airplanes, to requirereplacing the attaching nutplates oncertain engine nose cowls with washersand self-locking nuts. That action wasprompted by reports indicating thatnose cowls separated (or nearlyseparated) from the engines of certainairplanes following failure of the enginefan blade and subsequent vibration ofthe engine, which caused loosening ofthe attach bolts on the nose cowl of theengine. The actions required by that ADare intended to prevent the attach boltsfrom becoming loose, which couldresult in subsequent separation of thenose cowl from the engine.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous RuleSince the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has transferred the supplementaltype certificate data from the SeattleAircraft Certification Office (ACO) to theLos Angeles ACO. Therefore, the FAA

has determined it is necessary to issuethis AD to require that all futurealternative methods of compliance andadjustments of compliance time beapproved by the Manager of the LosAngeles ACO.

Explanation of Requirements of Rule

Since unsafe condition has beenidentified that is likely to exist ordevelop on other airplanes of this sametype design, this AD revises AD 95–19–08 to continue to require replacing theattaching nutplates on certain enginenose cowls with washers and self-locking nuts. This AD changes theresponsible office for approval of analternative method of compliance.

Determination of Rule’s Effective Date

Since this AD is a minor and merelytechnical amendment in which thepublic is not particularly interested, anddoes not change the existingrequirements, it is found that notice andopportunity for prior public commenthereon are unnecessary and that goodcause exists for making this amendmenteffective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form ofa final rule that is a minor and merelytechnical amendment and, thus, was notpreceded by notice and an opportunityfor public comment, comments areinvited on this rule. Interested personsare invited to comment on this rule bysubmitting such written data, views, orarguments as they may desire.Communications shall identify theRules Docket number and be submittedin triplicate to the address specifiedunder the caption ADDRESSES. Allcommunications received on or beforethe closing date for comments will beconsidered, and this rule may beamended in light of the commentsreceived. Factual information thatsupports the commenter’s ideas andsuggestions is extremely helpful inevaluating the effectiveness of the ADaction and determining whetheradditional rulemaking action would beneeded.

Submit comments using the followingformat:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.For example, discuss a request tochange the compliance time and arequest to change the service bulletinreference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specificchange to the AD is being requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons ordata) for each request.

Comments are specifically invited onthe overall regulatory, economic,



environmental, and energy aspects ofthe rule that might suggest a need tomodify the rule. All commentssubmitted will be available, both beforeand after the closing date for comments,in the Rules Docket for examination byinterested persons. A report thatsummarizes each FAA-public contactconcerned with the substance of this ADwill be filed in the Rules Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA toacknowledge receipt of their commentssubmitted in response to this rule mustsubmit a self-addressed, stampedpostcard on which the followingstatement is made: ‘‘Comments toDocket Number 2000–NM–249–AD.’’The postcard will be date stamped andreturned to the commenter.

Regulatory ImpactThe regulations adopted herein will

not have a substantial direct effect onthe States, on the relationship betweenthe national Government and the States,or on the distribution of power andresponsibilities among the variouslevels of government. Therefore, it isdetermined that this final rule does nothave federalism implications underExecutive Order 13132.

The FAA has determined that noticeand comment hereon are unnecessarybecause this is a minor and merelytechnical amendment in which thepublic is not particularly interested.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to theauthority delegated to me by theAdministrator, the Federal AviationAdministration amends part 39 of theFederal Aviation Regulations (14 CFRpart 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESSDIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended byremoving amendment 39–9370 (60 FR48630, September 20, 1995), and byadding a new airworthiness directive(AD), amendment 39–11839, to read asfollows:95–19–08 R1 Boeing: Amendment 39–

11839. Docket 2000-NM–249-AD.Revises AD 95–19–08, Amendment 39–9370.

Applicability: Model 727–100 and –200series airplanes equipped with an engine

nose cowl for engine numbers 1 and 3,installed in accordance with SupplementalType Certificate (STC) SA4363NM,certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplaneidentified in the preceding applicabilityprovision, regardless of whether it has beenmodified, altered, or repaired in the areasubject to the requirements of this AD. Forairplanes that have been modified, altered, orrepaired so that the performance of therequirements of this AD is affected, theowner/operator must request approval for analternative method of compliance inaccordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.The request should include an assessment ofthe effect of the modification, alteration, orrepair on the unsafe condition addressed bythis AD; and, if the unsafe condition has notbeen eliminated, the request should includespecific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unlessaccomplished previously.

To prevent the attach bolts on the nosecowl of the engine from becoming loose, andsubsequent separation of the nose cowl fromthe engine, accomplish the following:

Replacement(a) Within 12 months after October 20,

1995 (the effective date of AD 95–19–08,amendment 39–9370), replace the attachingnutplates of the No. 1 and No. 3 engine nosecowls with washers and self-locking nuts inaccordance with VALSAN B727–RE ServiceBulletin 71–006, Revision 1, dated March 3,1995.

Spares(b) As of October 20, 1995, no person shall

install a nose cowl having VALSAN partnumber 259–0002–501 or 259–0002–503 onany airplane.

Alternative Methods of Compliance(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time thatprovides an acceptable level of safety may beused if approved by the Manager, LosAngeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

Operators shall submit their requeststhrough an appropriate FAA PrincipalMaintenance Inspector, who may addcomments and then send it to the Manager,Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning theexistence of approved alternative methods ofcompliance with this AD, if any, may beobtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(d) Special flight permits may be issued inaccordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of theFederal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197and 21.199) to operate the airplane to alocation where the requirements of this ADcan be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(e) The replacement shall be done inaccordance with VALSAN B727–RE ServiceBulletin 71–006, Revision 1, dated March 3,1995. This incorporation by reference wasapproved previously by the Director of theFederal Register as of October 20, 1995 (60

FR 48630, September 20, 1995). Copies maybe obtained from VALSAN Partnership Ltd.,Aviation Products Management, ProductSupport Office, 39450 Third Street East, suite121, Palmdale, California 93550. Copies maybe inspected at the FAA, Transport AirplaneDirectorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,Washington; or at the FAA, TransportAirplane Directorate, Los Angeles AircraftCertification Office, 3960 ParamountBoulevard, Lakewood, California; or at theOffice of the Federal Register, 800 NorthCapitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective onAugust 16, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 25,2000.Donald L. Riggin,Acting Manager, Transport AirplaneDirectorate, Aircraft Certification Service.[FR Doc. 00–19262 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–13–P



14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–316–AD; Amendment39–11754; AD 2000–11–06]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BoeingModel 767 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal AviationAdministration, DOT.ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This document correctsinformation in an existing airworthinessdirective (AD) that applies to all BoeingModel 767 series airplanes. That ADcurrently requires repetitive inspectionsto detect discrepancies of the wiring andsurrounding Teflon sleeves of the fueltank boost pumps and override/jettisonpumps; replacement of the sleeves withnew sleeves, for certain airplanes; andrepair or replacement of the wiring andsleeves with new parts, as necessary.This document corrects the date for therelevant service information referencedin that AD. This correction is necessaryto ensure that operators use the correctsource of service information toaccomplish the actions required by theexisting AD, which are intended toensure adequate protection from chafingfor the fuel pump wire insulation.DATES: Effective July 6, 2000.

The incorporation by reference ofcertain publications listed in theregulations was approved previously bythe Director of the Federal Register as ofJuly 6, 2000 (65 FR 34928, June 1, 2000).FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Holly Thorson, Aerospace Engineer,



Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,Transport Airplane Directorate, SeattleAircraft Certification Office, 1601 LindAvenue, SW., Renton, Washington98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1357;fax (425) 227–1181.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May23, 2000, the Federal AviationAdministration (FAA) issued AD 2000–11–06, amendment 39–11754 (65 FR34928, June 1, 2000), which applies toall Boeing Model 767 series airplanes.That AD requires repetitive inspectionsto detect discrepancies of the wiring andsurrounding Teflon sleeves of the fueltank boost pumps and override/jettisonpumps; replacement of the sleeves withnew sleeves, for certain airplanes; andrepair or replacement of the wiring andsleeves with new parts, as necessary.

That AD was prompted by reports ofchafing of Teflon sleeves that surroundand protect electrical wires insideconduits installed in the fuel tanks. Theactions required by that AD areintended to ensure adequate protectionto the fuel pump wire insulation. Suchchafing of the wire insulation couldeventually result in exposure ofelectrical conductor, permit arcing fromthe wire to the conduit, and create apotential for a fuel tank fire orexplosion.

Need for the CorrectionSince the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has determined that the AD citesan incorrect date for the referencedservice information. The actions in thatAD are required to be accomplishedunder Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1. The AD referencesthat bulletin as being dated April 1,1999. The correct date for the servicebulletin is August 5, 1999. While thefooter on each page of Revision 1 of theservice bulletin shows a date of April 1,1999, the first page of the bulletin, aswell as the ‘‘Summary’’ and ‘‘RevisionTransmittal Sheet,’’ show a date ofAugust 5, 1999. The manufacturer hasinformed the FAA that the correct datefor the bulletin is August 5, 1999.

A correction to AD 2000–11–06 isnecessary. The correction will eliminateconfusion for operators and ensure thatoperators use the correct source ofservice information to accomplish theactions required by the existing AD.

Correction of PublicationThis document corrects the error and

correctly adds the AD as an amendmentto § 39.13 of the Federal AviationRegulations (14 CFR 39.13).

The AD is reprinted in its entirety forthe convenience of affected operators.The effective date of the AD remainsJuly 6, 2000.

Since this action only clarifies thecorrect date for the service informationreferenced in the existing AD, it has noadverse economic impact and imposesno additional burden on any person.Therefore, the FAA has determined thatnotice and public procedures areunnecessary.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,Safety.

Adoption of the Correction

Accordingly, pursuant to theauthority delegated to me by theAdministrator, the Federal AviationAdministration amends part 39 of theFederal Aviation Regulations (14 CFRpart 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESSDIRECTIVES


Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Corrected]

2. Section 39.13 is amended bycorrectly adding the followingairworthiness directive (AD):2000–11–06 Boeing: Amendment 39–11754.

Docket 98–NM–316–AD.Applicability: All Model 767 series

airplanes, certificated in any category.Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicabilityprovision, regardless of whether it has beenmodified, altered, or repaired in the areasubject to the requirements of this AD. Forairplanes that have been modified, altered, orrepaired so that the performance of therequirements of this AD is affected, theowner/operator must request approval for analternative method of compliance inaccordance with paragraph (f) of this AD. Therequest should include an assessment of theeffect of the modification, alteration, or repairon the unsafe condition addressed by thisAD; and, if the unsafe condition has not beeneliminated, the request should includespecific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unlessaccomplished previously.

To prevent exposure of electricalconductor, which could permit arcing fromthe wire to the conduit and create a potentialfor a fuel tank fire or explosion, accomplishthe following:

Inspections

(a) Perform a detailed visual inspection todetect discrepancies—including the presenceof splices, cuts, splits, holes, worn areas, andlacing ties installed on the outside of thesleeves (except at the sleeve ends)—of theTeflon sleeves surrounding the wiring of thefuel tank boost pumps and override/jettisonpumps, at the earlier of the times specifiedin paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD, in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin767–28A0053, Revision 1, dated August 5,1999. Repeat the inspection thereafter atintervals not to exceed 60,000 flight hours or30,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first.

(1) Prior to the accumulation of 50,000total flight hours, or within 90 days after theeffective date of this AD, whichever occurslater.

(2) Within 18 months after the effectivedate of this AD.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, adetailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘Anintensive visual examination of a specificstructural area, system, installation, orassembly to detect damage, failure, orirregularity. Available lighting is normallysupplemented with a direct source of goodlighting at intensity deemed appropriate bythe inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,magnifying lenses, etc. may be used. Surfacecleaning and elaborate access proceduresmay be required.’’

Corrective Actions(b) If any discrepancy is detected during

any inspection required by paragraph (a) ofthis AD: Prior to further flight, remove theTeflon sleeves and perform a detailed visualinspection to detect damage of the wiring, inaccordance with paragraph D. of theAccomplishment Instructions of BoeingService Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1,dated August 5, 1999.

(1) If no damage to the wiring is detected,prior to further flight, install new Teflonsleeves in accordance with the servicebulletin.

(2) If any damage to the wiring is detected,prior to further flight, accomplish therequirements of paragraph (c) of this AD.

(c) If any damage to the wiring is detectedduring any inspection required by paragraph(b) of this AD: Prior to further flight, performa detailed visual inspection to determine ifthe wiring damage was caused by arcing, inaccordance with paragraph D. of theAccomplishment Instructions of BoeingService Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1,dated August 5, 1999.

(1) If the wire damage was not caused byarcing: Prior to further flight, repair anydamaged wires or replace the wires with newor serviceable wires, as applicable, andinstall new Teflon sleeves; in accordancewith the service bulletin.

(2) If any damage caused by arcing isfound: Prior to further flight, perform aninspection for signs of fuel inside the conduitor on the wires, in accordance with theservice bulletin.

(i) If no sign of fuel is found, accomplishthe actions specified by paragraphs(c)(2)(i)(A), (c)(2)(i)(B), (c)(2)(i)(C), and(c)(2)(i)(D) of this AD.

(A) Prior to further flight, repair the wiresor replace the wires with new or serviceablewires, as applicable, in accordance with theservice bulletin.

(B) Prior to further flight, install newTeflon sleeves, in accordance with theservice bulletin.

(C) Repeat the inspection for signs of fuelinside the conduit thereafter at intervals notto exceed 500 flight hours, until therequirements of paragraph (c)(2)(i)(D) of this



AD have been accomplished. If any fuel isfound inside the conduit during anyinspection required by this paragraph, priorto further flight, replace the conduit with anew or serviceable conduit in accordancewith the service bulletin. Thereafter, repeatthe inspection specified in paragraph (a) ofthis AD at intervals not to exceed 60,000flight hours or 30,000 flight cycles,whichever occurs first.

(D) Within 6,000 flight hours or 18 monthsafter the initial fuel inspection specified byparagraph (c)(2) of this AD, whichever occursfirst, replace the conduit with a new orserviceable conduit, in accordance with theservice bulletin. Such conduit replacementconstitutes terminating action for therepetitive fuel inspections required byparagraph (c)(2)(i)(C) of this AD.

(ii) If any fuel is found in the conduit oron any wire: Prior to further flight, replacethe conduit with a new or serviceableconduit, replace damaged wires with new orserviceable wires, and install new Teflonsleeves; in accordance with the servicebulletin. Thereafter, repeat the inspectionspecified in paragraph (a) of this AD atintervals not to exceed 60,000 flight hours or30,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first.

Pump Retest

(d) For any wire bundle removed andreinstalled during any inspection required bythis AD: Prior to further flight after suchreinstallation, retest the fuel pump inaccordance with paragraph G., H., I., or J., asapplicable, of the AccomplishmentInstructions, of Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053, Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999.

Reporting Requirement

(e) Submit a report of positive inspectionfindings (findings of discrepancies only),along with any damaged wiring and sleeves,to the Seattle Manufacturing InspectionDistrict Office (MIDO), 2500 East ValleyRoad, Suite C–2, Renton, Washington 98055–4056; fax (425) 227–1159; at the applicabletime specified in paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) ofthis AD. The report must include the airplaneserial number; the number of total flighthours and flight cycles on the airplane; thelocation of the electrical cable on theairplane; and a statement indicating, ifknown, whether any wire has ever beenremoved and inspected during maintenance,along with the date (if known) of any suchinspection. Information collectionrequirements contained in this regulationhave been approved by the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) under theprovisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have beenassigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

(1) For airplanes on which the initialinspection required by paragraph (a) of thisAD is accomplished after the effective date ofthis AD: Submit the report within 10 daysafter performing the initial inspection.

(2) For airplanes on which the initialinspection required by paragraph (a) of thisAD has been accomplished prior to theeffective date of this AD: Submit the reportfor the initial inspection within 10 days afterthe effective date of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance(f) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time thatprovides an acceptable level of safety may beused if approved by the Manager, SeattleAircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA,Transport Airplane Directorate. Operatorsshall submit their requests through anappropriate FAA Principal MaintenanceInspector, who may add comments and thensend it to the Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning theexistence of approved alternative methods ofcompliance with this AD, if any, may beobtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(g) Special flight permits may be issued inaccordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of theFederal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197and 21.199) to operate the airplane to alocation where the requirements of this ADcan be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(h) The actions shall be done in accordancewith Boeing Service Bulletin 767–28A0053,Revision 1, dated August 5, 1999. Thisincorporation by reference was approvedpreviously by the Director of the FederalRegister as of July 6, 2000 (65 FR 34928, June1, 2000). Copies may be obtained fromBoeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O.Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207.Copies may be inspected at the FAA,Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 LindAvenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at theOffice of the Federal Register, 800 NorthCapitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,DC.

Effective Date

(i) The effective date of this amendmentremains July 6, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 25,2000.Donald L. Riggin,Acting Manager, Transport AirplaneDirectorate, Aircraft Certification Service.[FR Doc. 00–19260 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ANDHUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 201 and 341

[Docket No. 76N–052T]

RIN 0910–AA01

Cold, Cough, Allergy, Bronchodilator,and Antiasthmatic Drug Products forOver-the-Counter Human Use;Amendment of Final Monograph forOTC Antitussive Drug Products

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,HHS.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) is issuing a finalrule amending the final monograph forover-the-counter (OTC) antitussive drugproducts (products that relieve cough).Use of topical/inhalant productscontaining camphor or menthol near aflame, in hot water, or in a microwaveoven may cause the products to splatterand cause serious burns to the user. Aspart of its ongoing review of OTC drugproducts, FDA is adding warnings anddirections to inform consumers aboutthese improper uses and is amending itsfinal regulations for OTC drug labelingrequirements to add this newflammability warning for antitussivedrug products containing camphor ormenthol.DATES: This rule is effective May 16,2002. The compliance date for productswith annual sales less than $25,000 isMay 16, 2003. The compliance date forall other OTC drug products is May 16,2002.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Elizabeth A. Ryland or Gerald M.Rachanow, Center for Drug Evaluationand Research (HFD–560), Food andDrug Administration, 5600 FishersLane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–2222.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. BackgroundIn the Federal Register of August 12,

1987 (52 FR 30042), the agencypublished the final monograph for OTCantitussive drug products. Themonograph included the ingredientscamphor and menthol as single topicalantitussives in an ointment vehicle orfor steam inhalation use. Productscontaining camphor and menthol incombination are being considered aspart of the ongoing rulemaking for OTCcough-cold combination drug products.

When the final monograph waspublished in 1987, the agency was notaware of safety problems occurringwhen products that contain camphor ormenthol are added to hot water or usedin a microwave oven. In the FederalRegister of July 20, 1998 (63 FR 38762),the agency discussed new informationconcerning 34 fire-related events(flashing occurred) resulting fromantitussive drug products containingcamphor and menthol (in an ointmentvehicle or an alcohol-based solution)that were placed in hot water or heatedin a microwave oven. As a result, theagency proposed a flammability signalword and new warning and directionstatements for these products (63 FR38762 at 38765).

The agency proposed a flammabilitysignal word and a warning (‘‘Keep away



from fire or flame’’) for any productcontaining camphor or menthol in anointment vehicle or for steam inhalationuse. The agency also proposed a numberof ‘‘do not use’’ warnings (e.g., near anopen flame and in a microwave oven)and the following statements in thedirections: ‘‘See important warningsabout not using near a flame, in hotwater, or in a microwave oven.Improper use may cause the mixture tosplatter and cause burns.’’

In response to the proposal, theagency received two comments, copiesof which are on public display in theDockets Management Branch (HFA–305), 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061,Rockville, MD 20852. The agency’sresponses to the comments follow.

II. The Agency’s Conclusions on theComments

(Comment 1) One comment agreedwith the proposal to require additionalinformation to help increase appropriateuse of the topical/inhalant drugproducts containing camphor andmenthol.

(Comment 2) Two commentsrequested that the regulation clarify thata flammability signal word is notrequired on all products. The commentspointed out that the flammability signalwords in 16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10) and (c)(6)state that ‘‘flammable’’ is any substancehaving a flashpoint above 20 °F andbelow 100 °F and that no flammabilitysignal word is required if the flashpointof the substance is above 150 °F. Thecomments added that camphor andmenthol in ointment/cream productshave flashpoints over 150 °F and wouldnot need the flammability signal wordor warnings, while steam inhalationproducts in an alcohol vehicle have aflashpoint between 20 °F and below 100°F and would be labeled as flammableand contain the two proposedflammability warnings. One commentprovided the results of flashpoint testingfor its ointment, cream, and steaminhalation products (Ref. 1).

The agency has reviewed the testingresults and concurs that products witha flashpoint above 150 °F would notneed the flammability signal word orwarnings. The agency only intendedthat those products that meet the criteriain 16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10) (flashpoint of150 °F or below) be labeled with theflammability signal word and warnings.Accordingly, the agency is revising§ 341.74(c)(5)(iii) (21 CFR341.74(c)(5)(iii)) to require that thelabeling contains the appropriateflammability signal word and thestatement ‘‘Keep away from fire orflame’’ if the product meets thedefinition of one of the signal words

(‘‘extremely flammable,’’ ‘‘flammable,’’‘‘combustible’’) as described in 16 CFR1500.3(b)(10). The agency is alsoamending § 201.66(c)(5)(ii)(C) (21 CFR201.66(c)(5)(ii)(C)) to include§ 341.74(c)(5)(iii) as an example where aflammability warning is found in anOTC drug monograph.

(Comment 3) Two commentsrequested that the warnings about notusing these products in certain ways beincluded in the ‘‘Directions,’’ and notthe ‘‘Warnings,’’ section. The commentscontended that the warnings relate toappropriate use of the product andbelong in the directions so consumersknow how to use the product correctly.The comments argued that becausespace limitations on small package sizesmake it very difficult to fit similarinformation in two places (warnings anddirections), the information should beconsolidated in the ‘‘Directions’’section.

The agency has determined that thisinformation is more appropriate in the‘‘Warnings’’ section of the labeling.Under the new OTC drug productlabeling format in § 201.66(c)(5)(vi),which was issued after the proposal inthe current rulemaking, the subheading‘‘When using this product’’ is used todescribe activities consumers shouldavoid while using the product.Information about not using the productnear a flame or in a microwave ovenbelongs under this subheading.However, because of the importance ofthe warning information, the agency isincluding a short cross-reference in the‘‘Directions’’ section to the location ofthe information in the ‘‘Warnings’’section. This approach is consistentwith the ‘‘choking’’ warning for water-soluble gums in 21 CFR 201.319 wherethe information about choking appearsin the ‘‘Warnings’’ section and a cross-reference to the warning appears in the‘‘Directions’’ section.

The agency proposed a two-sentencecross-reference in the ‘‘Directions’’section that was repetitive of some ofthe information in the ‘‘Warnings’’section. The agency is removing therepetitive information in the firstproposed sentence (i.e., about not usingnear a flame, in hot water, or in amicrowave oven) and shortening thesentence to refer users to the sameinformation in the ‘‘Warnings’’ section.The revised directions statement nowreads: ‘‘[bullet] see important warningsunder ‘When using this product’ ’’[appears as the first statement under theheading ‘‘Directions’’ and is highlightedin bold type]. The agency is moving thesecond proposed statement about themixture splattering and causing burns tothe ‘‘Warnings’’ section to follow the

information about not using near aflame or in a microwave oven, becausethe second sentence shouldimmediately follow that information.

(Comment 4) Two commentsrequested that the directions providedifferent instructions for ointment andsteam inhalation products. Onecomment suggested the followingwording for ointment products: ‘‘Do notexpose to any heat source (includingstove or microwave) or place in anycontainer in which you are heatingwater. Improper use may cause themixture to splatter and cause burns.’’The comment added that steaminhalation products would also includethe word ‘‘flame’’ after ‘‘stove’’ and thewords ‘‘except when adding to coldwater in a hot steam vaporizer’’ after thewords ‘‘heating water.’’

The second comment proposedsimilar but revised wording forointment products: ‘‘Do not heat. Neverexpose to flame, microwave, or place inany container in which you are heatingwater. Improper use may cause themixture to splatter and cause burns.’’The comment added that steaminhalation products should also includethe words ‘‘except when adding to coldwater in a hot steam vaporizer’’ after thewords ‘‘heating water.’’

As discussed in part II, comment 3 ofthis document, this information aboutnot using the products in certain wayswill appear in the ‘‘Warnings’’ section.The agency agrees that ointment, cream,and steam inhalation products couldhave slightly different warningsdepending on the flashpoint of theproducts. The data provided by onecomment (Ref. 1) showed that theflashpoints of an ointment product were158 and 165 °F, while the flashpoint ofa cream product was 152 °F. Asdiscussed in part II, comment 2 of thisdocument, other manufacturers’products might have a flashpoint of 150°F or below and thus be required to havea flammability signal word andwarnings. The agency agrees withdeletion of the word ‘‘flame’’ from thewarnings for ointment/cream products ifthey are not flammable or combustible.The agency also agrees with inclusion ofthe words ‘‘except when adding to coldwater only in a hot steam vaporizer’’ forsteam inhalation products. To increasethe amount of information provided toconsumers and to state the informationin a clear and concise way, the agencyis revising the warnings as follows:

• For any product containingcamphor or menthol in a suitableointment vehicle and that does notcontain a flammability signal word asdescribed in 16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10).‘‘When using this product, do not • heat



• microwave • add to hot water or anycontainer where heating water. Maycause splattering and result in burns.’’[Information highlighted in bold type.]

• For any product containingcamphor or menthol in a suitableointment vehicle and that contains aflammability signal word as described in16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10). ‘‘When using thisproduct, do not • heat • microwave •use near an open flame • add to hotwater or any container where heatingwater. May cause splattering and resultin burns.’’ [Information highlighted inbold type.]

• For any product containingcamphor or menthol for steaminhalation use. ‘‘When using thisproduct, do not • heat • microwave •use near an open flame • add to hotwater or any container where heatingwater except when adding to cold wateronly in a hot steam vaporizer. Maycause splattering and result in burns.’’[Information highlighted in bold type.]

There are two types of productscontaining camphor or menthol forsteam inhalation use on the market. Oneis formulated to be added directly tocold water inside a hot steam vaporizerbefore the water is heated, and the otheris formulated to be placed into themedication chamber of the vaporizer.The agency is modifying the directionsin § 341.74(d)(2)(iv) and (d)(2)(v) forproducts containing camphor ormenthol for steam inhalation use toinclude appropriate directions for bothtypes of these products, as follows:

• For products formulated to be addeddirectly to cold water inside a hot steamvaporizer. • use 1 tablespoonful ofsolution for each quart of water or 1\1/2\ teaspoonsful of solution for each pintof water • add solution directly to coldwater only in a hot steam vaporizer •follow manufacturer’s directions forusing vaporizer.

• For products formulated to beplaced in the medication chamber of ahot steam vaporizer. • place water in thevaporizer and follow manufacturer’sdirections for using vaporizer • placesolution in the medication chamberonly.

(Comment 5) One comment statedthat the proposed warning about notusing an ointment product in a hotsteam vaporizer is inappropriate(because these products are not used inthat manner) and will lead to consumerconfusion.

The agency notes that 1 of the 21 fire-related events discussed in the proposal(63 FR 38762) involved an ointmentproduct that was added to hot water ina vaporizer. The agency believes that itis important to inform consumers aboutthis potential problem. The portion of

the warning about not adding theproduct to ‘‘hot water’’ covers both hotwater in a container on the stove andhot water in a vaporizer; thus, thisinformation should adequately informconsumers and should not causeconfusion.

III. ReferenceThe following reference is on display

in the Dockets Management Branch(address above) and may be seen byinterested persons between 9 a.m. and 4p.m., Monday through Friday.

1. Comment No. C200, Docket No.76N–052T, Dockets ManagementBranch.

IV. The Agency’s Final ConclusionsThe agency concludes that the case

reports raise safety concerns that couldbe alleviated by providing consumerswith additional warnings and directionsfor topical/inhalant OTC antitussivedrug products that contain camphor ormenthol. Products that meet thedefinition of one of the signal words(‘‘extremely flammable,’’ ‘‘flammable,’’‘‘combustible’’) in 16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10)must state the signal word and ‘‘Keepaway from fire or flame’’ in theirlabeling. Consumers need to beinformed via warnings not to heat ormicrowave these products, not to addthem to hot water, not to put them inany container where water is beingheated (except for adding a steaminhalation product to cold water only ina hot steam vaporizer), and not to usenear an open flame (if the product bearsa flammability signal word). The agencyhas included warnings and directionswith minor differences to fit the varietyof products that might exist and a shortcross-reference to the warningsinformation in the directions section.The agency has revised proposedwarnings and directions in this finalrule to state them in the new OTC druglabeling format required by § 201.66.

V. Analysis of ImpactsFDA has examined the impacts of this

final rule under Executive Order 12866,the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.601–612), and the Unfunded MandatesReform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1501 etseq.). Executive Order 12866 directsagencies to assess all costs and benefitsof available regulatory alternatives and,when regulation is necessary, to selectregulatory approaches that maximizenet benefits (including potentialeconomic, environmental, public healthand safety, and other advantages;distributive impacts; and equity). Underthe Regulatory Flexibility Act, if a rulehas a significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities, an

agency must analyze regulatory optionsthat would minimize any significantimpact of the rule on small entities.Section 202(a) of the UnfundedMandates Reform Act requires thatagencies prepare a written statementand economic analysis before proposingany rule that may result in anexpenditure in any one year by State,local, and tribal governments, in theaggregate, or by the private sector, of$100 million (adjusted annually forinflation).

The agency believes that this finalrule is consistent with the regulatoryphilosophy and principles identified inthe Executive Order. In addition, thefinal rule is not a significant regulatoryaction as defined by the Executive Orderand so is not subject to review under theExecutive Order.

The purpose of this final rule is torevise and improve the labeling (addadditional warning and directionstatements) for safer use of topical/inhalant products that contain camphor,menthol, or both ingredients. Thisrevised labeling addresses theflammability of these products andalerts consumers not to heat ormicrowave the products, nor to use nearan open flame, add to hot water, or putin any container in which water is beingheated (with an exception for adding asteam inhalation product to cold wateronly in a hot steam vaporizer). Potentialbenefits include a reduction in thenumber of flash fires and serious burnsthat may occur if consumers shouldmisuse these products.

This final rule will require relabelingof topical/inhalant products that containcamphor, menthol, or both ingredients.The agency’s Drug Listing Systemidentifies about 30 manufacturers and80 marketers of over 100 stockkeepingunits (SKU’s) (individual products,packages, and sizes) of topical/inhalantantitussive drug products containingcamphor, menthol, or both ingredients.There may be a few additionalmarketers and products that are notidentified in the sources FDA reviewed.

The agency indicated in the proposalthat relabeling costs of the type requiredby this final rule generally average about$2,000 to $3,000 per SKU. Indetermining this cost, the agency didnot believe that manufacturers wouldneed to increase the package size to addthe additional labeling information.Almost all of these products aremarketed in an outer carton, whichshould have adequate space for theadditional information. Assuming thatthere are about 110 affected OTC SKU’sin the marketplace, FDA estimated thatthe rule would impose total one-timecompliance costs on industry for



1 For a definition of the term ‘‘bullet,’’ see§ 201.66(b)(4) of this chapter.

relabeling of about $220,000 to$330,000. The agency did not receiveany comments on these estimates.

The agency believes the actual costcould be lower for several reasons. First,most of the label changes will be madeby private label small manufacturersthat tend to use simpler and lessexpensive labeling. However, the finalrule will not require any new reportingand recordkeeping activities. Therefore,no additional professional skills areneeded. Second, the agency has madethe compliance dates for this final rulethe same as the dates for thesemonographed products to be incompliance with the new standardizedformat and standardized contentrequirements for the labeling of OTCdrug products (§ 201.66), which are nowMay 16, 2002 (and May 16, 2003, forproducts with annual sales less than$25,000). Manufacturers will not incurany expenses determining how to statethe product’s labeling. Allmanufacturers should have ample timeto use up existing labeling stocks andthe relabeling costs would be mitigated.Thus, all required labeling changes canbe made at the same time, therebyreducing the labeling cost of this finalrule.

The agency considered but rejectedseveral labeling alternatives: (1) Ashorter or longer implementationperiod, and (2) an exemption fromcoverage for small entities. While theagency believes that consumers wouldbenefit from having this new labeling inplace as soon as possible, the agencyalso acknowledges that coordination ofthis labeling change withimplementation of the new OTC ‘‘DrugFacts’’ labeling may significantly reducethe costs of this final rule. Both a shorterand a longer time period for this rulemay cost more if firms would have toundertake two successive labelingrevisions. In addition, a longer timeperiod would unnecessarily delay thebenefit of the new labeling to consumerswho self-medicate with these products.The agency rejected an exemption forsmall entities because the new labelinginformation is also needed byconsumers who purchase productsmarketed by those entities.

The agency does not believe that thisfinal rule will have a significanteconomic impact on small entities,using the U.S. Small BusinessAdministration designations for thisindustry (750 employees). The agencybelieves that any other unidentifiedmanufacturer of these products is also asmall entity. From information availableto the agency, it appears that only onesmall entity manufactures more thanthree SKU’s of these products. Based on

the limited number of SKU’s eachmanufacturer has to relabel, the cost foreach manufacturer except one should beminimal.

Under the Unfunded MandatesReform Act, FDA is not required toprepare a statement of costs and benefitsfor this final rule because this rule is notexpected to result in any 1-yearexpenditure that would exceed $100million adjusted for inflation.

This analysis shows that the agencyhas considered the burden to smallentities. Thus, this economic analysis,together with other relevant sections ofthis document, serves as the agency’sfinal regulatory flexibility analysis, asrequired under the RegulatoryFlexibility Act.

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

FDA concludes that the labelingrequirements in this final rule are notsubject to review by the Office ofManagement and Budget because theydo not constitute a ‘‘collection ofinformation’’ under the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.). Rather, the labelingrequirements are a ‘‘public disclosure ofinformation originally supplied by theFederal Government to the recipient forthe purpose of disclosure to the public’’(5 CFR 1320.3(c)(2)).

VII. Environmental Impact

The agency has determined under 21CFR 25.31(a) that this action is of a typethat does not individually orcumulatively have a significant effect onthe human environment. Therefore,neither an environmental assessmentnor an environmental impact statementis required.

List of Subjects

21 CFR Part 201

Drugs, Labeling, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

21 CFR Part 341

Labeling, Over-the-counter drugs.Therefore, under the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and underauthority delegated to the Commissionerof Food and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 201and 341 are amended as follows:

PART 201—LABELING

1. The authority citation for 21 CFRpart 201 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,353, 355, 358, 360, 360b, 360gg–360ss, 371,374, 379e; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 262, 264.

2. Section 201.66 is amended byrevising paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(C) to read asfollows:

§ 201.66 Format and content requirementsfor over-the-counter (OTC) drug productlabeling.

* * * * *(c) * * *(5) * * *(ii) * * *(C) Flammability warning, with

appropriate flammability signal word(s)(e.g., §§ 341.74(c)(5)(iii), 358.150(c), and358.550(c) of this chapter). This warningshall follow a subheading containing theappropriate flammability signal word(s)described in an applicable OTC drugmonograph or approved drugapplication.* * * * *

PART 341—COLD, COUGH, ALLERGY,BRONCHODILATOR, ANDANTIASTHMATIC DRUG PRODUCTSFOR OVER-THE-COUNTER HUMANUSE


Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,355, 360, 371.

4. Section 341.74 is amended byadding new paragraphs (c)(5)(iii)through (c)(5)(vii), and by revisingparagraphs (d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iv),and (d)(2)(v) to read as follows:

§ 341.74 Labeling of antitussive drugproducts.

* * * * *(c) * * *(5) * * *(iii) For any product containing

camphor or menthol in a suitableointment vehicle or for steam inhalationuse and meets the definition of one ofthe signal words (‘‘extremelyflammable,’’ ‘‘flammable,’’‘‘combustible’’) as described in 16 CFR1500.3(b)(10). The labeling contains theappropriate flammability signal word(s)followed by a colon and the statement‘‘Keep away from fire or flame.’’

(iv) For any product containingcamphor or menthol in a suitableointment vehicle and that does notcontain a flammability signal word asdescribed in 16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10).‘‘When using this product, do not[bullet] 1 heat [bullet] microwave[bullet] add to hot water or anycontainer where heating water. Maycause splattering and result in burns.’’[Information highlighted in bold type.]

(v) For any product containingcamphor or menthol in a suitableointment vehicle and that contains aflammability signal word as described in16 CFR 1500.3(b)(10). ‘‘When using this



product, do not [bullet] heat [bullet]microwave [bullet] use near an openflame [bullet] add to hot water or anycontainer where heating water. Maycause splattering and result in burns.’’[Information highlighted in bold type.]

(vi) For any product containingcamphor or menthol for steaminhalation use. ‘‘When using thisproduct, do not [bullet] heat [bullet]microwave [bullet] use near an openflame [bullet] add to hot water or anycontainer where heating water exceptwhen adding to cold water only in a hotsteam vaporizer. May cause splatteringand result in burns.’’ [Informationhighlighted in bold type.]

(vii) For any product formulated in avolatile vehicle. The labeling containsthe following statement under theheading ‘‘Other information’’: ‘‘Closecontainer tightly and store at roomtemperature away from heat.’’

(d) * * *(2) * * *(i) For products containing camphor

identified in § 341.14(b)(1) in a suitableointment vehicle. The product contains4.7 to 5.3 percent camphor. ‘‘[bullet] seeimportant warnings under ‘When usingthis product’ ’’ [appears as the firststatement under the heading‘‘Directions’’ and is highlighted in boldtype] [bullet] adults and children 2years and older: [bullet] rub on thethroat and chest in a thick layer [bullet]cover with a warm, dry cloth if desired[bullet] clothing should be loose aboutthroat and chest to help vapors reachthe nose and mouth [bullet] use up tothree times daily or as directed by adoctor [bullet] children under 2 years ofage: Ask a doctor.

(ii) For products containing mentholidentified in § 341.14(b)(2) in a suitableointment vehicle. The product contains2.6 to 2.8 percent menthol. ‘‘[bullet] seeimportant warnings under ‘When usingthis product’ ’’ [appears as the firststatement under the heading‘‘Directions’’ and is highlighted in boldtype] [bullet] adults and children 2years and older: [bullet] rub on thethroat and chest in a thick layer [bullet]cover with a warm, dry cloth if desired[bullet] clothing should be loose aboutthroat and chest to help vapors reachthe nose and mouth [bullet] use up tothree times daily or as directed by adoctor [bullet] children under 2 years ofage: Ask a doctor.* * * * *

(iv) For products containing camphoridentified in § 341.14(b)(1) for steaminhalation use. The product contains 6.2percent camphor. ‘‘[bullet] seeimportant warnings under ‘When usingthis product’ ’’ [appears as the first

statement under the heading‘‘Directions’’ and is highlighted in boldtype] [bullet] adults and children 2years and older: (select one of thefollowing, as appropriate: For productsformulated to be added directly to coldwater inside a hot steam vaporizer.[bullet] use 1 tablespoonful of solutionfor each quart of water or 11⁄2teaspoonsful of solution for each pint ofwater [bullet] add solution directly tocold water only in a hot steam vaporizer[bullet] follow manufacturer’s directionsfor using vaporizer or For productsformulated to be placed in themedication chamber of a hot steamvaporizer. [bullet] place water in thevaporizer and follow manufacturer’sdirections for using vaporizer [bullet]place solution in the medicationchamber only) [bullet] breathe in themedicated vapors [bullet] use up tothree times daily or as directed by adoctor [bullet] children under 2 years ofage: Ask a doctor.

(v) For products containing mentholidentified in § 341.14(b)(2) for steaminhalation use. The product contains 3.2percent menthol. ‘‘[bullet] see importantwarnings under ‘When using thisproduct’ ’’[appears as the first statementunder the heading ‘‘Directions’’ and ishighlighted in bold type] [bullet] adultsand children 2 years and older: (selectone of the following, as appropriate: Forproducts formulated to be addeddirectly to cold water inside a hot steamvaporizer. [bullet] use 1 tablespoonful ofsolution for each quart of water or 1\1/2\ teaspoonsful of solution for each pintof water [bullet] add solution directly tocold water only in a hot steam vaporizer[bullet] follow manufacturer’s directionsfor using vaporizer or For productsformulated to be placed in themedication chamber of a hot steamvaporizer. [bullet] place water in thevaporizer and follow manufacturer’sdirections for using vaporizer [bullet]place solution in the medicationchamber only) [bullet] breathe in themedicated vapors [bullet] use up tothree times daily or as directed by adoctor [bullet] children under 2 years ofage: Ask a doctor.* * * * *

Dated: July 21, 2000.

Margaret M. Dotzel,Associate Commissioner for Policy.[FR Doc. 00–19302 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–F


Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01–99–067]

RIN 2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operation Regulations:Gowanus Canal, New York

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changingthe operating rules for four New YorkCity bridges across the GowanusCanal—the Ninth Street Bridge, at mile1.4; the Third Street Bridge, at mile 1.8;the Carroll Street Bridge, at mile 2.0;and the Union Street Bridge, at mile2.1—all in Brooklyn, New York. Thebridge owner asked the Coast Guard tochange the regulations to require a two-hour advance notice for openings. Thisaction will relieve the owner of thebridge from the requirement to crewthese bridges at all times by using aroving crew of drawtenders and stillmeet the reasonable needs of navigation.DATES: This rule is effective August 31,2000.ADDRESSES: Comments and materialreceived from the public, as well asdocuments indicated in this preamble asbeing available in the docket, are part ofdocket (CGD01–99–067) and areavailable for inspection or copying atthe First Coast Guard District, BridgeBranch Office, 408 Atlantic Avenue,Boston, Massachusetts 02110, 7 a.m. to3 p.m., Monday through Friday, exceptFederal holidays.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.John W. McDonald, Project Officer, FirstCoast Guard District, (617) 223–8364.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory InformationOn April 27, 2000, we published a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)entitled Drawbridge OperationRegulations; Gowanus Canal, New York,in the Federal Register (65 FR 24664).We received no comments in responseto the notice of proposed rulemaking.No public hearing was requested andnone was held.

Background and Purpose

Ninth Street BridgeThe Ninth Street Bridge, at mile 1.4,

across the Gowanus Canal at Brooklyn,has a vertical clearance of 5 feet at meanhigh water and 9 feet at mean low water.The existing operating regulations forthe Ninth Street Bridge require thebridge to open on signal at all times.



Third Street Bridge

The Third Street Bridge, at mile 1.8,across the Gowanus Canal at Brooklyn,has a vertical clearance of 10 feet atmean high water and 14 feet at meanlow water. The existing operatingregulations in 33 CFR 117.787, requirethe draw to open on signal at all times;except that, from May 1 throughSeptember 30, the draw shall open onsignal after a six-hour advance notice isgiven to the New York City HighwayDepartment’s Radio (Hotline) Room.

Carroll Street BridgeThe Carroll Street Bridge, at mile 2.0,

has a vertical clearance of 3 feet atMHW and 7 feet at MLW. The existingregulations require the draw to open onsignal at all times; except that, from May1 through September 30, the draw shallopen after a six-hour advance notice isgiven to the New York City HighwayDepartment’s Radio (Hotline) Room.

Union Street BridgeThe Union Street Bridge, at mile 2.1,

has a vertical clearance of 9 feet at

MHW and 13 feet at MLW. The existingregulations require the draw to open onsignal at all times; except that, from May1 through September 30, the draw shallopen after a six-hour advance notice isgiven to the New York City HighwayDepartment’s Radio (Hotline) Room.

The owner of all four bridges, theNew York City Department ofTransportation (NYCDOT), submittedbridge opening log data to the CoastGuard for review.

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Ninth ................................................................................. 864 984 927 836 0 0 0 0 423Third ................................................................................. 410 549 663 732 432 256 149 107 244Carroll ............................................................................... 517 627 669 704 432 245 142 114 228Union ................................................................................ 502 547 657 713 432 236 144 104 245

The bridge owner plans to operatethese bridges with a roving crew ofdrawtenders. A review of the monthlybreakdown of the opening data did notidentify any months that had asignificantly higher number of openingsthat would make the roving crewconcept unworkable. The waterwayusers are all commercial vessels whichoperate year round. They presentlyprovide a six-hour advance notice May1 through September 30 at all the abovebridges except the Ninth Street Bridge,which is required to open on signal.

The bridge owner has requested thatall four bridges open after a two-houradvance notice is given year round. Thisadvance notice requirement will allowthe bridge owner to use a roving crewof drawtenders to operate these bridges.The Coast Guard believes this rule isreasonable based upon the fact thatthree of the bridges presently open aftera six-hour notice May 1 throughSeptember 30, which is greater than thetwo-hour notice during those fivemonths.

The Coast Guard believes that thetwo-hour advance notice October 1through April 30 is reasonable becausethe bridges will still open on signalprovided the two-hour notice is given.The commercial vessel transits onGowanus Canal are scheduled inadvance. Providing a two-hour noticefor bridge openings for the additionalseven months of the year, October 1through April 30, should not preventvessels from transiting the waterway ina timely manner.

The reduction from six-hours advancenotice to two-hours advance noticeduring the remaining five months of theyear, May 1 through September 30,should make vessel transits easier toschedule during that time period. This

rule is expected to relieve the bridgeowner of the burden of crewing eachbridge continually, establish aconsistent bridge operating schedule forthe bridges listed in this rulemaking,and still meet the reasonable needs ofnavigation.

Discussion of Proposal

The Coast Guard is revising theoperating regulations for the GowanusCanal at 33 CFR 117.787 as follows:

Ninth Street Bridge

Add operating regulations for theNinth Street Bridge, mile 1.4, Across theGowanus Canal to require that the drawshall open on signal, if at least a two-hour advance notice is given.

Third Street Bridge

Revise the operating regulations forthe Third Street Bridge, mile 1.8, acrossthe Gowanus Canal to require that thedraw shall open on signal, if at least atwo-hour advance notice is given.

Carroll Street Bridge

Revise the operating regulations forthe Carroll Street, mile 2.0, across theGowanus Canal to require that the drawshall open on signal, if at least a two-hour advance notice is given.

Union Street Bridge

Revise the operating regulations forthe Union Street, mile 2.1, across theGowanus Canal to require that the drawshall open on signal, if at least a two-hour advance notice is given.

Notice for bridge openings shall begiven to the NYCDOT Hotline orNYCDOT Bridge Operation Office.

The bridge owner plans to use twocrews of drawtenders to operate theGowanus Canal bridges. The use of two

crews is expected to provide bridgeopenings in a timely manner. TheHamilton Avenue Bridge, mile 1.2, alsoacross Gowanus Canal was not includedin the roving drawtender plan becausethe frequency of bridge openings wereconsiderably higher than the otherbridges on this waterway.

Regulatory EvaluationThis rule is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) ofExecutive Order 12866 and does notrequire an assessment of potential costsand benefits under section 6(a)(3) of thatOrder. The Office of Management andBudget has not reviewed it under thatOrder. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under theregulatory policies and procedures ofthe Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979). Thisconclusion is based on the fact thatthree of the bridges presently open aftera six-hour notice May 1 throughSeptember 30, which is greater than theproposed two-hour notice during thosefive months.

The Coast Guard believes that thetwo-hour advance notice October 1through April 30 is reasonable becausethe bridges will still open on signalprovided the two-hour notice is given.The commercial vessel movements onGowanus Canal are scheduled inadvance by the commercial operators.Providing two-hours notice for bridgeopenings for the additional sevenmonths of the year, October 1 throughApril 30, should not prevent vesselsfrom still transiting the waterway in atimely manner.

Small EntitiesUnder the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601–612) we consideredwhether this rule would have a



significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.‘‘Small entities’’ comprises smallbusinesses, not-for-profit organizationsthat are independently owned andoperated and are not dominant in theirfields, and governmental jurisdictionswith populations less than 50,000.

The Coast Guard certifies under 5U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not havea significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.This conclusion is based on the fact thatthree of the bridges presently open aftera six-hour notice May 1 throughSeptember 30, which is greater than theproposed two-hour notice during thosefive months.

The Coast Guard believes that thetwo-hour advance notice October 1through April 30 is reasonable becausethe bridges will still open on signalprovided the two-hour notice is given.The commercial vessel transits onGowanus Canal are scheduled inadvance by the commercial operators.Providing two-hours notice for bridgeopenings for the additional sevenmonths of the year, October 1 throughApril 30, when the bridge formerlyopened on signal, should not preventvessels from still transiting thewaterway in a timely manner.

Collection of Information

This rule calls for no new collectionof information under the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520).

Federalism

We have analyzed this rule underExecutive Order 13132 and havedetermined that this rule does not haveimplications for federalism under thatOrder.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Actof 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governsthe issuance of Federal regulations thatrequire unfunded mandates. Anunfunded mandate is a regulation thatrequires a State, local, or tribalgovernment or the private sector toincur direct costs without the FederalGovernment’s having first provided thefunds to pay those unfunded mandatecosts. This rule will not impose anunfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This rule will not effect a taking ofprivate property or otherwise havetaking implications under ExecutiveOrder 12630, Governmental Actions andInterference with ConstitutionallyProtected Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This rule meets applicable standardsin sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of ExecutiveOrder 12988, Civil Justice Reform, tominimize litigation, eliminateambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this rule underExecutive Order 13045, Protection ofChildren from Environmental HealthRisks and Safety Risks. This rule is notan economically significant rule anddoes not concern an environmental riskto health or risk to safety that maydisproportionately affect children.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered theenvironmental impact of this rule andconcluded that under figure 2–1,paragraph (32)(e) of CommandantInstruction M16475.1C, this rule iscategorically excluded from furtherenvironmental documentation becausepromulgation of changes to drawbridgeregulations have been found to not havea significant effect on the environment.A ‘‘Categorical ExclusionDetermination’’ is available in thedocket for inspection or copying whereindicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

Bridges.

Regulations

For the reasons set out in thepreamble, the Coast Guard amends 33CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGEOPERATION REGULATIONS


Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 49 CFR 1.46; 33CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issuedunder the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106Stat. 5039.

2. Section 117.787 is revised to readas follows:

§ 117.787 Gowanus Canal

The draws of the Ninth Street Bridge,mile 1.4, the Third Street Bridge, mile1.8, the Carroll Street Bridge, mile 2.0,and the Union Street Bridge, mile 2.1,at Brooklyn, shall open on signal, if atleast a two-hour advance notice is givento the New York City Department ofTransportation (NYCDOT), RadioHotline, or the NYCDOT BridgeOperations Office.

Dated: July 19, 2000.G.N. Naccara,Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,First Coast Guard District.[FR Doc. 00–19396 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–15–P


Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01–99–069]

RIN 2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operation Regulations:Newtown Creek, Dutch Kills, EnglishKills and their tributaries, New York

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changingthe drawbridge operation regulations forsix New York City bridges: The PulaskiBridge, at mile 0.6, across NewtownCreek between Brooklyn and Queens;the Greenpoint Avenue Bridge, at mile1.3, across the Newtown Creek betweenBrooklyn and Queens; the Grand Street/Avenue Bridge, at mile 3.1, acrossNewtown Creek (East Branch) betweenBrooklyn and Queens; the MetropolitanAvenue Bridge, at mile 3.4, acrossEnglish Kills at Brooklyn; the BordenAvenue Bridge, at mile 1.2, across DutchKills at Queens; and the Hunters PointAvenue Bridge, at mile 1.4, across DutchKills at Queens all in New York.

The bridge owner asked the CoastGuard to change the regulations torequire a two-hour advance notice foropenings. It is expected to relieve thebridge owner from the requirement tocrew the bridges at all times by usingmultiple crews of drawtenders and stillmeet the reasonable needs of navigation.DATES: This rule is effective August 31,2000.ADDRESSES: Comments and materialreceived from the public, as well asdocuments indicated in this preamble asbeing available in the docket, are part ofdocket (CGD01–99–069) and areavailable for inspection or copying atthe First Coast Guard District, BridgeBranch Office, 408 Atlantic Avenue,Boston, Massachusetts, 02110, 7 a.m. to3 p.m., Monday through Friday, exceptFederal holidays.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JohnW. McDonald, Project Officer, FirstCoast Guard District, (617) 223–8364.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:



Regulatory InformationOn April 24, 2000, we published a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)entitled Drawbridge OperationRegulations; Newtown Creek, DutchKills, English Kills and their tributaries,New York, in the Federal Register (65FR 21683). We received no comments inresponse to the notice of proposedrulemaking. No public hearing wasrequested and none was held.

Background and Purpose

Pulaski BridgeThe Pulaski Bridge, at mile 0.6, across

Newtown Creek between Brooklyn andQueens has a vertical clearance of 39feet at mean high water and 43 feet atmean low water. The existingregulations require the draw to open onsignal at all times.

Greenpoint BridgeThe Greenpoint Avenue Bridge, at

mile 1.3, across the Newtown Creekbetween Brooklyn and Queens has avertical clearance of 26 feet at meanhigh water and 31 feet at mean lowwater. The existing regulations requirethe draw to open on signal at all times.

Grand Street/Avenue BridgeThe Grand Street/Avenue Bridge, at

mile 3.1 across the Newtown Creek (EastBranch) between Brooklyn and Queenshas a vertical clearance of 8 feet abovemean high water and 12 feet at meanlow water. The existing operating rules

for the Grand Street/Avenue Bridge,listed at 33 CFR 117.801(e), require thebridge to open on signal unless thedrawtender is at the Borden Avenue,Hunters Point Avenue or RooseveltIsland Bridges. In this event a notice tothe New York City Department ofTransportation (NYCDOT) RadioHotline, or NYCDOT Bridge OperationsOffice shall be given, resulting in up toa one-hour delay.

Metropolitan Avenue Bridge

The Metropolitan Avenue Bridge, atmile 3.4, across the English Kills atBrooklyn has a vertical clearance of 10feet above mean high water and 15 feetabove mean low water. The existingoperating regulations require the drawto open on signal at all times.

Borden Avenue Bridge

The Borden Avenue Bridge, at mile1.3, across the Dutch Kills has a verticalclearance of 4 feet at mean high waterand 9 feet at mean low water. Theexisting regulations in 33 CFR117.801(c) require the draw to open onsignal if at least a one-hour advancenotice is given to the drawtender at theGrand Street/Avenue Bridge, the NewYork City Department of TransportationRadio Hotline or NYCDOT BridgeOperations Office. In the event thedrawtender is at the Roosevelt IslandBridge or the Hunters Point AvenueBridge, up to an additional half-hourdelay may occur.

Hunters Point Avenue Bridge

The Hunters Point Avenue Bridge, atmile 1.4, over the Dutch Kills hasvertical clearances of 8 feet at mean highwater and 13 feet at mean low water.The existing regulations for the HuntersPoint Avenue Bridge in 33 CFR117.801(d) require the draw to open onsignal if at least a one-hour advancenotice is given to the drawtender at theGrand Street/Avenue Bridge, theNYCDOT Radio Hotline, or NYCDOTBridge Operations Office. In the eventthe drawtender is at the RooseveltIsland Bridge or the Borden AvenueBridge, up to an additional half-hourdelay may occur.

The bridge owner, the New York CityDepartment of Transportation(NYCDOT), submitted bridge openinglog data to the Coast Guard for review.The bridge owner plans to operate thesebridges with multiple crews ofdrawtenders. The two-hour advancenotice should allow sufficient time forthe crews to operate these bridges dueto the close proximity of the bridges toeach other. Recent yearly openings havebeen relatively low which will allow thebridge owner to utilize the roving crewconcept and still meet the needs ofnavigation.

The total number of bridge openingsat the above bridges from 1991 to 1999are as follows:

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Pulaski .............................................................................. 584 426 224 239 206 195 291 518 550Greenpt ............................................................................ 1014 880 587 549 498 557 626 920 1016Grand ............................................................................... 419 549 224 254 239 189 37 86 91Borden .............................................................................. 282 107 141 0 0 105 15 37 61Hunters ............................................................................. 264 106 141 0 0 113 15 42 77Metro ................................................................................ 301 356 225 310 272 407 432 588 688

The monthly distribution of openingsfor the above bridges were equallybalanced without any specific monthswhen opening requests weresignificantly greater.

Discussion of ProposalThis final rule should relieve the

bridge owner the burden of crewingeach bridge continually, and still meetthe reasonable needs of navigation. Atwo-hour advance notice requirementfor bridge openings will enable thebridge owner to utilize multiple crewsof drawtenders to open these bridges forvessel traffic. The Coast Guard believesthe roving drawtender concept requiringa two-hour advance notice is reasonableand should meet the needs of navigationbased upon the low number of yearly

openings at the bridges, the closeproximity of the bridges, and thescheduling of commercial vesseltransits. The bridges will still open onsignal at all times provided that theadvance notice is given. This rule isexpected to relieve the bridge owner ofthe burden of crewing each bridgecontinually and still meet thereasonable needs of navigation.

The Coast Guard is changing theoperating regulations for the GrandStreet/Avenue Bridge, Borden AvenueBridge, Hunters Point Bridge,Metropolitan Bridge, Pulaski Bridge andthe Greenpoint Bridge, to require a two-hour advance notice for openings at alltimes.

Paragraph (a)(1) of 33 CFR 117.801 forpublic and state vessels used for public

safety, will be removed because it isnow listed at 33 CFR 117.31 under thegeneral operating regulations forbridges.

Regulatory Evaluation

This rule is not a ‘‘significantregulatory action’’ under section 3(f) ofExecutive Order 12866 and does notrequire an assessment of potential costsand benefits under section 6(a)(3) of thatOrder. The Office of Management andBudget has not reviewed it under thatOrder. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under theregulatory policies and procedures ofthe Department of Transportation (DOT)(44 FR 11040; February 26, 1979). Thisconclusion is based on the fact that thebridges will open for marine traffic but



will require mariners to provide a two-hour notice.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act(5 U.S.C. 601–612) we consideredwhether this rule would have asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.‘‘Small entities’’ comprises smallbusinesses, not-for profit organizationsthat are independently owned andoperated and are not dominant in theirfields, and governmental jurisdictionswith populations less than 50,000.

The Coast Guard certifies under 5U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not havea significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.This conclusion is based on the fact thatthe bridges will still open on signal aftera two-hour notice is given.

Collection of Information

This rule calls for no new collectionof information under the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520).

Federalism

We have analyzed this rule underExecutive Order 13132 and havedetermined that this rule does not haveimplications for federalism under thatOrder.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Actof 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governsthe issuance of Federal regulations thatrequire unfunded mandates. Anunfunded mandate is a regulation thatrequires a State, local, or tribalgovernment or the private sector toincur direct costs without the FederalGovernment’s having first provided thefunds to pay those unfunded mandatecosts. This rule will not impose anunfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This rule will not effect a taking ofprivate property or otherwise havetaking implications under ExecutiveOrder 12630, Governmental Actions andInterference with ConstitutionallyProtected Property Rights

Civil Justice Reform

This rule meets applicable standardsin sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of ExecutiveOrder 12988, Civil Justice Reform, tominimize litigation, eliminateambiguity, and reduce burden

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this rule underExecutive Order 13045, Protection ofChildren from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is notan economically significant rule anddoes not concern an environmental riskto health or risk to safety that maydisproportionately affect children.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered theenvironmental impact of this rule andconcluded that under figure 2–1,paragraph (32)(e) of CommandantInstruction M16475.1C, this rule iscategorically excluded from furtherenvironmental documentation becausepromulgation of changes to drawbridgeregulations have been found to not havea significant effect on the environment.A ‘‘Categorical ExclusionDetermination’’ is available in thedocket for inspection or copying whereindicated under ADDRESSES.


Bridges.

Regulations

For the reasons set out in thepreamble, the Coast Guard amends 33CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGEOPERATION REGULATIONS


Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 49 CFR 1.46; 33CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issuedunder the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106Stat. 5039.

2. Section 117.801 is revised to readas follows:

§ 117.801 Newtown Creek, Dutch Kills,English Kills and their tributaries.

(a) The following requirements applyto all bridges across Newtown Creek,Dutch Kills, English Kills, and theirtributaries:

(1) The owners of all bridges acrossNewtown Creek, Dutch Kills, EnglishKills and their tributaries listed underthis section, shall provide and keep ingood legible condition two clearancegauges with figures not less than 12inches high designed, installed andmaintained according to the provisionsof § 118.160 of this chapter.

(2) Trains and locomotives shall becontrolled so that any delay in openingthe draw shall not exceed five minutes.If a train moving toward the bridge hascrossed the home signal for the bridgebefore the request to open the bridge isgiven, that train may continue across thebridge, but must clear the interlockbefore stopping.

(b) The draws of the Long IslandRailroad bridges, at mile 1.1, acrossDutch Kills at Queens, shall open on

signal if at least six-hours advancenotice is given to the Long IslandRailroad Movement Bureau, except asprovided in paragraph (a)(2) of thissection.

(c) The draw of the Borden AvenueBridge, mile 1.2, across Dutch Kills atQueens, shall open on signal if at leasta two-hour advance notice is given tothe New York City Department ofTransportation (NYCDOT) RadioHotline or NYCDOT Bridge OperationsOffice.

(d) The draw of the Hunters PointAvenue Bridge, mile 1.4, across DutchKills at Queens, shall open on signal ifat least a two-hour advance notice isgiven to the New York City Departmentof Transportation (NYCDOT) RadioHotline or the NYCDOT BridgeOperations Office.

(e) The draw of the MetropolitanAvenue Bridge, mile 3.4, across EnglishKills at New York City, shall open onsignal if at least a two-hour advancenotice is given to the New York CityDepartment of Transportation(NYCDOT) Radio Hotline or theNYCDOT Bridge Operations Office.

(f) The draw of the Grand Street/Avenue Bridge, mile 3.1, acrossNewtown Creek (East Branch) betweenBrooklyn and Queens, shall open onsignal if at least a two-hour advancenotice is given to the New York CityDepartment of Transportation(NYCDOT) Radio Hotline or theNYCDOT Bridge Operations Office.

(g) The draws of the Pulaski Bridge,mile 0.6, and the Greenpoint AvenueBridge, mile 1.3, both across theNewtown Creek between Brooklyn andQueens, shall open on signal if at leasta two-hour advance notice given to theNew York City Department ofTransportation (NYCDOT) RadioHotline or NYCDOT Bridge OperationsOffice.


G.N. Naccara,Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,First Coast Guard District.[FR Doc. 00–19395 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

37 CFR Part 201

[Docket No. RM 97–5B]

Copyright Restoration of Works inAccordance With the Uruguay RoundAgreements Act; CorrectionsPertaining to Notices of Intent ToEnforce Restored Copyrights

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library ofCongress.ACTION: Correction of errors madepertaining to the filing of Notices ofIntent to Enforce Restored Copyrights.

SUMMARY: This notice gives publicnotice that the Copyright Office iscorrecting certain errors in the filing andrecordation of notices of intent toenforce restored copyrights under theUruguay Round Agreement Act andissuing a policy decision permittingadministrative correction of certainerrors.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 1, 2000.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Charlotte Douglass, Principal LegalAdvisor to the General Counsel,Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400,Southwest Station, Washington, D.C.20024. Telephone: (202) 707–8380.Telefax: (202) 707–8366.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1997,the Copyright Office adopted an interimregulation which permitted correctionof errors in the filing of Notices of Intentto Enforce (NIEs) restored copyrightsunder certain conditions, pursuant tothe Uruguay Round Agreements Act. 62FR 55736 (1997). In accordance withthat regulation, a Correction Notice hasbeen filed to correct certain informationappearing on the NIE for the first worklisted below, originally recordedeffective August 22, 1997. The newinformation has been cataloged inCopyright Office records.

In a separate case, the Office hasadministratively amended the record fora Group NIE to reflect 45 additionaltitles not originally included. Theeffective date will be that of the originalGroup NIE, April 17, 1998. The Officeis making this amendment to reflect apolicy determination regarding theregulation permitting a single GroupNIE to cover multiple works at adiscounted rate where ‘‘all of the worksare by the same author.’’ 37 CFR 201.33(1999). Previously the Copyright Officeneither indexed nor listed titles from aGroup NIE that did not have completeidentity of authorship with other titles.For example, if a Group NIE listed titles

1and 2 by Author A and title 3 byCoauthors A and B, the Office requiredan additional NIE to be filed beforepublishing or indexing thenonconforming title.

In response to an inquiry andreexamination of the matter, the Officehas since determined that the regulationmight reasonably have been interpretedto permit group filing where the workshad at least one common author. TheOffice has, therefore, decided that whenit becomes aware that it has refused tolist titles from Group NIEs because thelisted works did not contain total unityof authorship but had one or morecommon authors, the Copyright Officewill amend the original NIE record toreflect the previously omitted titles andpublish those titles in the FederalRegister on the next scheduled four-month publication date. If anycorrections are received, the nextprojected publication date is December1, 2000.

List of Corrected Notices of Intent ToEnforce

Correction NIE

Republic Entertainment Inc.Mimi

Administrative NIE Correction

Sociedad Argentina de Autores yCompositores de Musica

AmarguraAmores de estudianteApure delantero bueyArrabal amargoAve sin rumboBrisasCriollita de mis amoresCuando tu no estásCaminito soleadoCampanitasCriollita deci que siCuesta abajoDesdenEl dia que me quierasEn los campos en florEn vano, en vanoEstudianteGolondrinasGuitarra, guitarra miaHay una virgenLejana tierra miaMañanita de solMe da pena confesarloMelodia de arrabalMi Buenos Aires queridoMi caballo bayoMi moroLos ojos de mi mozaOlvidoEl pangarePobre gallo batarazPobre mi negraPor una cabeza

Recuerdo malevoRubias de New YorkSilencioSoledadSus ojos se cerraronTu y yoUn bailongoVals de las guitarrasViejos tiemposVolverVolvió una nocheYo te adoroDated: July 25, 2000.

Marilyn J. Kretsinger,Assistant General Counsel.[FR Doc. 00–19098 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 1410–30–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 105–0242; FRL–6733–6]

Revisions to the California StateImplementation Plan, South Coast AirQuality Management District and theKern County Air Pollution ControlDistrict

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval ofrevisions to the South Coast Air QualityManagement District and the KernCounty Air Pollution Control Districtportion of the California StateImplementation Plan (SIP). Theserevisions were proposed in the FederalRegister on October 18, 1999, andFebruary 4, 2000, and concern oxides ofnitrogen (NOX) emissions fromstationary gas turbines, and hot mixasphalt paving plants, respectively. Weare approving local rules that regulatethese emission sources under the CleanAir Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or theAct).EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective onAugust 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: You can inspect copies ofthe administrative record for this actionat EPA’s Region IX office during normalbusiness hours. You can inspect copiesof the submitted SIP revisions at thefollowing locations:Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA94105–3901.

Environmental Protection Agency, AirDocket (6102), Ariel Rios Building, 1200Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., WashingtonDC 20460.

California Air Resources Board, StationarySource Division, Rule Evaluation Section,2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.



Kern County Air Pollution Control District,2700 ‘‘M’’ Street, Suite 302, Bakersfield,CA 93301, or

South Coast Air Quality ManagementDistrict, 21865 E. Copley Drive, DiamondBar, CA 91765–4182.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: EdAddison, Rulemaking Office (AIR–4),U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Region IX, (415) 744–1160.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.

I. Proposed Action

On October 18, 1999 (64 FR 56181),and February 4, 2000 (65 FR 5465), EPAproposed to approve the following rulesinto the California SIP.

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted

SCAQMD ..... 1134 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Stationary Gas Turbines .................................. 08/08/97 03/10/98KCAPCD ..... 425.1 Hot Mix Asphalt Paving Plants (Oxides of Nitrogen) .................................................... 10/13/94 10/19/94

We proposed to approve these rulesbecause we determined that theycomplied with the relevant CAArequirements. Our proposed actioncontains more information on the rulesand our evaluation.

II. Public Comments and EPAResponses

EPA’s proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During thisperiod, we received no comments.

III. EPA Action

No comments were submitted thatchange our assessment that thesubmitted rules comply with therelevant CAA requirements. Therefore,as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of theAct, EPA is fully approving these rulesinto the California SIP.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget(OMB) has exempted this regulatoryaction from Executive Order 12866,entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning andReview.’’

B. Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045, entitledProtection of Children fromEnvironmental Health Risks and SafetyRisks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),applies to any rule that: (1) isdetermined to be ‘‘economicallysignificant’’ as defined under ExecutiveOrder 12866, and (2) concerns anenvironmental health or safety risk thatEPA has reason to believe may have adisproportionate effect on children. Ifthe regulatory action meets both criteria,the Agency must evaluate theenvironmental health or safety effects ofthe planned rule on children, andexplain why the planned regulation ispreferable to other potentially effectiveand reasonably feasible alternativesconsidered by the Agency.

The rules are not subject to ExecutiveOrder 13045 because they do notinvolve decisions intended to mitigateenvironmental health or safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084,Consultation and Coordination withIndian Tribal Governments, EPA maynot issue a regulation that is notrequired by statute, that significantlyaffects or uniquely affects thecommunities of Indian tribalgovernments, and that imposessubstantial direct compliance costs onthose communities, unless the Federalgovernment provides the fundsnecessary to pay the direct compliancecosts incurred by the tribalgovernments. If the mandate isunfunded, EPA must provide to OMB,in a separately identified section of thepreamble to the rule, a description ofthe extent of EPA’s prior consultationwith representatives of affected tribalgovernments, a summary of the natureof their concerns, and a statementsupporting the need to issue theregulation. In addition, Executive Order13084 requires EPA to develop aneffective process permitting elected andother representatives of Indian tribalgovernments ‘‘to provide meaningfuland timely input in the development ofregulatory policies on matters thatsignificantly or uniquely affect theircommunities.’’

Today’s rules do not significantly oruniquely affect the communities ofIndian tribal governments. Accordingly,the requirements of section 3(b) ofExecutive Order 13084 do not apply tothe rules.

D. Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132, entitledFederalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,1999) revokes and replaces ExecutiveOrders 12612, Federalism and 12875,Enhancing the IntergovernmentalPartnership. Executive Order 13132requires EPA to develop an accountableprocess to ensure ‘‘meaningful andtimely input by State and local officialsin the development of regulatorypolicies that have federalismimplications.’’ ‘‘Policies that havefederalism implications’’ is defined inthe Executive Order to include

regulations that have ‘‘substantial directeffects on the States, on the relationshipbetween the national government andthe States, or on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities among thevarious levels of government.’’ UnderExecutive Order 13132, EPA may notissue a regulation that has federalismimplications, that imposes substantialdirect compliance costs, and that is notrequired by statute, unless the Federalgovernment provides the fundsnecessary to pay the direct compliancecosts incurred by State and localgovernments, or EPA consults withState and local officials early in theprocess of developing the proposedregulation. EPA also may not issue aregulation that has federalismimplications and that preempts Statelaw unless the Agency consults withState and local officials early in theprocess of developing the proposedregulation.

The rules will not have substantialdirect effects on the States, on therelationship between the nationalgovernment and the States, or on thedistribution of power andresponsibilities among the variouslevels of government, as specified inExecutive Order 13132, because itmerely acts on a state rule implementinga federal standard, and does not alterthe relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities establishedin the Clean Air Act. Thus, therequirements of section 6 of theExecutive Order does not apply to therules.

E. Regulatory Flexibility ActThe Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conducta regulatory flexibility analysis of anyrule subject to notice and commentrulemaking requirements unless theagency certifies that the rule will nothave a significant economic impact ona substantial number of small entities.Small entities include small businesses,small not-for-profit enterprises, andsmall governmental jurisdictions.

The final rules will not have asignificant impact on a substantial



number of small entities because SIPactions under section 110 andsubchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Actdo not create any new requirements butsimply act on requirements that theState is already imposing. Therefore,because the Federal SIP action does notcreate any new requirements, I certifythat this action will not have asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of theFederal-State relationship under theClean Air Act, preparation of flexibilityanalysis would constitute Federalinquiry into the economicreasonableness of state action. TheClean Air Act forbids EPA to base itsactions concerning SIPs on suchgrounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. Unfunded MandatesUnder Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signedinto law on March 22, 1995, EPA mustprepare a budgetary impact statement toaccompany any proposed or final rulethat includes a Federal mandate thatmay result in estimated annual costs toState, local, or tribal governments in theaggregate; or to private sector, of $100million or more. Under Section 205,EPA must select the most cost-effectiveand least burdensome alternative thatachieves the objectives of the rule andis consistent with statutoryrequirements. Section 203 requires EPAto establish a plan for informing andadvising any small governments thatmay be significantly or uniquelyimpacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approvalaction promulgated does not include aFederal mandate that may result inestimated annual costs of $100 millionor more to either State, local, or tribalgovernments in the aggregate, or to theprivate sector. This Federal action actson pre-existing requirements underState or local law, and imposes no newrequirements. Accordingly, noadditional costs to State, local, or tribalgovernments, or to the private sector,result from this action.

G. National Technology Transfer andAdvancement Act

Section 12 of the National TechnologyTransfer and Advancement Act(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federalagencies to evaluate existing technicalstandards when developing a newregulation. To comply with NTTAA,EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntaryconsensus standards’’ (VCS) if availableand applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing sowould be inconsistent with applicablelaw or otherwise impractical.

EPA believes that VCS areinapplicable to today’s action because itdoes not require the public to performactivities conducive to the use of VCS.

H. Submission to Congress and theComptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the SmallBusiness Regulatory EnforcementFairness Act of 1996, generally providesthat before a rule may take effect, theagency promulgating the rule mustsubmit a rule report, which includes acopy of the rule, to each House of theCongress and to the Comptroller Generalof the United States. EPA will submit areport containing this rule and otherrequired information to the U.S. Senate,the U.S. House of Representatives, andthe Comptroller General of the UnitedStates prior to publication of the rule inthe Federal Register. A major rulecannot take effect until 60 days after itis published in the Federal Register.The rules are not ‘‘major’’ rules asdefined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

I. Petitions for Judicial ReviewUnder section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review ofthis action must be filed in the UnitedStates Court of Appeals for theappropriate circuit by October 2, 2000.Filing a petition for reconsideration bythe Administrator of the final rules doesnot affect the finality of the rules for thepurposes of judicial review nor does itextend the time within which a petitionfor judicial review may be filed, andshall not postpone the effectiveness ofsuch rules or action. This action maynot be challenged later in proceedings toenforce its requirements. (See section307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,Incorporation by reference,Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogendioxide, Ozone, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements, Volatileorganic compounds.

Dated: June 7, 2000.Felicia Marcus,Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Codeof Federal Regulations is amended asfollows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F—California

2. Section 52.220 is amended byadding paragraphs (c)(202)(i)(B)(2) and(c)(254)(i)(D)(4) to read as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *(c) * * *(202) * * *(i) * * *(B) * * *(2) Rule 425.1 adopted on October 13,

1994.* * * * *

(254) * * *(i) * * *(D) * * *(4) Rule 1134 adopted on August 8,

1997.* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–19117 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDSPACE ADMINISTRATION


Contract Bundling

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This is a final rule amendingthe NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) toprovide guidance on internal NASAprocedures for justifying contractbundling.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 1, 2000.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: TomO’Toole, NASA, Office of Procurement,Contract Management Division (CodeHK), (202) 358–0478.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

Federal Acquisition Circular 97–15included an interim rule addressingcontract bundling that overlaps existingcoverage at NFS 1819.202–170 oncontract consolidations. To conform theNFS to the FAR, NASA is eliminatingits separate coverage on consolidations.Instead, NASA is supplementing FAR7.107, Additional requirements foracquisitions involving bundling ofcontract requirements, to establish thefollowing internal administrativeprocedures: (1) the justification anddocumentation mandated by the FARfor ‘‘substantial bundling’’ must beperformed for proposed NASAbundlings of $5 million or more; (2) themeasurable benefit analysis,justification, and the bundling



documentation for each acquisition of$5 million or more must be sent toNASA Headquarters for review; (3) theanalysis, justification, anddocumentation requirements apply toan order from a Federal SupplySchedule contract, Governmentwideacquisition contract, or other indefinite-delivery contract if the requirementsconsolidated under the order meet thedefinition of ‘‘bundling’’ at FAR 2.101;and (4) proposed acquisitions identifiedvia the agency’s Master Buy Planprocess must indicate if they are abundled acquisition.

B. Regulatory Flexibility ActThis final rule does not constitute a

significant revision within the meaningof FAR 1.501 and Pub. Law 98–577 andpublication for comments is notrequired. However, NASA will considercomments from small entitiesconcerning the affected NFS subparts inaccordance with 5 U.S.C. 610.

C. Paperwork Reduction ActThe Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the changes do notimpose information collection

requirements that require the approvalof the Office of Management and Budgetunder 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1807and 1819

Government Procurement.

Tom Luedtke,Associate Administrator for Procurement.

Accordingly, 48 CFR Parts 1807 and1819 are amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for 48 CFRParts 1807 and 1819 continues to readas follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).

PART 1807—ACQUISITION PLANNING

2. Add sections 1807.107 and1807.107–70 to read as follows:

1807.107 Additional requirements foracquisitions involving bundling of contractrequirements. (NASA supplementsparagraphs (c) and (e).)

(c) Requests for approval of proposedbundlings that do not meet thethresholds in FAR 7.107(b) must be sent

to the Headquarters Office ofProcurement (Code HS).

(e) The substantial bundlingdocumentation requirement applies toeach proposed NASA bundlingexpected to exceed $5 million or more.The contracting officer must forward thedocumentation along with themeasurable benefits analysis required byFAR 7.107(b) to the Headquarters Officeof Procurement (Code HS) in sufficienttime to allow a minimum of 10 days forreview.

1807.107–70 Orders against FederalSupply Schedule contracts,Governmentwide acquisition contracts(GWACs), or other existing indefinite-delivery contracts.

The FAR and NFS requirements forjustification, review, and approval ofbundling of contract requirements alsoapply to an order from a Federal SupplySchedule contract, Governmentwideacquisition contract, or other indefinite-delivery contract if the requirementsconsolidated under the order meet thedefinition of ‘‘bundling’’ at FAR 2.101.

3. Table 1807–1 is revised to read asfollows:

TABLE 1807–1FORMAT

MASTER BUY PLAN PROCEDURESLine Item No.:llllllllllll FYllllllllllllllll Page No.:llllllllllllInstallation:lllllllllllll Date:llllllllllllll

(1)Cognizant

HeadquartersOffice

(2)Descriptive

Title ofProcurement

(3)Estimated

DollarValue

(4)Acquisition

Plan

(5)JOFOC

(6)RFP

(7)SEB

(8)Pre-Neg

(9)ContractReview

(10)CurrentStatus

(11)Remarks

INSTRUCTIONSGeneral1. Prepare on 81⁄2″x11″ paper or electronically.2. List only one procurement on each page and number each page. Sequentially number each procurement action with a two digit ‘‘Line

Item Number’’ beginning with ‘‘01’’ for each annual submission and subsequent amendments.3. For the initial submissions only, list procurements and their current status from prior fiscal year(s) Master Buy Plans and amendments

to MBPs that have not been completed.4. Do not reproduce these instructions on the submission.Supplementary instructions by heading number(1) Include letter code and Headquarters contact, if known.(2) Include an ‘‘N’’ to indicate new procurement or ‘‘FO’’ to indicate follow-on procurement.(3) A range of dollar values may be used, if the exact value is unavailable. Express the range as $120M to $25M, $25M, $25M to $50M,

and so forth in $25M increments. Include all phases of the procurement. All dollar values must be in real year dollars, i.e., adjusted toinclude anticipated inflation.

(4) Installation recommendation (‘‘Y’’ or ‘‘N’’) that an Acquisition Strategy Meeting be held. (The final decision will be made by Head-quarters upon review of the MBP submission.)

(5)–(9) Use ‘‘X’’ to indicate applicable documents. If Column (7) contains an ‘‘X’’, include your recommendation in that column for theSource Selection Official (SSO). The recommendation should be either the Center SSO or Headquarters SSO (HSSO).

(10) Status should include scheduled date for next event. (Complete horizontally.)



(11) Include data considered pertinent and indicate expected date for placement of contract. If less than full and open competition is in-volved, indicate the authority being used, identify the firm(s) to which the procurement is being limited, and indicate the current statusof the justification document. Include the names and telephone numbers of the cognizant installation procurement person and technicalrepresentative. Indicate if the procurement will result in a bundled contract as defined in FAR 2.101.

PART 1819—SMALL BUSINESSPROGRAMS

1819.202–170 [Removed]

4. Section 1819.202–170 is removed.[FR Doc. 00–19270 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7510–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 000119014–0137–02; I.D.072600E]

Fisheries of the Northeastern UnitedStates; Scup Fishery; CommercialQuota Harvested for Summer Period

AGENCY: National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS), National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA),Commerce.ACTION: Commercial quota harvested forsummer period.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that thescup commercial quota available in thesummer period to the coastal states fromMaine to North Carolina has beenharvested. Federally-permittedcommercial vessels may not land scupin these states for the remainder of the2000 summer quota period (throughOctober 31, 2000). Regulationsgoverning the scup fishery requirepublication of this notification to advisethe coastal states from Maine throughNorth Carolina that the quota has beenharvested and to advise Federal vesselpermit holders and Federal dealerpermit holders that no commercialquota is available for landing for theremainder of the summer period.DATES: Effective 0001 hours, August 1,2000 through 2400 hours, October 31,2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PaulH. Jones, Fishery Policy Analyst, (978)281–9273.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Regulations governing the scup fisheryare found at 50 CFR part 648. Theregulations require annual specificationof a commercial quota that is allocatedinto three quota periods. The summercommercial quota (May throughOctober) is distributed to the coastalstates from Maine through North

Carolina on a coastwide basis. Theprocess to set the annual commercialquota and the seasonal allocation isdescribed in § 648.120.

The total commercial quota for scupfor the 2000 calendar year was set at2,534,160 lb (1,149,476 kg)(65 FR 33486;May 24, 2000). The summer periodquota was initially set at 987,055 lb(447,721 kg). As specified in § 648.120,landings in excess of the commercialquota in the 1999 summer period werededucted from the summer periodallocation this year, resulting in a finalsummer quota allocation of 685,628 lb(310,996 kg).

Section 648.121 requires theAdministrator, Northeast Region, NMFS(Regional Administrator) to monitor thecommercial scup quota for each quotaperiod and, based upon dealer reports,state data, and other availableinformation, to determine when thecommercial quota for a period has beenharvested. NMFS is required to publishnotification in the Federal Registeradvising that, effective upon a specificdate, the scup commercial quota hasbeen harvested, and notifying vessel anddealer permit holders that nocommercial quota is available forlanding scup for the remainder of theperiod. The Regional Administrator hasdetermined, based upon dealer reportsand other available information, that thescup commercial quota for the 2000summer period has been harvested andno further quota is available throughOctober 31, 2000.

The regulations at § 648.4(b) providethat Federal scup moratorium permitholders agree as a condition of thepermit not to land scup in any state afterNMFS has published a notification inthe Federal Register stating that thecommercial quota for the period hasbeen harvested and that no commercialquota for scup is available. Therefore,effective 0001 hours, August 1, 2000,further landings of scup by vesselsholding Federal scup moratoriumpermits are prohibited through October31, 2000. The Winter II period forcommercial scup harvest will open onNovember 1, 2000. Effective 0001 hours,August 1, 2000, federally-permitteddealers are also advised that they maynot purchase scup from federally-permitted vessels that land in coastalstates from Maine through NorthCarolina for the remainder of thesummer period (through October 31,2000).

ClassificationThis action is required by 50 CFR part

648 and is exempt from review underExecutive Order 12866.


Dated: July 27, 2000.Bruce Morehead,Acting Director, Office of SustainableFisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.[FR Doc. 00–19360 Filed 7–27–00; 3:50 pm]BILLING CODE 3510–22–F



50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 000426114–0114–01; I.D.072600D]

Fisheries of the Northeastern UnitedStates; Spiny Dogfish Fishery;Commercial Quota Harvested forPeriod 1

AGENCY: National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS), National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA),Commerce.ACTION: Commercial quota harvest forperiod 1.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that thespiny dogfish commercial quotaavailable in period 1 to the coastal statesfrom Maine through Florida has beenharvested. Commercial vessels may notland spiny dogfish from Maine throughFlorida for the remainder of the 2000quota period 1 (through October 31,2000). Regulations governing the spinydogfish fishery require publication ofthis notification to advise the coastalstates from Maine through Florida thatthe quota has been harvested and toadvise vessel permit holders and dealerpermit holders that no commercialquota is available for landing spinydogfish in these states.DATES: Effective August 1, 2000, 0001hrs, local time, through October 31,2000, 2400 hrs, local time.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Jennifer L. Anderson, FisheryManagement Specialist, at (978) 281–9226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Regulations governing the spiny dogfishfishery are found at 50 CFR part 648.The regulations require annual



specification of a commercial quota thatis allocated into two quota periodsbased upon percentages of the annualquota. The period 1 commercial quota(May through October) is distributed tothe coastal states from Maine throughFlorida. The process to set the annualcommercial quota is described in§ 648.230.

The initial total commercial quota forspiny dogfish for the 2000 calendar yearwas set equal to 4,000,000 lb (1,814 mt)(65 FR 25887, May 4, 2000). The period1 quota, which is equal to 57.9 percentof the annual commercial quota, was setat 2,316,000 lb (1,050 mt).

Section 648.231 requires the RegionalAdministrator Northeast Region, NMFS(Regional Administrator) to monitor thecommercial spiny dogfish quota for eachquota period and, based upon dealerreports, state data and other availableinformation, to determine when thecommercial quota has been harvested.NMFS is required to publish a notice inthe Federal Register advising andnotifying commercial vessels and dealer

permit holders that, effective upon aspecific date, the spiny dogfishcommercial quota has been harvestedand no commercial quota is available forlanding spiny dogfish for the remainderof period 1. The Regional Administratorhas determined, based upon dealerreports and other available information,that the spiny dogfish commercial quotafor the 2000 period 1 has beenharvested.

The regulations at § 648.4(b) providethat Federal spiny dogfish permitholders agree as a condition of thepermit not to land spiny dogfish in anystate after NMFS has published anotification in the Federal Registerstating that the commercial quota for theperiod has been harvested and that nocommercial quota for the spiny dogfishfishery is available. The RegionalAdministrator has determined thatperiod 1 for spiny dogfish no longer hascommercial quota available. Therefore,effective 0001 hrs local time, August 1,2000, further landings of spiny dogfishin coastal states from Maine through

Florida by vessels holding commercialFederal fisheries permits are prohibitedthrough October 31, 2000, 2400 hrs localtime. The quota for period 2 forcommercial spiny dogfish harvest willopen on November 1, 2000. EffectiveAugust 1, 2000, federally permitteddealers are also advised that they maynot purchase spiny dogfish fromfederally permitted spiny dogfish permitholders that land in coastal states fromMaine through Florida for the remainderof period 1 (through October 31, 2000).

Classification

This action is required by 50 CFR part648 and is exempt from review underExecutive Order 12866.



Bruce Morehead,Acting Director, Office of SustainableFisheries, National Marine Service.[FR Doc. 00–19359 Filed 7–27–00; 3:50 pm]



This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains notices to the public of the proposedissuance of rules and regulations. Thepurpose of these notices is to give interestedpersons an opportunity to participate in therule making prior to the adoption of the finalrules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

46879

Vol. 65, No. 148


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 905

[Docket No. FV00–905–3 PR]

Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, andTangelos Grown in Florida; ProposedIncrease in the Minimum SizeRequirements for Dancy, Robinson,and Sunburst Tangerines

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,USDA.ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This proposed rule wouldincrease the minimum sizerequirements for Dancy, Robinson, andSunburst tangerines grown in Florida.The minimum size requirements wouldbe increased to 26⁄16 inches diameter forboth domestic and export shipments.The marketing order regulates thehandling of oranges, grapefruit,tangerines, and tangelos grown inFlorida and is administered locally bythe Citrus Administrative Committee(Committee). This proposed rule wouldhelp the Florida tangerine industry meetmarket demands for larger fruit andshould help increase returns toproducers.

DATES: Comments must be received byAugust 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: Interested persons areinvited to submit written commentsconcerning this proposal. Commentsmust be sent to the Docket Clerk,Marketing Order AdministrationBranch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,AMS, USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456;Fax: (202) 720–5698, or E-mail:[email protected]. Allcomments should reference the docketnumber and the date and page numberof this issue of the Federal Register andwill be made available for publicinspection in the Office of the DocketClerk during regular business hours, orcan be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab/html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:William Pimental, Marketing Specialist,Southeast Marketing Field Office,Marketing Order AdministrationBranch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 2276, WinterHaven, Florida 33883; telephone: (863)299–4770, Fax: (863) 299–5169; orGeorge Kelhart, Technical Advisor,Marketing Order AdministrationBranch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,AMS, USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456;telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)720–5698.

Small businesses may requestinformation on complying with thisregulation by contacting Jay Guerber,Marketing Order AdministrationBranch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room2525–S, Washington, DC 20090–6456;telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)720–5698, or E-mail:[email protected] INFORMATION: Thisproposed rule is issued under MarketingAgreement No. 84 and Marketing OrderNo. 905, both as amended (7 CFR part905), regulating the handling of oranges,grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelosgrown in Florida, hereinafter referred toas the ‘‘order.’’ The marketingagreement and order are effective underthe Agricultural Marketing AgreementAct of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to as the‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture(Department) is issuing this rule inconformance with Executive Order12866.

This proposed rule has been reviewedunder Executive Order 12988, CivilJustice Reform. This rule is not intendedto have retroactive effect. This proposalwill not preempt any State or local laws,regulations, or policies, unless theypresent an irreconcilable conflict withthis rule.

The Act provides that administrativeproceedings must be exhausted beforeparties may file suit in court. Undersection 608c(15)(A) of the Act, anyhandler subject to an order may filewith the Secretary a petition stating thatthe order, any provision of the order, orany obligation imposed in connectionwith the order is not in accordance withlaw and request a modification of theorder or to be exempted therefrom. Ahandler is afforded the opportunity for

a hearing on the petition. After thehearing the Secretary would rule on thepetition. The Act provides that thedistrict court of the United States in anydistrict in which the handler is aninhabitant, or has his or her principalplace of business, has jurisdiction toreview the Secretary’s ruling on thepetition, provided an action is filed notlater than 20 days after the date of theentry of the ruling.

The order for Florida citrus providesfor the establishment of minimum gradeand size requirements with theconcurrence of the Secretary. Theminimum grade and size requirementsare designed to provide fresh marketswith fruit of acceptable quality and size,thereby maintaining consumerconfidence for fresh Florida citrus. Thiscontributes to stable marketingconditions in the interest of growers,handlers, and consumers, and helpsincrease returns to Florida citrusgrowers. The current minimum gradestandard for domestic and exportshipments of Dancy, Robinson, andSunburst tangerines is U.S. No. 1. Thecurrent minimum size requirement fordomestic shipments is 24⁄16 inches indiameter (size 210), and the minimumsize for export shipments is 22⁄16 inchesin diameter for Dancy tangerines and24⁄16 for Robinson and Sunburst.

This proposed rule invites commentson a change to the order’s rules andregulations that would increase theminimum size requirement for domesticand export shipments of Dancy,Robinson, and Sunburst tangerines. Thisrule would increase the minimum sizeto 26⁄16 inches in diameter for Dancy,Robinson, and Sunburst tangerines bothfor domestic and export shipments. Thisproposed rule would help the Floridatangerine industry meet market andindustry demands for larger fruit andshould help increase returns toproducers. The Committee met on May26, 2000, and unanimouslyrecommended this action.

Section 905.52 of the order, in part,authorizes the Committee to recommendminimum grade and size regulations tothe Secretary. Section 905.306 (7 CFRpart 905.306) specifies minimum gradeand size requirements for differentvarieties of fresh Florida tangerines.Such requirements for domesticshipments are specified in § 905.306 inTable I of paragraph (a), and for exportshipments in Table II of paragraph (b).

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 12:01 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 01AUP1

46880 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

This rule would adjust Table I andTable II to establish a minimum size of26⁄16 inches diameter for Dancy,Robinson, and Sunburst tangerines.

This proposed rule would increasethe minimum size requirement fordomestic and export shipments ofDancy, Robinson, and Sunbursttangerines. Based on an analysis ofmarkets and demands of buyers, theCommittee believes that an increase inminimum size would improve themarketing of Florida tangerines. Thisfollows an industry movement towardshipping larger tangerines. Newcommercial varieties have resulted inlarger-sized tangerines being shipped inresponse to a strong consumer demand.Because of this demand, production oflarger tangerines has been a popularmethod of improving returns amongproducers as it also increases totalyields.

The shift toward tangerine varietiesproducing larger fruit has been inresponse to customer needs. Robinsonand Dancy tangerines tend to be smallervarieties. Overall, production of thesetwo varieties has decreased by morethan 60 percent from the 1995–96season to the 1999–2000 season.Conversely, production of largervarieties such as Sunburst and Fallglohas been increasing. In terms of totalshipments of Dancy, Robinson, andSunburst tangerines, Sunburstrepresented almost 95 percent ofcombined shipments for the 1999–2000season.

The preference for large sizes is alsoevident in the volume of small sizesshipped. From the 1995–96 season tothe 1999–2000 season, shipments of size210 fruit accounted for on average lessthan 1.3 percent of total Dancy,Robinson, and Sunburst tangerineshipments. Even during the 1998–99season when sizes for all Florida citruswere unusually small, shipments of size210 tangerines only accounted for 2.3percent of total shipments of these threevarieties.

The change in the minimum size wasrecommended to address this movementof customer demand and industryproduction toward larger sizes. Sizecontinues to be a major influence onprice. The Committee believes that theavailability of small size 210 fruit has anegative affect on market price. In termsof price, a carton of size 210 (24⁄16 inchdiameter) tangerines can be as much as$3 less than a carton of size 176 (26⁄16

inch) tangerines. For the 1999–2000season, the average price for a carton ofsize 210 Dancy, Robinson, or Sunbursttangerines was $7.80. This compares toa weighted average price for all sizes of$11.26. The Committee believes

increasing the minimum size wouldmatch supply with demand and lessenthe price depressing affect of smallersizes.

In addition, the seasons for thesethree varieties are short. The season forthe Dancy tends to be three weeks long,five weeks for the Robinson, and 12weeks for the Sunburst. With this shortmarketing window, it is of increasedimportance that only the best, mostpreferred fruit enters the market. Themarket has no time to recover fromshipments of fruit that have adepressing effect on price. Also, onaverage, approximately 65 percent of thecrop for these three varieties goes to thefresh market. With the on tree price forprocessing averaging less than $1.00, itis imperative that the fresh market bemaintained.

The increase in the minimum size to26⁄16 inches in diameter is not expectedto significantly affect the total numberof shipments. During the 1999–2000season, of the approximate 3,821,0004⁄5 bushel container shipments of Dancy,Robinson, and Sunburst tangerines fromFlorida, only about 20,670 cartons weresize 210. Therefore, the increase in thesize requirement would only reduceshipments by around .5 percent. Thischange would also make the minimumsize consistent for all tangerines, as theminimum size is already 26⁄16 inches forFallglo and Honey tangerines.

Experience has shown that providinguniform quality and size acceptable toconsumers helps stabilize the market,improve grower returns, and fostermarket growth. The increased minimumsize would match supply to marketpreferences, which would benefit bothproducers and handlers of Floridatangerines. Increasing the minimum sizeis expected to further enhance consumerdemand and would encourage repeatpurchases resulting in increased returnsto producers. Therefore, based onavailable information, the Committeeunanimously recommended that theminimum size for shipping Dancy,Robinson, or Sunburst tangerines to thedomestic and export market be 26⁄16

inches in diameter.Handlers in Florida shipped

approximately 3,821,000 4/5 bushelcartons of tangerines to the fresh marketduring the 1999–2000 season. Of thesecartons, about 150,000 were exported. Inthe past three seasons, domesticshipments of Florida tangerinesaveraged about 3.5 million cartons.

Pursuant to requirements set forth inthe Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), theAgricultural Marketing Service (AMS)has considered the economic impact ofthis action on small entities.

Accordingly, AMS has prepared thisinitial regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fitregulatory actions to the scale ofbusiness subject to such actions in orderthat small businesses will not be undulyor disproportionately burdened.Marketing orders issued pursuant to theAct, and rules issued thereunder, areunique in that they are brought aboutthrough group action of essentiallysmall entities acting on their ownbehalf. Thus, both statutes have smallentity orientation and compatibility.

There are approximately 55 tangerinehandlers who are subject to regulationunder the order, and approximately11,000 growers of citrus in the regulatedarea. Small agricultural service firms,which include tangerine handlers, aredefined by the Small BusinessAdministration (SBA) as those havingannual receipts of less than $5,000,000,and small agricultural producers aredefined as those having annual receiptsof less than $500,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

Based on industry and Committeedata for the 1999–2000 season, theaverage annual f.o.b. price for freshtangerines was around $12.00 per 4/5bushel carton, and total fresh shipmentsfor the 1999–2000 season were3,821,000 cartons of tangerines.Approximately 25 percent of allhandlers handled 70 percent of Floridatangerine shipments. In addition, manyof these handlers ship other citrus fruitand products which are not included inCommittee data but would contributefurther to handler receipts. Using theaverage f.o.b. price, about 55 percent oftangerine handlers could be consideredsmall businesses under SBA’sdefinition. The majority of thesehandlers, and growers may be classifiedas small entities.

This proposed rule would increasethe minimum size requirement fordomestic and export shipments oftangerines to 26⁄16 inches in diameter forthe Dancy, Robinson, and Sunburstvarieties. The current minimum sizerequirement for domestic shipments is24⁄16 inches in diameter, and theminimum size for export shipments is22⁄16 inches in diameter for Dancytangerines and 24⁄16 for Robinson andSunburst. Section 905.52 of the order, inpart, authorizes the Committee torecommend minimum grade and sizeregulations to the Secretary. Section905.306 (7 CFR part 905.306) specifiesminimum grade and size requirementsfor different varieties of fresh Floridatangerines. Such requirements fordomestic shipments are specified in§ 905.306 in Table I of paragraph (a),and for export shipments in Table II ofparagraph (b). This rule would adjust


46881Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Table I and Table II to establish aminimum size of 26⁄16 inches indiameter for Dancy, Robinson, andSunburst tangerines. This proposed rulewould help the Florida tangerineindustry meet market and industrydemands and should help increasereturns to producers.

The costs associated with this rule areexpected to be minimal. The increase inthe minimum size is not expected tosignificantly affect the total number oftangerine shipments. Rather, theCommittee believes this size increasewould help improve the marketing ofFlorida tangerines. The direct costrelated to this change would stem fromthe shipment volume of size 210tangerines times price. In terms of lastseason, that would be approximately20,670 cartons times the average pricefor size 210 tangerines, $7.80, for apossible cost of about $161,226.

However, the Committee believes thatthis action would help stabilize pricesand increase shipments. This changewas made to address the increasingdemand for larger sizes. While there aresome short-term costs associated withincreasing the minimum size, thebenefits are expected to outweigh thecosts. If this regulation just succeeds inraising returns five cents a carton, itwould more than cover its costs. Inaddition, this change should not requirethe purchase of any additionalequipment. This action is consistentwith current and anticipated demand.The opportunities and benefits of thisrule are expected to be equally availableto tangerine handlers and growersregardless of their size of operation.

The Committee considered onealternative to this action. TheCommittee discussed leaving the

regulations as they were. However, thisalternative was rejected based on theconsideration of current demand forlarger sizes and the possible negativeimpact on price resulting frommaintaining the current minimum size.

This proposed rule would increasesize requirements under the marketingorder for Florida citrus. Accordingly,this action would not impose anyadditional reporting or recordkeepingrequirements on either small or largetangerine handlers. As with all Federalmarketing order programs, reports andforms are periodically reviewed toreduce information requirements andduplication by industry and publicsector agencies.

The Department has not identifiedany relevant Federal rules thatduplicate, overlap or conflict with thisproposed rule. However, tangerinesmust meet the requirements as specifiedin the U.S. Standards for Grades ofFlorida Tangerines (7 CFR 51.1810through 51.1837) issued under theAgricultural Marketing Act of 1946(7 U.S.C. 1621 through 1627).

In addition, the Committee’s meetingwas widely publicized throughout theFlorida citrus industry and all interestedpersons were invited to attend themeeting and participate in Committeedeliberations on all issues. Like allCommittee meetings, the May 26, 2000,meeting was a public meeting and allentities, both large and small, were ableto express their views on this issue.Finally, interested persons are invited tosubmit information on the regulatoryand informational impacts of this actionon small businesses.

A small business guide on complyingwith fruit, vegetable, and specialty cropmarketing agreements and orders may

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html. Any questions about thecompliance guide should be sent to JayGuerber at the previously mentionedaddress in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT section.

A 30-day comment period is providedto allow interested persons to respondto this proposal. Thirty days is deemedappropriate because this rule wouldneed to be in place as soon as possiblesince handlers will begin shippingtangerines in September. Also, Floridatangerine handlers are aware of thisissue which was discussed at a publicmeeting and was unanimouslyrecommended by the Committee. Allcomments received in a timely mannerwill be considered before a finaldetermination is made on this matter.


Grapefruit, Marketing agreements,Oranges, Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements, Tangerines, Tangelos.

For the reasons set forth in thepreamble, 7 CFR part 905 is proposed tobe amended as follows:

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT,TANGERINES, AND TANGELOSGROWN IN FLORIDA


Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. In § 905.306, Table I in paragraph(a) and Table II in paragraph b) areamended by revising the entries forDancy, Robinson, and Sunburst under‘‘Tangerines,’’ to read as follows:

§ 905.306 Orange, Grapefruit, Tangerine,and Tangelo Regulation.

(a) * * *

TABLE I

Variety Regulation period Minimum gradeMinimumdiameter(inches)

(1) (2) (3) (4)

TANGERINESDancy ............................. On and after 9/1/00 ........................................................................... U.S. No. 1 ................................... 26⁄16

Robinson ........................ On and after 9/1/00 ........................................................................... U.S. No. 1 ................................... 26⁄16

Sunburst ......................... On and after 9/1/00 ........................................................................... U.S. No. 1 ................................... 26⁄16

* * * * * * *

(b) * * *



TABLE II VARIETY

Variety Regulation period Minimum gradeMinumumdiameter(inches)

(1) (2) (3) (4)

TANGERINESDancy ............................. On and after 9/1/00 ........................................................................... U.S. No. 1 ................................... 26⁄16

* * * * * * *

Robinson ........................ On and after 9/1/00 ........................................................................... U.S. No. 1 ................................... 26⁄16

Sunburst ......................... On and after 9/1/00 ........................................................................... U.S. No. 1 ................................... 26⁄16

* * * * * * *

* * * * *Dated: July 27, 2000.

Robert C. Keeney,Deputy Administrator, Fruit and VegetablePrograms.[FR Doc. 00–19344 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Immigration and Naturalization Service

8 CFR Parts 212, 236, and 241

[INS No. 2029–00; AG Order No. 2310–2000]

RIN 1115–AF82

Detention of Aliens Ordered Removed

AGENCY: Immigration and NaturalizationService, Justice.ACTION: Proposed rule; extension ofcomment period.

SUMMARY: On June 30, 2000, at 65 FR40540, the Immigration andNaturalization Service published aproposed rule in the Federal Register, toprovide a uniform review processgoverning the detention of criminal,inadmissible, and other aliens,excluding Mariel Cubans, who havereceived a final order but whosedeparture has not been effected withinthe 90-day removal period. To ensurethat the public has ample opportunity tofully review and comment on theproposed rule, this notice extends thepublic comment period from July 31,2000, through August 11, 2000.DATES: Written comments must besubmitted on or before August 11, 2000.ADDRESSES: Please submit writtencomments, in triplicate, to the Director,Policy Directives and InstructionsBranch, Immigration and NaturalizationService, 425 I Street, NW., room 4034,Washington, DC 20536. To ensureproper handling, please reference INSNo. 2029–00 on your correspondence.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: JoanS. Lieberman, Office of the GeneralCounsel, Immigration andNaturalization Service, 425 I Street,NW., room 6100, Washington, DC20536, telephone 202–514–1932.

Dated: July 27, 2000.Doris Meissner,Commissioner, Immigration andNaturalization Service.[FR Doc. 00–19412 Filed 7–28–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–10–P

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANSAFFAIRS

38 CFR Part 36

RIN 2900–AG20

Loan Guaranty: Net Value and Pre-Foreclosure Debt Waivers

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We propose to amend theLoan Guaranty Regulations to changethe formula for calculating the net valueof property securing VA guaranteedloans being terminated and to addcriteria for granting preforeclosure debtwaivers. The proposed changesregarding net value appear necessary tomore accurately reflect current costs.The proposed changes regardingwaivers appear necessary to moreaccurately reflect statutory intent.DATES: Comments must be received onor before October 2, 2000. VA proposesto make these regulations effective 30days after publication of the finalregulations.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand-deliverwritten comments to: Director, Office ofRegulations Management (02D),Department of Veterans Affairs, 810Vermont Avenue, NW, Room 1154,Washington, DC 20420. Commentsshould indicate that they are submittedin response to ‘‘RIN 2900–AG20.’’ All

written comments received will beavailable for public inspection at theabove address, Room 1158, between thehours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Mondaythrough Friday (except holidays).FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.Richard Fyne, Assistant Director forLoan Management (261), Loan GuarantyService, Veterans BenefitsAdministration, Department of VeteransAffairs, Washington DC 20420, (202)273–7380.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Wepropose to amend the Loan GuarantyRegulations to change the formula forcalculating the net value of propertysecuring VA guaranteed loans beingterminated and to add criteria forgranting preforeclosure debt waivers.

Under current law, when a VAguaranteed loan is reported as being indefault, the Secretary is required toestablish the ‘‘net value’’ of the propertysecuring the guaranteed loan in default.‘‘Net value’’ means the fair market valueof the property minus certain costs thatVA would incur to acquire, manage, anddispose of the property. Therelationship between the net value ofthe property, the total indebtedness ofthe veteran at the time of loantermination, and the amount of VA’sguaranty determines whether or not VAmay acquire the property followingforeclosure from the foreclosing loanholder. These factors also affect theGovernment’s claim payment to theforeclosing holder under the guaranty.In addition, they will affect the amountof the veteran’s debt to the Governmentunder those circumstances where, bylaw, VA is entitled to establish a debtagainst a veteran. Moreover, they affectthe VA’s loss on the guarantytransaction which, in turn, will affectthe veteran’s ability to have previously-used entitlement restored.

Under § 36.4301, VA computes ‘‘netvalue’’ using cost data for the precedingthree fiscal years. We propose to changehow VA computes ‘‘net value.’’ Instead



of using three years data, we propose touse data only from the most recent fiscalyear. VA believes this change will leadto a calculation of net value that is morereflective of current costs.

We also propose to makenonsubstantive changes to the definitionof ‘‘net value’’ for purposes ofclarification and conformance tostatutory provisions.

Currently § 36.4323(e)(1) sets forthprovisions regarding waiver by VA ofthe establishment of a debt against aveteran whose VA guaranteed loan isbeing foreclosed. We propose to includeprovisions stating that VA may grant apreforeclosure debt waiver if the defaultwas caused by a transferee-owner, andthere is no indication of fraud,misrepresentation, or bad faith on thepart of the veteran. Public Law 101–236eliminated ‘‘material fault’’ as a bar towaiving a veteran’s debt. We believe ourproposed changes are consistent withthis statutory enactment.

We also would make citationcorrections in § 36.4323(e)(4).

This proposed rule supercedes anearlier proposed rule published in theFederal Register on September 22, 1993(58 FR 49251). The earlier proposed rulewas the same in substance as thisproposed rule.

Executive Order 12866

This proposed rule has been reviewedby the Office of Management andBudget under the provisions ofExecutive Order 12866.

Unfunded Mandates

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Actrequires (in section 202) that agenciesprepare an assessment of anticipatedcosts and benefits before developing anyrule that may result in an expenditureby State, local, or tribal governments, inthe aggregate, or by the private sector of$100 million or more in any given year.This rule would have no consequentialeffect on State, local, or tribalgovernments.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Secretary hereby certifies that theadoption of the proposed rule would nothave a significant economic impact ona substantial number of small entities asthey are defined in the RegulatoryFlexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. Theproposed rule only affects VAguaranteed loan foreclosures. Suchforeclosures represent only a small partof affected lenders’ businesses.Moreover, the effect of the proposedrule would be cost-neutral in almost allcases. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the proposed rule is exemptfrom the initial and final regulatoryflexibility analysis requirements ofsections 603 and 604.

The Catalog of Federal DomesticAssistance Program numbers are 64.114 and64.118.


Condominiums, Handicapped,Housing loan programs—housing andcommunity development, Manufacturedhomes, Veterans.

Approved: March 16, 2000.Togo D. West, Jr.,Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

For the reasons set out in thepreamble, 38 CFR part 36 is proposed tobe amended as follows:

PART 36—LOAN GUARANTY


Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 3701–3704, 3707,3710–3714, 3719, 3720, 3729, 3762, unlessotherwise noted.

2. In § 36.4301, the definition for theterm ‘‘Net value’’ is amended byrevising the introductory text andparagraph (3) to read as follows:

§ 36.4301 Definitions.

* * * * *Net value. The fair market value of

real property, minus an amountrepresenting the costs that the Secretaryestimates would be incurred by VA inacquiring and disposing of the property.The number to be subtracted from thefair market value will be calculated bymultiplying the fair market value by thecurrent cost factor. The cost factor usedwill be the most recent percentage of thefair market value that VA calculated andpublished in the Notices section of theFederal Register (it is intended that thispercentage will be calculated annually).In computing this cost factor, VA willdetermine the average operatingexpenses and losses on resale incurredfor properties acquired under § 36.4320which were sold during the precedingfiscal year and the averageadministrative cost to VA associatedwith the property management activity.The final net value derived from thiscalculation will be stated as a wholedollar amount (any fractional amountwill be rounded up to the next wholedollar). The cost items included in thecalculation will be:* * * * *

(3) Administrative costs. (i) Anestimate of the total cost for VA ofpersonnel (salary and benefits) andoverhead (which may include things

such as travel, transportation,communication, utilities, printing,supplies, equipment, insurance claimsand other services) associated with theacquisition, management anddisposition of property acquired under§ 36.4320. The average administrativecosts will be determined by:

(A) Dividing the total cost for VApersonnel and overhead salary andbenefits costs by the average number ofproperties on hand and adjusting thisfigure based on the average holding timefor properties sold during the precedingfiscal year; then

(B) Dividing the figure calculated inparagraph (3)(i)(A) of this definition bythe VBA ratio of personal services coststo total obligations.

(ii) The three cost averages will beadded to the average loss on propertysold during the preceding fiscal year(based on the average property purchaseprice) and the sum will be divided bythe average fair market value at the timeof acquisition for properties which weresold during the preceding fiscal year toderive the percentage to be used inestimating net value.

3. In § 36.4323 amend paragraph(e)(1)(v) at the end of the paragraph byremoving ‘‘liability.’’ and adding, in itsplace, ‘‘liability; or’’; add paragraph(e)(1)(vi); and revise the first sentence inparagraph (e)(4) and the authoritycitation at the end of paragraph (e)(4), toread as follows:

§ 36.4323 Subrogation and indemnity.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(1) * * *

(vi) The obligor being released is notthe current titleholder to the propertyand there are no indications of fraud,misrepresentation, or bad faith on theobligor’s part in obtaining the loan ordisposing of the property or inconnection with the loan default.* * * * *

(4) Determinations made underparagraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of thissection are intended for the benefit ofthe Government in reducing the amountof claim payable by VA and/or avoidingthe establishment of uncollectable debtsowning to the United States. * * *(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 3703(c)(1), 5302)

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–19083 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P




Federal Railroad Administration


[Docket No. FRA–1999–6439, Notice No. 2]

RIN 2130–AA71

Use of Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings

AGENCY: Federal RailroadAdministration (FRA), Department ofTransportation (DOT).ACTION: Proposed rule; notification ofcongressional contacts.

SUMMARY: On January 13, 2000, FRApublished in the Federal Register aNotice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)regarding the use of locomotive horns athighway-rail grade crossings (65 FR2230). This document providesinformation pertaining to contacts thatFRA officials have had with variouswith members of Congress regarding theNPRM.ADDRESSES: The public docket isavailable at DOT’s Docket ManagementFacility at room PL–401, 400 7th Street,SW., Washington, DC 20590. Alldocuments are also available at thedocket facilities web site athttp://dms.dot.gov.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mark H. Tessler, Office of ChiefCounsel, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue,NW., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:202–493–6061).SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Backgrounds

Congressional Meeting

In the NPRM published on January13, 2000, FRA established a commentperiod during which the public couldprovide its views on the NPRM. FRAstated: ‘‘Comments must be received byMay 26, 2000. Comments received afterthat date will be considered to theextent possible without incurringadditional expense or delay.’’

On June 22, 2000, Federal RailroadAdministrator Jolene Molitoris met withcertain members of Congress at theirrequest to discuss the pendingrulemaking. At the meeting, attended byAdministrator Molitoris, FRA ChiefCounsel S. Mark Lindsey, SpeakerDennis Hastert, Senator Richard Durbin,and Representatives William Lipinski,Judy Biggert, and John Porter, the FRAofficials received a proposal from theMembers concerning the proposedlocomotive horn rule.

A summary of the discussion, togetherwith the proposal presented to the

Administrator has been placed in thepublic docket of this proceeding and isidentified as Document Number 2316 ofDocket No. FRA–1999–6439. Thisdocument, together with all otherdocuments contained in the publicdocket is available at DOT’s DocketManagement Facility at room PL–401,400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC20590. All documents are also availableat the docket facilities web siteat http://dms.dot.gov.

Congressional Hearing

On July 18, 2000, DeputyAdministrator John V. Wells testifiedbefore the House Subcommittee onGround Transportation of theCommittee on Transportation andInfrastructure regarding the NPRM. FRAwill submit to the docket a copy of thetranscript of that hearing when it ismade available to FRA.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 25,2000.S. Mark Lindsey,Chief Counsel.[FR Doc. 00–19397 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–06–M


National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration

49 CFR Part 575

[Docket No. NHTSA–2000–6859; Notice2]

RIN 2127–AC64

Consumer Information Regulations;Federal Motor Vehicle SafetyStandards; Rollover Prevention

AGENCY: National Highway TrafficSafety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.ACTION: Extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: This document grants arequest by the Alliance of AutomobileManufacturers to extend, for 30 days,the comment period on the agency’srequest for comment on the proposal toinclude ratings for rollover resistance inthe New Car Assessment Program.DATES: The comment period will closeon August 30, 2000.ADDRESSES: Comments should refer toDocket No. NHTSA–2000–6859 and besubmitted to: Docket Management,Room PL–401, 400 Seventh St, SW,Washington, DC 20590. Docket roomhours are from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Gayle Dalrymple, Office of Crash

Avoidance Standards 202–366–5559 orby FAX to 202–493–2739. The mailingaddress is National Highway TrafficSafety Administration, NPS–23, 400Seventh St, SW, Washington, DC 20590.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OnThursday, June 1, 2000, NHTSApublished a request for comment on theagency’s intent to include a vehiclemeasure of rollover resistance, its StaticStability Factor (SSF), as an addition tothe New Car Assessment Program(NCAP).

The agency believes that consumerinformation on the rollover risk ofpassenger cars and light multipurposepassenger vehicles and trucks, based onthe vehicle’s SSF, would reduce thenumber of injuries and fatalities fromrollover crashes. This informationwould enable prospective purchasers tomake informed choices about newvehicles based on differences in real-world rollover risk and serve as amarket incentive to manufacturers instriving to design their vehicles withgreater rollover resistance.

Included in the notice was a newstatistical study undertaken todemonstrate a relationship between SSFand rollover rate representative of thewhole country. A relationship betweenrollover rate and SSF normalized to thenational rollover rate and to a nationallyrepresentative set of driver and road usevariables was developed as a basis for acomparative rating system for rolloverrisk in the event of a single-vehiclecrash. We had available crash reports of185,000 single-vehicle crashes from sixstates from 1994 to 1997 in which it waspossible to determine the make/modelof the vehicles and whether rolloveroccurred in the course of a single-vehicle crash, and for which SSF datawere also available. We also had theNASS GES data sampling system, withfar fewer but nationally representativecrash reports, to determine the nationalaverage rollover rate for the populationof vehicles investigated in the statereports.

The notice specified a commentclosing date of July 31, 2000 (60 daysafter date of publication). However, onJuly 10, 2000 we received a request foran extension of the comment closingdate from the Alliance of AutomobileManufacturers (AAM). The AAM statedthat it would need an additional 30 daysto allow for replication and analysis ofthe statistical study presented in theappendix to the notice.

NHTSA wants the public to haveadequate time to analyze the statisticalstudy and other facts that are the basisfor our proposed rollover rating system.The request for an additional 30 days



does not seem excessive. Thus, in orderto provide the AAM and otherinterested parties ample time andopportunity to analyze the studypresented in the notice and to expresstheir views on the proposal, NHTSAbelieves that there is good cause for theextension of the comment period andthat such extension in consistent withthe public interest. Accordingly, theAAM request to extend the commentperiod for an additional 30 days isgranted. The comment period will nowclose August 30, 2000.

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,30117, and 30166; delegation of authority isat 49 CFR 1.50.

Issued on: July 26, 2000.Stephen R. Kratzke,Associate Administrator for SafetyPerformance Standards.[FR Doc. 00–19398 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–59–P



50 CFR Part 635

[I.D. 070500C]

Atlantic Highly Migratory SpeciesFisheries; Additional ScopingMeetings

AGENCY: National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS), National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA),Commerce.ACTION: Scoping meetings.

SUMMARY: On July 19, 2000, NMFSpublished a notice of intent to preparea Supplemental Environmental ImpactStatement (SEIS); notice of availability

of Biological Opinion (BO); and anannouncement of scoping meetings.NMFS also announced that additionalscoping meetings may be scheduled ata later date. NMFS herewith announcestwo additional scoping meetings.

To accommodate people unable toattend a scoping meeting or wishing toprovide written comments, NMFS alsosolicits written comments on thesedocuments.

DATES: The additional scoping meetingsare scheduled as follows:

1. Wednesday, August 16, 2000–Manteo, NC 7–9:30 p.m.

2. Thursday, August 18, 2000–CapeCanaveral, FL 7–9:30 p.m.ADDRESSES: The locations for theadditional scoping meetings are asfollows:

1. N.C. Aquariums, Roanoke Island,Neptune Theater, 374 Airport Road,Manteo, NC 27954.

2. Radisson Resort at the Port &Conference Ctr. 8701 AstronautBoulevard, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920.

Written comments on the proposal toprepare the SEIS and requests for copiesof the BO should be sent to: RebeccaLent, Chief, Highly Migratory SpeciesManagement Division (F/SF1), Office ofSustainable Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD20910. Comments also may be sent viafacsimile (fax) to (301) 713–1917.Comments will not be accepted ifsubmitted via e-mail or the Internet.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Margo Schulze-Haugen or KarylBrewster-Geisz, 301–713–2347; fax 301–713–1917.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Background information about theSupplemental Environmental ImpactStatement (SEIS), the BiologicalOpinion, and a list of other scoping

meetings are contained in theannouncement published July 19,2000(65 FR 44753) and is not repeated here.

Public Hearings and SpecialAccommodations

The public is reminded that NMFSexpects participants at the publichearings to conduct themselvesappropriately. At the beginning of eachpublic hearing, a NMFS representativewill explain the ground rules (e.g.,alcohol is prohibited from the hearingroom; attendees will be called to givetheir comments in the order in whichthey registered to speak; each attendeewill have an equal amount of time tospeak; and attendees should notinterrupt one another). The NMFSrepresentative will attempt to structurethe hearing so that all attendingmembers of the public will be able tocomment, if they so choose, regardlessof the controversial nature of thesubject(s). Attendees are expected torespect the ground rules, and, if they donot, they will be asked to leave thehearing.

Special Accommodations

The scoping meetings are physicallyaccessible to people with disabilities.Requests for sign languageinterpretation or other auxiliary aidsshould be directed to Margo Schulze-Haugen or Karyl Brewster-Geisz (see FORFURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7days prior to the hearing or meeting.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq., and 16U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: July 27, 2000.Bruce C. Morehead,Acting Director, Office of SustainableFisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.[FR Doc. 00–19389 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–22–F


This section of the FEDERAL REGISTERcontains documents other than rules orproposed rules that are applicable to thepublic. Notices of hearings and investigations,committee meetings, agency decisions andrulings, delegations of authority, filing ofpetitions and applications and agencystatements of organization and functions areexamples of documents appearing in thissection.

Notices Federal Register

46886

Vol. 65, No. 148


COMMODITY FUTURES TRADINGCOMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:Commodity Futures TradingCommission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday,August 4, 2000.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington,D.C., 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: SurveillanceMatters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.

Jean A. Webb,Secretary of the Commission.[FR Doc. 00–19493 Filed 7–28–00; 12:31 pm]BILLING CODE 6351–01–M



AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:Commodity Futures TradingCommission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday,August 11, 2000.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington,D.C., 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: SurveillanceMatters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.




AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:Commodity Futures TradingCommission.TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday,August 18, 2000.PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington,D.C., 9th Floor Conference Room.STATUS: Closed.MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: SurveillanceMatters.CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.




AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:Commodity Futures TradingCommissionTIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, August25, 2000PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington,DC, 9th Floor Conference RoomSTATUS: ClosedMATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: SurveillanceMattersCONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.


CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL ANDCOMMUNITY SERVICE

Availability of Funds for Grants toSupport the Martin Luther King, Jr.Service Day Initiative

AGENCY: Corporation for National andCommunity Service.ACTION: Notice of availability of funds.

SUMMARY: The Corporation for Nationaland Community Service (theCorporation), in consultation with the

Martin Luther King, Jr. Center forNonviolent Social Change, Inc. inAtlanta, invites applications for grantsto pay for the federal share of the costof planning and carrying out serviceopportunities in conjunction with thefederal legal holiday honoring thebirthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. onJanuary 15, 2001.

The purpose of the grants is tomobilize more Americans to observe theMartin Luther King, Jr. federal holidayas a day of service in communities andto bring people together around thecommon focus of service to others. Toachieve this, we will makeapproximately $500,000 in grant fundsavailable to support approved serviceopportunities. Eligible organizationsmay apply for a grant in one of thefollowing two categories. The firstcategory, in amounts of up to $3,500,will support national service andcommunity volunteering projects of arelatively small scale and limitedgeographical scope. The secondcategory, in amounts of up to $10,000,will support large-scale (e.g., state-wide,city-wide, county-wide, or regional)service projects. By large-scale, we meanthat the service involves a large numberof participants in a geographic area. Weexpect to award a greater number ofsmall-scale grants.DATES: The deadline for submission ofapplications is September 15, 2000, nolater than 5 p.m. local time.ADDRESSES: Obtain applications fromand return them to the Corporation stateoffice in your state unless otherwisenoted. See Supplementary Informationsection for Corporation state officeaddresses. Address the application to:Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service,Corporation for National Service(Appropriate State Address).FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Forfurther information, contact the personlisted for the Corporation office in yourstate, unless otherwise noted. You mayrequest this notice in an alternativeformat for the visually impaired bycalling (202) 606–5000, ext. 262. TheCorporation’s T.D.D. number is (202)565–2799 and is operational betweenthe hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. EasternDaylight Time.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

BackgroundThe Corporation is a federal

government corporation, established by

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 19:52 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM pfrm10 PsN: 01AUN1

46887Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Notices

Congress in the 1993 amendments to theNational and Community Service Act of1990 (the Act) that engages Americansof all ages and backgrounds in serviceto communities. This service addressesthe nation’s education, public safety,environmental, or other human needs toachieve direct and demonstrable resultswith special consideration to servicethat affects the needs of children. Indoing so, the Corporation fosters civicresponsibility, strengthens the ties thatbind us together as a people, andprovides educational opportunity forthose who make a substantialcommitment to service. The Corporationsupports a range of national serviceprograms including AmeriCorps, Learnand Serve America, and the NationalSenior Service Corps. In providinggrants to support service in connectionwith the Martin Luther King, Jr. federalholiday, the Corporation acts inconsultation with the Martin LutherKing, Jr. Center for Nonviolent SocialChange, Inc. For more information aboutthe Corporation and the programs itsupports, go to http://www.nationalservice.org. For moreinformation about the King Center, go tohttp://www.thekingcenter.com.

Section 12653(s) of the Act, asamended in 1994, authorizes theCorporation to make grants to share thecost of planning and carrying outservice opportunities in conjunctionwith the federal legal holiday honoringthe birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr.We will fund grants to support activitiesthat will (1) get necessary things donein communities, (2) strengthen thecommunities engaged in the serviceactivity, (3) reflect the life and teachingof Martin Luther King, Jr., (4) respondto one or more of the goals set forth atthe Presidents’ Summit for America’sFuture and include young people asservice providers, not just recipients ofservice, and (5) begin or occur insignificant part on the federal legalholiday (January 15, 2001).

Getting things done means thatprojects funded under the Martin LutherKing Jr. holiday grant will helpcommunities meet education, publicsafety, environmental, or other humanneeds through direct service andeffective citizen action. Accordingly, weexpect well designed activities that meetcompelling community needs and leadto measurable outcomes and impact.

Strengthening communities meansbringing people together in pursuit of acommon objective that is of value to thecommunity. On Martin Luther King, Jr.Day in 1998, President Clinton said‘‘* * * to achieve one America, wemust go beyond words to deeds. Servingtogether on the King holiday—and

everyday—will bring our nation closertogether and help meet some of ourtoughest challenges.’’ Projects shouldseek to engage a wide range of localpartners in the communities served.You should design, implement, andevaluate projects with partners,including local and state King HolidayCommissions, national service programs(AmeriCorps, Learn and Serve America,and the National Senior Service Corps),state and local organizations affiliatedwith the campaign for children andyouth launched at the Presidents’Summit for America’s Future andcarried forward by America’s Promise—the Alliance for Youth, community-based agencies, schools and schooldistricts, Volunteer Centers of the Pointsof Light Foundation and other volunteerorganizations, local United Ways,communities of faith, businesses,foundations, state and localgovernments, labor organizations, andcolleges and universities.

Reflecting the life and teaching ofMartin Luther King, Jr. meansdemonstrating his proposition that,‘‘Everybody can be great becauseeverybody can serve.’’ Dr. King’sconcept of greatness, when expressedthrough acts of service, offers everyonean opportunity to experience a sense ofworth and dignity. His exampleencourages all ages, races, colors, ethnicgroups, genders, nationalities, andabilities to respond to those in need. Weare challenged to adopt his philosophyin addressing the evils ofdiscrimination, poverty and violence.Dr. King’s abiding faith and earnestbelief in the ‘‘American Dream’’ isexemplified by his commitment tojustice and his willingness to serveunselfishly. His strategies anddetermination to use non-violence as ameans to transform the hearts ofmillions should be used as a rousingforce to encourage others in their desireto be socially responsible through non-violent direct actions—direct service.You should consider serviceopportunities for this program thatfoster cooperation and understandingamong racial and ethnic groups,nonviolent conflict resolution, equaleconomic and educationalopportunities, and social justice.

Respond to one or more of the goalsof the Presidents’ Summit and includeyoung people as service providers, notjust recipients of service means thatservice projects should be designed tohelp achieve the five basic promises forall children and youth declared at thePresidents’ Summit for America’sFuture and carried forward byAmerica’s Promise—the Alliance forYouth, the organization led by General

Colin Powell to pursue the Summit’sgoals. Those five ‘‘promises’’ for youngpeople are: an ongoing relationship witha caring adult—mentor, tutor, coach;safe spaces and structured activitiesduring non-school hours; a healthy start;an effective education that equips withmarketable skills; and an opportunity togive back to their communities throughtheir own service. Particularlyimportant is the fifth goal: to challengeand inspire young people to give at leastone hundred hours of service a year. Allyoung people must see themselves—andbe seen by others—as resources andleaders, not just as problems or victims.Therefore, you should include youngpeople as service providers andresources in project planning, not just asthe recipients of service.

Begin or occur in significant part onthe federal legal holiday means that asignificant portion of the communityservice activities supported by the grantshould occur on the holiday itself tostrengthen the link between theobservance of Martin Luther King, Jr.’sbirthday, the federal legal holiday(January 15, 2001), and service thatreflects his life and teaching.

The direct service you will do on andin connection with the King holidaymay include, but is not limited to, thefollowing types of activities: tutoringchildren or adults, feeding the hungry,packing lunches, delivering meals,stocking a food or clothing pantry,repairing a school and adding to itsresources, translating books anddocuments into other languages,recording books for the visuallyimpaired, restoring a public space,organizing a blood drive, registeringbone marrow and organ donors,renovating low-income or seniorhousing, building a playground,removing graffiti and painting a mural,renovating or creating safe spaces forchildren who are out of school andwhose parents are working, collectingoral histories of elders, running healthfairs that provide health screenings,immunizations and health insuranceinformation, gleaning and distributingfruits and vegetables, etc.

Although celebrations, parades, andrecognition ceremonies may be a part ofthe activities that you plan on theholiday and lead to or celebrate acommitment to service, these activitiesdo not constitute direct service underthis grant and the grant will not fundsuch activities.

Other service outcomes we willconsider in grant applications include,but are not limited to, the following: aday-of-service you design to produce asustained long-term servicecommitment; community-wide


46888 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Notices

servathons that bring a broad cross-section of people together in a burst ofenergy on one day of service, includingschools or school districts that seek toinvolve all students and teachers injoint service; service-learning projectsthat link student service in schools anduniversities with community-basedorganizations; faith-based servicecollaborations that bring togethercommunities of faith and secular humanservice programs (subject to thelimitations listed below); and serviceprojects that include a pledge orcommitment for continued servicethroughout the year.

Grant funding will be available on aone-time, non-renewable basis for abudget period not to exceed sevenmonths, beginning no sooner thanNovember 1, 2000 and ending no laterthan June 30, 2001. By statute, thegrants we provide for this program,together with all other federal funds youuse to plan or carry out the serviceopportunity, may not exceed 30 percentof the total cost.

For example, if you request $3,500 infederal dollars you must have a non-federal match of at least $8,167 (cashand/or in-kind contributions) and a totalprojected cost of at least $11,667. If yourequest $10,000 in federal dollars youmust have a non-federal match of atleast $23,333 (cash and/or in-kindcontributions) and a total projected costof at least $33,333. In other words thetotal project cost multiplied by .30 is themaximum amount of money you canrequest from the federal government.(Total project cost minus federal dollarsrequested equals the required match). Itmay assist in the calculation to applythe formula as follows:

Total Project Cost × .30 = MaximumFederal ContributionTotal Project Cost ¥ Federal DollarsRequested = Non-Federal Match.

The non-federal match may includecash and in-kind contributions(including, but not limited to, supplies,staff time, trainers, food, transportation,facilities, equipment, and services)necessary to plan and carry out theservice opportunity. Grants under thisprogram constitute federal assistanceand therefore may not be used primarilyto inhibit or advance religion in amaterial way. You may not use any partof an award from the Corporation tofund religious instruction, worship orproselytization. You may not use anypart of an award to pay honoraria or feesfor speakers. You may not use any partof an award to support a celebrationbanquet or other activity that is notconnected to the actual service.

The total amount of grant funds wewill provide under this Notice willdepend on the quality of applicationsand the availability of appropriatedfunds for this purpose.

Eligible Applicants

By law, any entity otherwise eligiblefor assistance under the national servicelaws is eligible to receive a grant underthis announcement. The applicable lawsinclude the National and CommunityService Act of 1990, as amended, andthe Domestic Volunteer Service Act of1973, as amended.

Eligible applicants include, but arenot limited to: nonprofit organizations,state commissions on service, volunteercenters, institutions of higher education,local education agencies, educationalinstitutions, local or state governments,and private organizations that intend toutilize volunteers in carrying out thepurposes of this program.

We especially invite applicationsfrom organizations with experience in—and commitment to—fostering serviceon Martin Luther King, Jr. Day,including state and local Martin LutherKing, Jr. Commissions, local educationagencies, faith-based partnerships,Volunteer Centers of the Points of LightFoundation, and United Ways and othercommunity-based agencies.

Any grant recipient from the 1997,1998, 1999, and 2000 Martin LutherKing, Jr., Day of Service Initiatives willbe ineligible if it has been non-compliant with the terms of those grantawards.

Pursuant to the Lobbying DisclosureAct of 1995, an organization describedin section 501(c)(4) of the InternalRevenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S.C.501(c)(4), which engages in lobbyingactivities, is not eligible.

Overview of Application Requirements

Applicants should submit thefollowing standard components forfederal grants:

1. An Application for FederalAssistance, Standard Form 424.

2. A Project Narrative describing:a. the types of service activities (that

lead to measurable outcomes) that youplan in observance of Martin LutherKing, Jr. Day, which must take placesignificantly on the legal federal holiday(January 15, 2001), but which mayextend for the budget period (November1, 2000 through June 30, 2001);

b. partnerships in the localcommunity, city, state or region that youare engaging in support of the serviceactivities;

c. your organization’s background andcapacity to carry out this program; and

d. how you propose to staff theactivity.

The project narrative portion of theapplication may be no longer than 7single-sided pages for applications notto exceed $3,500 and 15 single-sidedpages for applications not to exceed$10,000. You must type double-spacedin a font no smaller than 12 point andnumber each page.

3. A Budget Narrative (specificinstructions are provided in theapplication materials).

4. Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (SF 424A) formin the application package.

5. A signed Assurances—Non-Construction Programs (SF 424B) formincorporating conditions attendant tothe receipt of federal funding.

6. Three complete copies (one signedoriginal and two copies) of theapplication.

We must receive all applications by5:00 p.m. local time, September 15,2000 at the Corporation office in yourstate, unless otherwise noted, addressedas follows:Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of ServiceCorporation for National Service(Appropriate state office address; see list

of addresses provided below).You may not submit an application by

facsimile.To ensure fairness to all applicants,

we reserve the right to take action, upto and including disqualification, in theevent that your application fails tocomply with the requirements relatingto page limits, line-spacing, font size,and application deadlines.

Budget

Detailed instructions about the budgetinformation you must provide are in theapplication materials.

Selection Process and Criteria

We will review the applicationsinitially to confirm that you are aneligible recipient and to ensure thatyour application contains theinformation we require and otherwisecomplies with the requirements of thisnotice. We will assess the quality ofapplications’ responsiveness to theobjectives included in thisannouncement based on the followingcriteria listed below:

1. Program Design (60%) Theproposal must demonstrate your abilityto get necessary things done, strengthencommunities, reflect the life andteaching of Martin Luther King Jr.,respond to one or more of the goals setforth at the Presidents’ Summit forAmerica’s Future and include youngpeople as service providers, not just



recipients of service, and begin or occurin significant part on the federal legalholiday, January 15, 2001.

2. Organizational Capacity (25%)Your application must demonstrate yourorganization’s ability to carry out theactivities described in the proposal,including the use of highly qualifiedstaff.

3. Budget/Cost Effectiveness (15%)You must demonstrate how you will usethis grant effectively, including thesources and uses of matching support.

After evaluating the overall quality ofproposals and their responsiveness tothe criteria noted above, we will seek toensure that applications we selectrepresent a portfolio that is: (1)Geographically diverse, includingprojects throughout the fivegeographical clusters as designated bythe Corporation; (2) representative ofdifferent population tracts, i.e. rural,urban, suburban; (3) representative of arange of models of service projects.

Awards

We anticipate making selectionsunder this announcement no later thanNovember 1, 2000.

Corporation for National Service StateOffices

AKJohn Miller, Jackson Federal Bldg.,

Suite 3190, 915 Second Ave.,Seattle, WA 98174–1103, Phone:(206) 220–7745 Fax: (206) 553–4415

ALNancy Reeder, Medical Forum, 950

22nd St., N., Suite 428,Birmingham, AL 35203, Phone:(205) 731–0027 Fax: (205) 731–0031

AROpal Sims, Federal Building, Room

2506, 700 West Capitol Street, LittleRock, AR 72201, Phone: (501) 324–5234 Fax: (501) 324–6949

AZRichard Persely, 522 North Central,

Room 205A, Phoenix, AZ 80504–2190, Phone: (602) 379–4825 Fax:(602) 379–4030

CAJavier LaFianza, 11150 W. Olympic

Blvd., Suite 670, Los Angeles, CA90064, Phone: (310) 235–7421 Fax:(310) 235–7422

COJames Byrnes, 999 Eighteenth Street,

Suite 1440 South, Denver, CO80202, Phone: (303) 312–7952 Fax:(303) 312–7954

CTRomero Cherry, 1 Commercial Plaza,

21st Floor, Hartford, CT 06103–3510, Phone: (860) 240–3237 Fax:(860) 240–3238

DCThomas Harmon, 400 North 8th

Street, Suite 446, P.O. Box 10066,Richmond, VA 23240–1832, Phone:(804) 771–2197 Fax: (804) 771–2157

DEJerry Yates, Fallon Federal Bldg., 31

Hopkins Plaza, Suite 400–B,Baltimore, MD 21201, Phone: (410)962–4443 Fax: (410) 962–3201

FLWarren Smith, 3165 McCrory Street,

Suite 115, Orlando, FL 32803–3750,Phone: (407) 648–6117 Fax: (407)648–6116

GADaryl James, 75 Piedmont Avenue,

N.E., Room 902, Atlanta, GA30303–2587, Phone: (404) 331–4646Fax: (404) 331–2898

HILynn Dunn, 300 Ala Moana Blvd.,

Room 6213, Honolulu, HI 96850–0001, Phone: (808) 541–2832 Fax:(808) 541–3603

IAJoel Weinstein, Federal Building,

Room 917, 210 Walnut Street,DeMoines, IA 50309–2195, Phone:(515) 284–4816 Fax: (515) 284–6640

IDV. Kent Griffitts, 304 North 8th Street,

Room 344, Boise, ID 83702–5835,Phone: (208) 334–1707 Fax: (208)334–1421

ILTimothy Krieger, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Suite 442, Chicago, IL60604–3511, Phone: (312) 353–3622Fax: (312) 353–5343

INThomas Haskett, 46 East Ohio Street,

Room 457, Indianapolis, IN 46204–1922, Phone: (317) 226–6724 Fax:(317) 226–5437

KSJames Byrnes, 444 S.E. Quincy, Room

260, Topeka, KS 66683–3572,Phone: (785) 295–2540 Fax: (785)295–2596

KYBetsy Wells, 600 Martin L. King Place,

Room 372–D, Louisville, KY 40202–2230, Phone: (502) 582–6384 Fax:(502) 582–6386

LAWillard Labrie, 707 Florida Street,

Suite 316, Baton Rouge, LA 70801,Phone: (225) 389–0473 Fax: (225)389–0510

MAMalcolm Coles, 10 Causeway Street,

Room 473, Boston, MA 02222–1038, Phone: (617) 565–7001 Fax:(617) 565–7011

MD

Jerry Yates, Fallon Federal Bldg., 31Hopkins Plaza, Suite 400–B,Baltimore, MD 21201, Phone: (410)962–4443 Fax: (410) 962–3201

MEMalcolm Coles, 1 Pillsbury Street,

Suite 201, Concord, NH 03301–3556, Phone: (603) 225–1450 Fax:(603) 225–1459

MIMary Pfeiler, 211 West Fort Street,

Suite 1408, Detroit, MI 48226–2799,Phone: (313) 226–7848 Fax: (313)226–2557

MNRobert Jackson, 431 South 7th Street,

Room 2480, Minneapolis, MN55415–1854, Phone: (612) 334–4083Fax: (612) 334–4084

MOJohn McDonald, 801 Walnut Street,

Suite 504, Kansas City, MO 64106–2009, Phone: (816) 374–6300 Fax:(816) 374–6305

MSR. Abdul-Azeez, 100 West Capitol

Street, Room 1005A, Jackson, MS39269–1092, Phone: (601) 965–5664Fax: (601) 965–4671

MTJohn Allen, 208 North Montana

Avenue, Suite 206, Helena, MT59601–3837, Phone: (406) 449–5404Fax: (406) 449–5412

NCRobert Winston, 300 Fayetteville

Street Mall, Room 131,Raleigh, NC 27601–1739, Phone: (919)

856–4731 Fax: (919) 856–4738ND

John Pohlman, 225 S. Pierre Street,Room 225, Pierre, SD 57501–2452,Phone: (605) 224–5996 Fax: (605)224–9201

NEAnne Johnson, Federal Building,

Room 156, 100 Centennial MallNorth, Lincoln, NE 68508–3896,Phone: (402) 437–5493 Fax: (402)437–5495

NHMalcolm Coles, 1 Pillsbury Street,

Suite 201, Concord, NH 03301–3556, Phone: (603) 225–1450 Fax:(603) 225–1459

NJStanley Gorland, 44 South Clinton

Ave., Room 702, Trenton, NJ08609–1507, Phone: (609) 989–2243Fax: (609) 989–2304

NMErnesto Ramos, 120 S. Federal Place,

Room 315, Sante Fe, NM 87501–2026, Phone: (505) 988–6577 Fax:(505) 988–6661

NV



Craig Warner, 4600 Kietzke Lane,Suite E–141, Reno, NV 89502–5033,Phone: (775) 784–5314 Fax: (775)784–5026

NYDonna Smith, Clinton Ave. & Pearl

St., Room 818, Albany, NY 12207,Phone: (518) 431–4150 Fax: (518)431–4154

OHPaul Schrader, 51 North High Street,

Suite 451, Columbus, OH 43215,Phone: (614) 469–7441 Fax: (614)469–2125

OKZeke Rodriguez, 215 Dean A. McGee,

Suite 324, Oklahoma City, OK73102, Phone: (405) 231–5201 Fax:(405) 231–4329

ORRobin Sutherland, 2010 Lloyd Center,

Portland, OR 97232, Phone: (503)231–2103 Fax: (503) 231–2106

PAJorina Ahmed, Robert N.C. Nix

Federal Bldg., 900 Market St., Suite229, Philadelphia, PA 19107,Phone: (215) 597–2806 Fax: (215)597–2807

PRLoretta Cordova, 150 Carlos Chardon

Ave., Suite 662, San Juan, PR00918–1737, Phone: (787) 766–5314Fax: (787) 766–5189

RIVincent Marzullo, 400 Westminster

Street, Room 203, Providence, RI02903, Phone: (401) 528–5426 Fax:(401) 528–5220

SCJerome Davis, 1835 Assembly Street,

Suite 872, Columbia, SC 29201–2430, Phone: (803) 765–5771 Fax:(803) 765–5777

SDJohn Pohlman, 225 S. Pierre Street,

Room 225, Pierre, SD 57501–2452,Phone: (605) 224–5996 Fax: (605)224–9201

TNJerry Herman, 265 Cumberland Bend

Drive, Nashville, TN 37228, Phone:(615) 736–5561 Fax: (615) 736–7937

TXJerry Thompson, 903 San Jacinto,

Suite 130, Austin, TX 78701–3747,Phone: (512) 916–5671 Fax: (512)916–5806

UTRick Crawford, 350 S. Main Street,

Room 504, Salt Lake City, UT84101–2198, Phone: (801) 524–5411Fax: (801) 524–3599

VAThomas Harmon 400 North 8th Street,

Suite 446, P. O. Box 10066,

Richmond, VA 23240–1832, Phone:(804) 771–2197 Fax: (804) 771–2157

VILoretta Cordova 150 Carlos Chardon

Ave., Suite 662, San Juan, PR00918–1737, Phone: (787) 766–5314Fax: (787) 766–5189

VTMalcolm Coles 10 Causeway Street,

Room 473, Boston, MA 02222–1038, Phone: (617) 565–7001 Fax:(617) 565–7011

WAJohn Miller, Jackson Federal Bldg.,

Suite 3190, 915 Second Ave.,Seattle, WA 98174–1103, Phone:(206) 220–7745 Fax: (206) 553–4415

WILinda Sunde, 310 W. Wisconsin Ave.,

Room 1240, Milwaukee, WI 53203–2211, Phone: (414) 297–1118 Fax:(414) 297–1863

WVJudith Russell, 10 Hale Street, Suite

203, Charleston, WV 25301–1409,Phone: (304) 347–5246 Fax: (304)347–5464

WYPatrick Gallizzi, Federal Building,

Room 1110, 2120 Capitol Avenue,Cheyenne, WY 82001–3649, Phone:(307) 772–2385 Fax: (307) 772–2389

Dated: July 25, 2000Gary Kowalczyk,Coordinator of National Service Programs,Corporation for National and CommunityService.[FR Doc. 00–19288 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6050–28–U

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL ANDCOMMUNITY SERVICE

Privacy Act of 1974; Report ofAmended System of Records

AGENCY: Corporation for National andCommunity Service.ACTION: Notice of amended system ofrecords.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that inaccordance with the Privacy Act of1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4),(‘‘the Act’’), the Corporation for Nationaland Community Service herebypublishes a notice of its amendedsystem of records due to minor changesto the current system of records as setforth below. Title 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)and (11) provides that the public begiven 30 days to comment on theamended system of records. The Officeof Management and Budget (OMB),which has oversight responsibilitiesunder the Privacy Act, requires 40 days

to conclude its review of the amendedsystem of records.EFFECTIVE DATES: The proposed changesto the Corporation’s system of recordsbecomes effective September 11, 2000.ADDRESSES: Comments should beaddressed to the Corporation forNational and Community Service, Officeof Administrative and ManagementServices, Attn: Denise Moss,Corporation Records Liaison Officer,1201 New York Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C., 20525.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Denise Moss, Corporation RecordsLiaison Officer, 202–606–5000,extension 384. A copy of this amendedsystem of records may be obtained in analternate format by calling: TDD, 202–606–5256, or by writing to theCorporation for National andCommunity Service, Office ofAdministrative and ManagementServices, Attn: Corporation RecordsLiaison Officer, 1201 New York Avenue,NW., Washington, DC, 20525.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheCorporation publishes the followingnotice of its system of records: Notice ofSystem of Records—PreliminaryStatement.

Corporation—when used in the noticerefers to Corporation for National andCommunity Service.

AmeriCorps—when used in the noticerefers to the Volunteers In Service ToAmerica (VISTA) program, the NationalCivilian Community Corps (NCCC)program, the Leaders program, or thestate and national program.

Operating Units—The names of theoperating units within the Corporationto which a particular system of recordspertains are listed under the systemmanager and address section of eachsystem notice.

Official Personnel Files—Officialpersonnel files of Federal employees inthe General Schedule and theCorporation’s Alternative PersonnelSystem, in the custody of theCorporation are considered the propertyof the Office of Personnel Management.Access to such files shall be inaccordance with such notices publishedby OPM. Access to such files in thecustody of the Corporation will begranted to individuals to whom suchfiles pertain upon request to theCorporation for National andCommunity Service, Director, HumanResources, 1201 New York Avenue,NW., Washington, DC 20525.

Various offices in the Corporationmaintain files which contain copies ofmiscellaneous personnel materialaffecting Corporation employees. Theseinclude copies of standard personnel



forms, evaluation forms, etc. These filesare kept only for immediate officereference and are considered by theCorporation to be part of the personnelfile system. The Corporation’s internalpolicy provides that such information isa part of the general personnel files andcan be disclosed only through theDirector, Human Resources, in orderthat he or she may ensure that anymaterial be disclosed is relevant,current, and fair to the individualemployees. Also, it is the policy of theCorporation to limit the use of such filesand to encourage the destruction of asmany as possible.

Description of ChangesThe changes made to the

Corporation’s system of records areconsidered to be minor in nature, andconsist of the following: (1) Corporation#1, #2, and #17 were renamed; (2)Corporation #3, has been changed toreflect the Alumni Coordinator beingresponsible for the electronicrecordkeeping of the service histories ofpast VISTA and AmeriCorps*VISTAmembers; (3) Corporation #12—theSTORAGE category was changed toreflect computerized files, and theSAFEGUARDS category was changed toreflect an individual with authority torelease files to other members of theCorporation for their official use.

Statement of General Routine UsesThe following general routine uses are

incorporated by this reference into eachsystem of records set forth herein,unless specifically limited in the systemdescription.

1. In the event that a record in asystem of records maintained by theCorporation indicates, either by itself orin combination with other informationin the Corporation’s possession, aviolation or potential violation of thelaw (whether civil, criminal, orregulatory in nature, and whetherarising by statute or by regulation, ruleor order issued pursuant thereto), thatrecord may be referred, as a routine use,to the appropriate agency, whetherFederal, state, local or foreign, chargedwith the responsibility of investigatingor prosecuting such violation, orcharged with enforcing or implementingthe statute, rule, regulation, or orderissued pursuant thereto. Such referralshall include, and be deemed toauthorize: (1) Any and all appropriateand necessary uses of such records in acourt of law or before an administrativeboard or hearing; and (2) such otherinteragency referrals as may benecessary to carry out the receivingagencies’ assigned law enforcementduties.

2. A record may be disclosed as aroutine use to designated officers andemployees of other agencies anddepartments of the Federal governmenthaving an interest in the individual foremployment purposes including thehiring or retention of any employee, theissuance of a security clearance, theletting of a contract, or the issuance ofa license, grant or other benefit by therequesting agency, to the extent that theinformation is relevant and necessary tothe requesting agency’s decision on thematter involved, provided, however,that other than information furnishedfor the issuance of authorized securityclearances, information divulgedhereunder as to full-time volunteersunder Title I of the Domestic VolunteerService Act of 1973, as amended (42U.S.C. 4951), and the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended, shall be limited to theprovision of dates of service and astandard description of service asheretofore provided by the Corporation.

3. A record may be disclosed as aroutine use in the course of presentingevidence to a court, magistrate oradministrative tribunal of appropriatejurisdiction and such disclosure mayinclude disclosures to opposing counselin the course of settlement negotiations.

4. A record may be disclosed as aroutine use to a member of Congress, orstaff acting upon the constituent’sbehalf, when the member or staffrequests the information on behalf ofand at the request of the individual whois the subject of the record.

5. Information from certain systems ofrecords, especially those relating toapplicants for Federal employment orvolunteer service, may be disclosed as aroutine use to designated officers andemployees of other agencies of theFederal government for the purpose ofobtaining information as to suitabilityqualifications and loyalty to the UnitedStates Government.

6. Information from a system ofrecords may be disclosed to any sourcefrom which information is requested inthe course of an investigation to theextent necessary to identify theindividual, inform the source of thenature and purpose of the investigation,and to identify the type of informationrequested.

7. Information in any system ofrecords may be used as a data source,for management information, for theproduction of summary descriptivestatistics and analytical studies insupport of the function for which therecords are collected and maintained, orfor related personnel managementfunctions or manpower studies.Information may also be disclosed to

respond to general requests forstatistical information (without personalidentification of individuals) under theFreedom of Information Act.

8. A record from any system ofrecords may be disclosed as a routineuse of the National Archives andRecords Administration in recordsmanagement inspections conductedunder authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and2906.

9. A record may be disclosed to aFederal or state grand jury agentpursuant to a Federal or state grand jurysubpoena or prosecution request thatsuch record be released for the purposeof its introduction to a grand jury.

10. A record may be referred tosuspension/debarment authorities,internal to the Corporation, when therecord released is germane to adetermination of the propriety ornecessity for a suspension or debarmentaction.

11. A record may be disclosed to acontractor, grantee or other recipient ofFederal funds when the record to bereleased reflects serious inadequacieswith the recipient’s personnel, anddisclosure of the record is for thepurpose of permitting the recipient toeffect corrective action in theGovernment’s best interests.

12. A record may be disclosed to acontractor, grantee or other recipient ofFederal funds when the recipient hasincurred an indebtedness to theGovernment through its receipt ofGovernment funds, and release of therecord is for the purpose of allowing thedebtor to effect a collection against athird party.

13. Information in a system of recordsmay be disclosed to ‘‘Consumerreporting agencies’’ (as defined in theFair Credit Reporting Act, 14 U.S.C.1681a(f), or the Federal ClaimsCollection Act of 1966, 31 U.S.C.3701(a)(3)), the U.S. Department of theTreasury or other Federal agenciesmaintaining debt servicing centers, andto private collection contractors as aroutine use for the purpose of collectinga debt owed to the Federal governmentas provided in regulations promulgatedby the Corporation.

14. The names, social securitynumbers, home addresses, dates ofbirth, dates of hire, quarterly earnings,employer identifying information, andState of hire of employees may bedisclosed to the: (a) Office of ChildSupport Enforcement, Administrationfor Children and Families, Departmentof Health and Human Services FederalParent Locator System (FPLS), andFederal Tax Offset System for use inlocating individuals and identifyingtheir income sources to establish



paternity, establishing and modifyingorders of child support, identifyingsources of income, and for other childsupport enforcement action; (b) Office ofChild Support Enforcement for releaseto the Social Security Administrationfor verifying social security numbers inconnection with the operation of theFPLS by the Office of Child SupportEnforcement; and (c) Office of ChildSupport Enforcement for release to theU.S. Department of the Treasury forpayroll and savings bonds and otherdeduction purposes, and for purposes ofadministering the Earned Income TaxCredit Program (Section 32, InternalRevenue Code of 1986), and verifying aclaim with respect to employment on atax return, as required by the PersonalResponsibility and Work OpportunityReconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–193).

15. A record may be disclosed as aroutine use to a contractor, expert, orconsultant of the Corporation (or anoffice within the Corporation) when thepurpose of the release is in order toperform a survey, audit, or other reviewof the Corporation’s procedures andoperations.

Locations of Corporation ServiceCenters/State Offices

The Corporation maintains fiveService Centers with State Officeswithin their service areas. The ServicesCenters, their addresses, and the Stateswithin their service areas are listedbelow. In the event of any doubt as towhether a record is maintained in aService Center or State Office, a queryshould be directed to the address of theService Center Director for theappropriate state under theirjurisdiction where the volunteerperformed their service as listed below.The Service Center Director shallfurnish all assistance necessary to locatea specified record.Atlantic Service Center, 801 Arch Street,

Suite 103, Philadelphia, PA 19107–2416 (Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,Maryland, Massachusetts, NewHampshire, New Jersey, New York,Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, RhodeIsland, Vermont, and the VirginIslands).

Southern Service Center, 60 Forsyth,Street SW, Suite. 3M40, Atlanta, GA30303–3201 (Alabama, District ofColumbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,Mississippi, North Carolina, SouthCarolina, Tennessee, Virginia, andWest Virginia).

North Central Service Center, 77 WestJackson Blvd., Suite 442, Chicago, IL60604–3511 (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska,

North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota,and Wisconsin).

Southwest Service Center, 1999 BryanStreet, Suite 2050, Dallas, TX 75201(Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas,Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico,Oklahoma, and Texas).

Pacific Service Center, P.O. Box 29996,Building 386, Morgan Avenue.Presidio of San Francisco, CA, 94129–09996 (Alaska, American Samoa,California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho,Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah,Washington, and Wyoming).

NotificationIndividuals may inquire whether any

system of records contains informationpertaining to them by addressing therequest to the specific Records LiaisonOfficer for each file category in writing.Such request should include the nameand address of the individual, his or hersocial security number, any relevantdata concerning the information sought,and, where possible, the place ofassignment or employment, etc. In caseof any doubt as to which systemcontains a record, interested individualsshould contact the Corporation forNational and Community Service, Officeof Administrative and ManagementServices, Attn: Records Liaison Officer,1201 New York Avenue, NW.,Washington, DC 20525, which hasoverall supervision of records systemsand will provide assistance in locatingand/or identifying appropriate systems.

Access and ContestIn response to a written request by an

individual, the appropriate RecordsLiaison Officer will arrange for access tothe requested record or advise therequester if no record exists. If anindividual wishes to contest the contentof any record, he or she may do so byaddressing a written request to the StateProgram Director in the state where themember performed their assignedduties. If the State Program Directordetermines that a request to amend anindividual’s record should be denied,the State Program Director shall provideall necessary information regarding therequest to the Corporation’s initialdenial authority/Privacy Act Officer.

Locations of Corporation AmeriCorpsNational Civilian Community CorpsCampuses

The Corporation maintains fiveAmeriCorps*National CivilianCommunity Corps Campuses (NCCC)under its jurisdiction. The Campuses,and their addresses are listed below. Inthe event there is any doubt as towhether a record is maintained at acampus location, questions should be

directed to the address of theAmeriCorps*NCCC Regional CampusDirector for the appropriate campuslocation where the volunteer performedtheir service as listed below. TheRegional Campus Director shall furnishall assistance necessary to locate aspecified record.

AmeriCorps*NCCC Capitol RegionCampus, 2 D.C. Village Lane, S.W.Washington, D.C., 20032.

AmeriCorps*NCCC Northeast Campus,VA Medical Center, Building 15,Room 9, Perry Point, MD 21902–0027.

AmeriCorps*NCCC Southeast Campus,2231 South Hopson Avenue,Charleston, S.C. 29405–2430.

AmeriCorps*NCCC Central Campus,1059 South Yosemite Street, Bldg 758,Room 213, Aurora, CO 80010–6062.

AmeriCorps*NCCC Western Campus,2650 Truxtun Road, San Diego, CA92106–6001.

Access and Contest

In response to a written request by anindividual, the appropriate RecordsLiaison Officer arranges for access to therequested record or advises therequester if no record exists. If anindividual wishes to contest the contentof any record, he or she may do so byaddressing a written request to theAmeriCorps*NCCC Regional CampusDirector, located at the pertinentaddress for each campus location aslisted above. If the Regional CampusDirector determines that a request toamend an individual’s record should bedenied, the Regional Campus Directorshall provide all necessary informationregarding the request to theCorporation’s initial denial authority/Privacy Act Officer.

Location of the CorporationAmeriCorps*VISTA Alumni Office

The AmeriCorps*VISTA AlumniOffice is located at the Corporation’sHeadquarters in Washington, D.C. Thisoffice maintains an electronic history offormer VISTA and AmeriCorps*VISTAmembers.

Notification

Members may inquire whether thissystem of records contains informationpertaining to them by addressing theirrequest to the Corporation for Nationaland Community Service, Attn: AlumniCoordinator, 1201 New York Avenue,Washington, D.C., 20525, who hasoverall supervision of this recordsystem. Such request should include themember’s name, social security number,and approximate dates of volunteerservice.



Access and Contest

In response to a written request by amember, the Alumni Coordinator willarrange for access to the requestedrecord or advise the requester if norecord exists. If an individual wishes tocontest the content of any record, he orshe may do so by addressing a writtenrequest to the Corporation for Nationaland Community Service, Attn: AlumniCoordinator, 1201 New York Avenue,Washington, DC 20525. If the AlumniCoordinator determines that the requestto amend a member’s record should bedenied, the Alumni Coordinator shallprovide all necessary informationregarding the request to theCorporation’s initial denial authority/Privacy Act Officer.

Listing of System of Records

Momentum Financials Open Obligations andAutomated Disbursement Files—Corporation-I

Momentum Financials Accounts ReceivableFiles—Corporation-2

Domestic Full-time Member Census MasterFile—Corporation-3

AmeriCorps Full-time Member PersonnelFiles—Corporation-4

Employee and Applicant Records Files—Corporation-5

Employee/Member Occupation Injury/IllnessReports and Claim Files—Corporation-6

Travel Files—Corporation-7AmeriCorps Member Individual Accounts—

Corporation-8Counselors’ Report Files—Corporation-9Discrimination Complaint Files—

Corporation-10Employee Pay and Leave Record Files—

Corporation-11Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act

Request Files—Corporation-12Legal Office Litigation/Correspondence

Files—Corporation-13Merit Promotion Plan Files—Corporation-14Office of the Inspector General Investigative

Files—Corporation-15Travel Authorization Files—Corporation-16Momentum Financials Vendor Files—

Corporation-17AmeriCorps*VISTA Volunteer Management

System Files—Corporation-8

CORPORATION–1

SYSTEM NAME:

Momentum Financials OpenObligations and AutomatedDisbursement Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:

Office of Accounting and FinancialManagement Services, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC20525.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THESYSTEM:

Individuals to whom the agency owesmoney.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Name of payee, address, ABA routing

number, financial institution name andaddress, depositor account number,taxpayer identification number, amountowed, date of liability, amount paid,schedule number authorizing the U.S.Department of the Treasury to issuepayment and returned or cancelledpayments.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:The Domestic Volunteer Service Act

of 1973, as amended; the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended, and the Budget andAccounting Procedures Act of 1950, asamended; the Chief Financial OfficerAct of 1990; and the Debt CollectionImprovement Act of 1996.

PURPOSE(S):To maintain a current record of

amounts owed and paid by theCorporation.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM,INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THEPURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

See General Routine Uses containedin Preliminary Statement. Data is alsoreleased to the Internal Revenue Servicein accordance with the Internal RevenueCode.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING,RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING ANDDISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:

STORAGE:Records are maintained electronically

and file folders are stored in lockedmetal file cabinets.

RETRIEVABILITY:Hardcopy records are indexed

alphabetically by name and electronicrecords may be accessed by name orTIN.

SAFEGUARDS:Records are available only to staff in

the Office of Accounting and FinancialManagement Services and otherappropriate Corporation officials withthe need for such records in theperformance of their duties.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Hardcopy records are held for three

(3) years and then retired to the FederalRecords Center. Electronic records arearchived periodically.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Director, Office of Accounting and

Financial Management Services,

Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:To determine whether there is a

record in the system about individual,that individual should submit a requestin writing to the Records Liaison Officergiving name, taxpayer identificationnumber, and address.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:See Notification procedures.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:Anyone desiring to contest or amend

information contained in this systemshould write to the Records LiaisonOfficer at the address given and set forththe basis for which the record isbelieved to be incomplete or incorrect.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:Data in this system is obtained from

documents submitted by individualscovered by the system as well asdocuments issued by Corporationofficials involved with managing anddisbursing funds.

EXEMPTION CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:None.

CORPORATION–2

SYSTEM NAME:Momentum Financials Accounts

Receivable Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Office of Accounting and Financial

Management Services, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC, 20525.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THESYSTEM.

Individuals owing money to theCorporation.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Name of debtor, address, taxpayer

identification number, amount owed,date of liability, and amount collectedor amount forwarded to the U.S.Treasury for further collection action asmandated by DCIA of 1996.


of 1973, as amended; the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended; the Budget and AccountingProcedures Act of 1950, as amended,and the Debt Collection ImprovementAct of 1996.

PURPOSE(S):To maintain a current record of

amounts owed and paid to theCorporation.



ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM,INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND THEPURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

See General Routine Uses containedin Preliminary Statement. Data may bedisclosed to the U.S. Department ofJustice for litigation action; the U.S.Department of the Treasury to pursuefurther collection action when theCorporation is unable to collect a debtthrough its own efforts and/orrecommended write-off; or to theGeneral Accounting Office inconnection with inquiries, audits orinvestigations related to theCorporation’s debt activities.


STORAGE:

Records are maintained in file folderswhich are stored in locked metal filecabinets.

RETRIEVABILITY:

Records are indexed alphabetically byname.

SAFEGUARDS:

Records are available only to staff inthe Office of Accounting and FinancialManagement Services, other authorizedCorporation officials with the need forsuch records in the performance of theirduties or forwarded to the U.S. Treasuryfor further collection action.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:

Records are held for three (3) yearsand then retired to the Federal RecordsCenter.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:

Office of Accounting and FinancialManagement Services, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, N.W., Washington,D.C., 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:

To determine whether there is arecord in the system about anindividual, that individual shouldsubmit a request in writing to theRecords Liaison Officer giving name,taxpayer identification number, andaddress.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:

See Notification procedures.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:

Anyone desiring to contest or amendinformation contained in this systemshould write to the Records LiaisonOfficer and set forth the basis for whichthe record is believed to be incompleteor incorrect.


documents submitted by individualscovered by the system as well asdocuments issued by Corporationofficials involved with managing andcollecting debts.


CORPORATION–3

SYSTEM NAME:Domestic Full-time Member Census

Master File.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Corporation for National and

Community Service,AmeriCorps*VISTA, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.


Any person who has served as aVISTA, or an AmeriCorps*VISTAmember.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:The records maintained contain

information extracted from themember’s application, informationabout the member’s period of service,and information about the member’shistory with the Corporation.


of 1973, as amended.

PURPOSE(S):The system of records was established

to maintain service histories on allformer VISTA and AmeriCorps*VISTAmembers.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THESYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS ANDTHE PURPOSE OF SUCH USES:

See General Routine Uses containedin Preliminary Statement.


STORAGE:Records are stored in electronic

database form on the Corporation’sinternal computer network.

RETRIEVABILITY:The member’s name and/or social

security number retrieves records.

SAFEGUARDS:The material is available only to

Corporation and AmeriCorps*VISTAstaff. It is not available to anyone elsewithout the express written consentfrom the individual to release his/herinformation.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:These records are maintained

permanently.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Director of AmeriCorps*VISTA,

Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:A former member wishing to

determine if this system contains theirrecords should contact the Corporationfor National and Community Service,Attn: Alumni Coordinator, 1201 NewYork Avenue, NW, Washington, DC20525, and provide their name, socialsecurity number, and approximate datesof volunteer service.

RECORDS ACCESS PROCEDURES:A former member wishing access to

information about his/her record shouldcontact the Corporation for National andCommunity Services, Attn: AlumniCoordinator, 1201 New York Avenue,NW, Washington, DC 20525.

CONTESTING RECORDS PROCEDURES:Any former member wishing to

amend information maintained in his/her electronic record may do so byaddressing such request to theCorporation for National andCommunity Service, Office of theGeneral Counsel, Attn: CorporationPrivacy Act Officer, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:The data is obtained from the

member’s application, status change,and payroll change notices.


CORPORATION–4

SYSTEM NAME:AmeriCorps Full-time Member

Personnel Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:All Corporation State Offices,

AmeriCorps*Leaders Office atCorporation Headquarters, and NCCCRegional Campuses.


All active AmeriCorps membersassigned under programs operated bythe Corporation.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:

Records maintained contain memberapplication and reference forms,member status and payroll information,member travel vouchers, future plans



forms, including evaluation of service,and general correspondence.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:

The Domestic Volunteer Service Actof 1973, as amended; the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):

This system of records wasestablished to maintain information onAmeriCorps while they are assigned totheir respective programs.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THESYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS ANDTHE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

The content of these records may bedisclosed to the member’s sponsor(VISTA) and other Corporation officialsconcerning placement, performance,support and related matters forAmeriCorps members. Also, see GeneralRoutine Uses contained in PreliminaryStatement.


STORAGE:


RETRIEVABILITY:

Records are retrievable alphabeticallyby last name.

SAFEGUARDS:

Records in the system are availableonly to appropriate Corporation staff inState Offices, the AmeriCorps*LeadersOffice at Corporation Headquarters, andRegional NCCC Campuses, and otherappropriate officials of the Corporationwith need for such records in theperformance of their duties.


Records are retained for one (1) yearafter the member has terminated andthen retired to the Federal RecordsCenter where they are maintained forsix (6) years.


The System Manager for VISTAs isthe State Program Director in eachCorporation State Office; the RegionalNCCC Campus Director at each Campuslocation; and the Director,AmeriCorps*Leaders at CorporationHeadquarters.


Members wishing to determine if thissystem contains their records shouldcontact the Corporation State Office(VISTAs) for the state where the

member performed their service; NCCCCampus where the member wasassigned, and the AmeriCorps*LeadersOffice at Corporation Headquarters.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:Members wishing access to

information about their records shouldcontact the particular Corporation StateOffice, NCCC Regional Campus wherethe member was assigned or performedtheir service, and theAmeriCorps*Leaders Office atCorporation Headquarters, and providename, social security number, and datesand location of where the memberperformed their service.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:A member wishing to amend his or

her record may do so by addressing arequest to the Corporation for Nationaland Community Service, Office of theGeneral Counsel, Attn: CorporationPrivacy Act Officer, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.

RECORD SOURCES CATEGORIES:The data is supplied by the member

or through forms signed and executedby the member, or by Corporationpersonnel.


CORPORATION–5

SYSTEM NAME:Employee and Applicant Records

Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Human Resources, Corporation for

National and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC 20525.


Current and former employees;applicants; any individual involved in agrievance or grievance appeal or whohas filed a complaint with theDepartment of Labor, Federal LaborRelations Council, Federal Mediationand Conciliation Service, or similarorganization; and individualsconsidered for access to classifiedinformation.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:(1) The Staff Security Files contain

investigative information regarding anindividual’s character, conduct,behavior in the community where he orshe lives; loyalty to the U.S.Government; arrest and convictions forany violations against the law; reports orinterviews with former supervisors,coworkers, associates, educators, etc.,

about qualifications of an individual fora specific position; reports of inquireswith law enforcement agencies, formeremployers, educational institutionsattended; and other similar informationdeveloped from the above.

(2) The Grievance, Appeal andArbitration Files contain copies ofpetitions, complaints, charges,responses, rebuttals, evidentiarymaterials, briefs, affidavits, statements,records of hearings and decisions orfindings of fact with respect thereto andincidental correspondence regardingcomplaints and appeals with respect togrievances and arbitration matters.

(3) The Employees Indebtedness Filescontain records which are primarilycorrespondence regarding allegedindebtedness of Corporation employees,including employees’ responses, theCorporation’s response to the employeeand/or creditor and administrativecorrespondence and records relating toagency assistance to the employee inresolving the indebtedness, ifappropriate.

(4) The Employee Reemployment andRepromotion Priority ConsiderationFiles list a person’s name and thepositions he or she was considered for,dates of consideration and a copy of theindividual’s latest Standard Form 171and performance evaluation.

(5) The Performance Evaluation Fileconsists of the annual evaluations ofemployee performance prepared bysupervisors and reviewed bysupervisory reviewing officials, togetherwith comments, if any by the employeeevaluated.

(6) The Management-Union RecordsSystem consists of automated dataprintouts showing an employee’s name,grade, series, title, organizational entityand other data which determineinclusion or exclusion from thebargaining unit under the existing unioncontract. The record also contains aprintout showing the amount of dueswithheld from each employee who hasauthorized such withholding, and otherrelated data.

(7) The Human ResourcesManagement Information System is acomputer based record which includesdata relating to tenure, benefitseligibility, awards, etc., and other dataneeded by the Office of HumanResources and Corporation managers.

(8) The Personnel History Programcontains a record of personnel actionsmade during employment, forwardingaddress, reason for leaving, socialsecurity number, date of birth, tenure,information regarding date and reasonfor termination.




of 1973, as amended; the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended; provisions of the FederalPersonnel Manual; Executive Ordersconcerning management relations withemployee organizations; ExecutiveOrder 10450; and various acts ofCongress relating to personnelinvestigations authorizing the same bythe Office of Personnel Managementwhose responsibility can, under CivilService regulations and law, bedelegated in whole or in part toagencies.

PURPOSE(S):To provide an information system

which documents and supports theCorporation’s personnel managementprocess including those categories listedabove.

ROUTINE USES OR RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THESYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OR USERS ANDTHE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:

As indicated below, the subsystemsincorporate all or some of the publishedroutine uses.

(1) Staff Security Files—in addition toour general routine uses may bedisclosed to the Office of PersonnelManagement as part of the centralpersonnel investigation records system.

(2) Grievance, Appeal and ArbitrationRecords and Files—in addition to ourgeneral routine uses may be disclosedand used: (a) To OPM; the Merit SystemProtection Board; and the Office ofSpecial Counsel, Merit SystemProtection Board, on request inconjunction with any appeal or inconjunction with its official duties withregard to personnel matters andinvestigations regarding complaints ofFederal employees and applicants; and(b) To designated hearing examiners,arbitrators and third-party appellateauthorities involved in the hearing orappeal procedures.

(3) Employees Indebtedness Recordsand Files—may be released under ourroutine uses numbers 1, 2, and 3 exceptthat under routine use number 1,records may be released only to anappropriate Federal agency and therecords may also be referred to a courtof law or any administrative board ofhearing on matters related to probationand parole.

(4) Employee Reemployment andRepromotion Priority ConsiderationRecords and Files—in addition to ourgeneral routine uses may be disclosedto: (a) OPM as part of the OPMpersonnel management evaluationsystem; and (b) to OPM for informationconcerning reemployment andrepromotion rights.

(5) Performance Evaluation Files—inaddition to our general routine uses maybe disclosed to OPM in connection withany request for information or inquiry asto Federal personnel regulation.

(6) Management Union Records—inaddition to the general routine uses maybe disclosed to and used for: (a) TheCorporation employees union formaintenance of its dues and inclusionin the bargaining unit; (b) the TreasuryDepartment for preparation of payrollchecks with appropriate withholding ofdues; and (c) OPM for reports ofmanagement/labor relations.

(7) Human Resources ManagementInformation System—used byCorporation officials for day-to-daywork information; statistical reportswithout personal identifiers and for in-house reports relating to management.Information contained in this record isreflected in the individual’s officialpersonnel folder.

(8) Personnel History Program—isused by the Human Resources staff toverify service and for day-to-dayinformation.


STORAGE:Records are maintained in file folders,

floppy disks, lists or loose-leaf binders,and are stored in metal file cabinetswith a lock or in secured rooms withaccess limited to those employeeswhose duties require access. Where datais obtained via computer, controlledaccess is maintained through computersecurity control procedures.

RETRIEVABILITY:Records are indexed by name, social

security number or employee number.

SAFEGUARDS:

Records are generally available toCorporation employees having a needfor such records in the performance oftheir duties. Generally, the SecurityFiles are available only to office headsor security personnel.


After termination, death or retirementor consideration of an applicant, theStaff Security Files are kept in thesecurity office three (3) years and thenretired to a Federal Records Center fortwenty-seven (27) years and thendestroyed. The Grievances, Appeals andArbitration Files are retainedindefinitely in Human Resources. TheEmployee Indebtedness Files aredestroyed on a bi-annual basis or whenthe problem is resolved. The EmployeeReemployment and Repromotion

Priority Consideration Files are retainedaccording to length of reemployment orrepromotion eligibility. ThePerformance Evaluation Files areretained one year or until superseded.The Human Resources ManagementInformation System records and thePersonnel Program data are keptindefinitely in the Office of HumanResources. The Management-UnionLists are retained until superseded by acorrected or updated list.


Director, Human Resources,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20525.


See the Notification paragraph in thePreliminary Statement.


See the Notification paragraph in thePreliminary Statement.

CONTESTING RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

Same as ‘‘Record Access Procedures’’.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:

From the individual; the officialpersonnel folder; statistical and otherinformation developed by HumanResource staff, such as enter on dutydate and within grade increase duedates; agency supervisors and reviewingofficials; individual employee fiscal andpayroll records; alleged creditors ofemployees; witnesses to occurrencesgiving rise to a grievance, appeal orother action; hearing records andaffidavits and other documents used orusable in connection with grievance,appeal and arbitration hearings.Information contained in the StaffSecurity files is obtained from: (a)Applications and other personnel andsecurity forms furnished by theindividual; (b) investigative materialfurnished by other Federal agencies; (c)personal investigation or written inquiryfrom associates, police departments,courts, credit bureaus, medical records,probation officials, prison officials, andother sources as may be developed fromthe above; and (d) the individual.

EXEMPTION CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:

None.

CORPORATION-6

SYSTEM NAME:

Employee/Member OccupationalInjury/Illness Reports and Claim Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:

Human Resources, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201



New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC, 20525.


Corporation staff and full-timevolunteers.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Reports of work related injuries and

illnesses and claims for workers’compensation submitted to Departmentof Labor.


Federal Employees Compensation Act& Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration Act.

PURPOSE(S):

To maintain injury/illness reportsdata and to track workers’ compensationclaims on behalf of Corporation staffand full-time members.


To determine annual work relatedinjury/illness data re: Corporation staff,and to identify trends if possible. Toprepare and submit workers’compensation claims. Also, generally,see General Routine Uses contained inPreliminary Statement.


STORAGE:


RETRIEVABILITY:Records are maintained by name in

alphabetical sequence.

SAFEGUARDS:Records are available only to

claimants and Corporation staff whodemonstrate a need to know.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Official files are kept seven (7) years

following year of occurrence. Disposalof records is by shredding.


OWCP Liaison Officer, HumanResources, Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20525.


Claimant writes request for data to theaddress listed above.


Requester should give OWCP claimnumber, but it is not mandatory. Data

requests may be requested in the nameof injured employee/volunteer.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:Claimant or injured employee/

member may submit any data deemedrelevant to the case to address listed.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:Individual who suffers work related

injury/illness submits any pertinentdata necessary; medical reports, witnessstatements, time and attendancerecords, medical bills, legal briefs.


CORPORATION-7

SYSTEM NAME:Travel Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Office of Administrative and

Management Services, Travel Unit,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20525.


All Corporation Staff, Consultants,Invitational Travelers, and RelocatedStaff.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Individuals’ records and special event

records.


of 1973, as amended, and the NationalCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):To maintain travel files on all persons

traveling on official Corporationbusiness.




STORAGE:Files are maintained in individual

folders in a locked metal file cabinetwhen not in immediate use.

RETRIEVABILITY:Individual’s name in alphabetical

order and Travel Authorization number.

SAFEGUARDS:Access only to appropriate personnel

and Corporation officials. The metal

travel file cabinet is locked when not inuse.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Retention three (3) years. Disposal of

records is by shredding.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Travel Analyst, Office of

Administrative and ManagementServices, Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:Send to address listed.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:Travel Analyst, Office of

Administrative and ManagementServices, Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:Send to address listed.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:Submitted by Corporation employees

etc.


CORPORATION-8

SYSTEM NAME:AmeriCorps Member Individual

Accounts.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Corporation for National and

Community Service, National ServiceTrust Operations, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.


Any person who has served or isserving as a member or other full-time,stipended member under a Corporationprogram.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:The records maintained contain

information extracted from theapplication, information about theperiod of service, and information aboutthe member’s service history.


of 1973, as amended, and the Nationaland Community Service Act of 1990, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):The system of records was established

to maintain service histories on allcurrent and former and other full-timestipend volunteers serving in theCorporation programs and earning aneducation award.



ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THESYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS ANDTHE PURPOSE OF SUCH USES:



STORAGE:Records are stored on magnetic tape,

disks, electronic image, hard copy, andare kept in a locked room when not inuse.

RETRIEVABILITY:Records are retrieved by social

security number.

SAFEGUARDS:The material on tapes and disks is

generally available only to theCorporation’s OIT and Accounting staff,and is so coded as to be unavailable toanyone else. Hard copy records areavailable only to Corporation staff witha need for such records in theperformance of their duties.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:These records are maintained for a

period of (7) seven years from date thevolunteer earns an education award andthen forwarded to the Federal RecordsCenter for (3) three years. Electronicallyimaged documents will be maintainedpermanently.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Director, National Service Trust

Operations, Corporation for Nationaland Community Service, 1201 NewYork Avenue, NW., Washington, DC20525.


Persons wishing to determine if thissystem contains their records shouldcontact the Corporation for National andCommunity Service, Director, NationalService Trust Operations, 1201 NewYork Avenue, NW., Washington, DC20525, and provide name, socialsecurity number, and dates of volunteerservice.

RECORDS ACCESS PROCEDURES

Persons wishing access to informationabout their records should contact theCorporation for National andCommunity Services, Director, NationalService Trust Operations, 1201 NewYork Avenue, NW., Washington, DC20525.


A person wishing to amend his or herrecord may do so by addressing suchrequest to the Corporation for Nationaland Community Service, Office of the

General Counsel, Attn: CorporationPrivacy Act Officer, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:The data is obtained from enrollment

and exit forms.


CORPORATION-9

SYSTEM NAME:Counselors’ Report Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Equal Opportunity Office,

Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New York,Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.


Any employee or applicant foremployment, service member, orapplicant or trainee for volunteer orservice status, or employee of a granteewho has contacted or requested aCorporation Equal OpportunityCounselor for counseling but has notfiled a formal discrimination complaint.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Counselors’ Reports, Privacy Act

notice, confidentiality agreement, noticeto members of collective bargainingagreement, notice of final interview,notes and correspondence, and copies ofpersonnel records or other documentsrelevant to the matter presented to theCounselor, and any other recordsrelating to the counseling instance.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:Titles VI and VII of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964, as amended; AgeDiscrimination in Employment Act, asamended; Rehabilitation Act of 1973, asamended; Title IX of the EducationAmendments of 1972, as amended;Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973,as amended; National and CommunityService Act of 1990, as amended; andthe Age Discrimination Act, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):

To enable Equal OpportunityCounselors to look into matters broughtto their attention, provide counseling,attempt to resolve the matter, anddocument actions taken.

ROUTINE USES OR RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THESYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS ANDTHE PURPOSE OF SUCH USES:

1. Referral or disclosure: (a) To aFederal, state, or local agency chargedwith the responsibility of investigating,enforcing, or implementing the statute,

rule, regulation, or order; (b) to aninvestigator, Counselor, grantee or otherrecipient of Federal financial assistance,or hearing officer or arbitrator chargedwith the above responsibilities; (c) anyand all appropriate and necessary usesof such records in a court of law orbefore an administrative board orhearing; and (d) such other referrals asmay be necessary to carry out theenforcement and implementation of thestatutes, rules, regulations, or orders.

2. Disclosure to the Congressionalcommittees having legislativejurisdiction over the program involved,including when actions are proposed tobe undertaken by suspending orterminating or refusing to grant or tocontinue Federal financial assistance forviolation of the statutes, rules,regulations, or orders for recipients ofFederal financial assistance from theCorporation.

3. Disclosure to any source, eitherprivate or governmental, to the extentnecessary to secure from sourceinformation relevant to, and sought infurtherance of, a legitimate investigationor EO counseling matter.

4. Disclosure to a contractor, granteeor other recipient of Federal financialassistance, when the record to bereleased reflects serious inadequacieswith the recipient’s personnel, anddisclosure of the record is for thepurpose of permitting the recipient toeffect corrective action in theGovernment’s best interests.

5. Disclosure to any party pursuant tothe receipt of a valid subpoena.

6. Disclosure during the course ofpresenting evidence to a courtmagistrate or administrative tribunal ofappropriate jurisdiction and suchdisclosure may include disclosure toopposing counsel in the course ofsettlement negotiations.

7. Disclosure to a member of Congresssubmitting a request involving anindividual who is a constituent of suchmember who has requested assistancefrom the member with respect to thesubject matter of the record.

8. Information in any system ofrecords may be used as a data source,for management information, for theproduction of summary descriptivestatistics and analytical studies insupport of the function for which therecords are collected and maintained, orfor related personnel managementfunctions or manpower studies.Information may also be disclosed torespond to general requests forstatistical information (without personalidentification of individuals) under theFreedom of Information Act.

9. Information in any system ofrecords to be disclosed to a



Congressional office, in response to aninquiry from any such office, made atthe request of the individual to whomthe record pertains.

10. A record from any system ofrecords may be disclosed as a routineuse of the National Archives andRecords Administration, in recordsmanagement inspection conductedunder authority of 44 U.S.C. 209 and290.

11. Referral to Federal, state, local andprofessional licensing authorities whenthe record to be released reflects on themoral, educational, or vocationalqualifications of an individual seekingto be licensed.

12. Disclosure to the Office ofGovernment Ethics (OGE) for anypurpose consistent with OGE’s mission,including the compilation of statisticaldata.

13. Disclosure to the Department ofJustice in order to obtain theDepartment’s advice regardingCorporation’s disclosure obligationsunder the Freedom of Information Act.

14. Disclosure of the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) or theEqual Employment OpportunityCommission (EEOC) in order to obtainOMB’s advice regarding Corporation’sobligations under the Privacy Act.

Note: The Agency-wide statement ofgeneral routine uses does not apply to thissystem of records.


STORAGE:Files are maintained in folders or

computer diskettes and locked in metalfile cabinets when not in immediate use.

RETRIEVABILITY:Retrievability is by the name of the

person who contacted the Counselor.

SAFEGUARDS:Records in the system are available

only to appropriate personnel in theOffice of Equal Opportunity and otherdesignated officials of the Corporationwith a need for such records in theperformance of their duties.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Two (2) years after completion of

counseling, the files are destroyed.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESSES:Director, Equal Opportunity,

Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:Request by individuals on whether a

record is maintained about himself or

herself should be addressed to theSystem Manager.


Request for access to these recordsshould be addressed to the SystemManager.


Contest to information included inthese records should be addressed to theSystem Manager.


Data in this system is obtained fromthe following categories of sources: (1)Aggrieved persons, witnesses, etc., incounseling matters; (2) Counselors’Reports; (3) Copies of documentsrelevant to any counseling matter; and(4) Correspondence.


None.

CORPORATION–10

SYSTEM NAME:

Discrimination Complaint Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:

Equal Opportunity Office,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20525.


Any employee or applicant foremployment, AmeriCorps member orapplicant or trainee for volunteer orservice status, or employee of a grantee,or program beneficiary who has filed aformal complaint with or against theCorporation.


Formal complaints, Reports ofInvestigation, Counseling documents,case decisions, and relevantcorrespondence, including settlementagreements.


Titles VI and VII of the Civil RightsAct of 1964, as amended; the AgeDiscrimination in Employment Act, asamended; the Rehabilitation Act of1973, as amended; Title IX of theEducation Amendments of 1972, asamended; the Domestic VolunteerService Act of 1973, as amended; theNational and Community Service Act of1990, as amended; and the AgeDiscrimination Act, as amended.

PURPOSE(S):

To enable the Corporation toinvestigate and adjudicate complaints ofdiscrimination.


1. Referral or disclosure: (a) To aFederal, state, or local agency chargedwith the responsibility of investigating,enforcing, or implementing the statute,rule, regulation, or order; (b) to aninvestigator, counselor, grantee or otherrecipient of Federal financial assistanceor hearing officer or arbitrator chargedwith the above responsibilities; (c) anyand all appropriate and necessary usesof such records in a court of law orbefore an administrative board orhearing; and (d) such other referrals asmay be necessary to carry out theenforcement and implementation of thestatutes, rules, regulations, or orders.

2. Disclosure to the Congressionalcommittees having legislative oversightover the program involved, includingwhen actions are proposed to beundertaken by suspending orterminating or refusing to grant or tocontinue Federal financial assistance forviolation of the statutes, rules,regulations, or orders for recipients ofFederal financial assistance from theCorporation.

3. Disclosure to any source, eitherprivate or governmental, to the extentnecessary to secure from sourceinformation relevant to, and sought infurtherance of, a legitimate investigationor EO counseling matter.

4. Disclosure to a contractor, granteeor other recipient of Federal financialassistance, when the record to bereleased reflects serious inadequacieswith the recipient’s personnel, anddisclosure of the record is for thepurpose of permitting the recipient toeffect corrective action in theGovernment’s best interests.

5. Disclosure to any party pursuant tothe receipt of a valid subpoena.

6. Disclosure during the course ofpresenting evidence to a court,magistrate or administrative tribunal ofappropriate jurisdiction and suchdisclosure may include disclosures toopposing counsel in the coursesettlement negotiations.

7. Disclosure to a member of Congresssubmitting a request involving anindividual who has requested assistancefrom the member with respect to thesubject matter of the record.

8. Information in any system ofrecords may be used as a data source,for management information, for theproduction of summary descriptivestatistics and analytical studies insupport of the function for which therecords are collected and maintained, orfor related personnel managementfunctions or manpower studies.Information may also be disclosed to



respond to general requests forstatistical information (without personalidentification of individuals) under theFreedom of Information Act.

9. A record from any system ofrecords may be disclosed as a routineuse of the National Archives andRecords Administration, in recordsmanagement inspections conductedunder authority of 44 U.S.C. 2094 and2906.

10. Referral to Federal, state, local andprofessional licensing authorities whenthe record to be released reflects on themoral, educational, or vocationalqualifications of an individual seekingto be licensed.

11. Disclosure to the Office ofGovernment Ethics (OGE) for anypurpose consistent with OGE’s mission,including the compilation of statisticaldata.

12. Disclosure to the Department ofJustice in order to obtain theDepartment’s advice regarding theCorporation’s disclosure obligationsunder the Freedom of Information Act.

13. Disclosure to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) or theEqual Employment OpportunityCommission (EEOC) in order to obtainOMB’s advice regarding theCorporation’s obligations under thePrivacy Act.

Note: The Agency-wide statement ofgeneral routine uses does not apply to thissystem of records.


STORAGE:

Files are maintained in folders or oncomputer diskettes which are locked inmetal file cabinets when not inimmediate use.

RETRIEVABILITY:

Files are retrieved by thecomplainant’s name.

SAFEGUARDS:

Records in the system of records areavailable only to appropriate personnelin Equal Opportunity and otherdesignated officials of the Corporationwith a need of such records in theperformance of their duties.


Records are destroyed four (4) yearsafter the close of the case.


Director, Equal Opportunity,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.


Request by individuals on whether arecord is maintained about himself orherself should be addressed to theSystem Manager.


Request for access to these recordsshould be sent to the System Manager.


Contest of information included inthese records should be sent to theSystem Manger.


Data in this system is obtained fromthe following categories of sources: (1)Complainants, witnesses, etc., indiscrimination complaints; (2) Reportsof investigations and Counselors’Reports; (3) Copies of documentsrelevant to any EO investigation; (4)Records of hearings on complaint; and(5) Correspondence.


None.

CORPORATION–11

SYSTEM NAME:

Employee Pay and Leave RecordFiles.

SYSTEM LOCATION:

Human Resources, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW., Washington,DC 20525.


Corporation employees and formeremployees.


Personnel actions; employing,promoting and terminating employees;savings bond applications; advises ofallotments; IRS tax withholdings,applications, and records regardingcollections for overpayments; and timeand attendance records.


GAO Policy and Procedures Manual;31 U.S.C. 66(a); and the Budget andAccounting Procedures Act of 1950, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):

To provide a system wherebyCorporation employees can track payrolland leave information.


Information from these records isroutinely provided: (1) To the U.S.

Department of Treasury for payroll andsavings bonds and other deductionpurposes; (2) to the Internal RevenueService with regard to tax deductions;and (3) to participating insurancecompanies holding policies with respectto employees of the Corporation. Also,see General Routine Uses contained inPreliminary Statement.


STORAGE:Records are maintained in file folders

which are stored in locked metal filecabinets. The individual Time andAttendance records maintained bydesignated timekeepers throughout theagency are also stored in locked metalfile cabinets.

RETRIEVABILITY:Records are by name in alphabetical

order.


only to employees of the Corporationwith a need for such records in theperformance of their duties.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Records in the system are maintained

for three (3) years after the end of thefiscal year in which an employeeterminates employment with theCorporation and then retired to thenearest Federal Records Center inaccordance with General AccountingOffice instructions.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Payroll Supervisor, Corporation for

National and Community Service,Human Resources, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:See the Notification paragraph in the

Preliminary Statement.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:See the Access and Contest paragraph

in the Preliminary Statement.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:See the Access and Contest paragraph


RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:Corporation employee to whom the

record pertains.


CORPORATION–12

SYSTEM NAME:Freedom of Information Act and

Privacy Act Request Files.



SYSTEM LOCATION:Office of the General Counsel,

Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525.


Persons who have submitted Freedomof Information Act and/or Privacy Actrequests to the Corporation.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Formal requests (FOIA/PA), research

data, written decisions, and relevantcorrespondence, including finalresponses to the requesters.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:The Freedom of Information Act of

1966, as amended, and the Privacy Actof 1974, as amended.

PURPOSE(S):To maintain files of FOIA/Privacy Act

requests and the Corporation’sresponses.





which are stored in locked metal filecabinets. Computerized files aremaintained on the Corporation FOIA/PA Officer’s computer.

RETRIEVABILITY:Records are indexed by number and

by year.


only to the Corporation FOIA/PrivacyAct Officer or those officials authorizedby the General Counsel with a need ofsuch records in the performance of theirduties.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Records concerning requests and

appeals are destroyed three (3) yearsafter initial request.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESSES:Corporation FOIA/Privacy Act

Officer, Corporation for National andCommunity Service, Office of theGeneral Counsel, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:See Notification paragraph in the



See Access and Consent paragraph inthe Preliminary Statement.


See Access and Contest paragraph inthe Preliminary Statement.


Data in this system is obtained fromdocuments submitted by individualsengaging in official FOIA/Privacy Actrequests as well as from responsesissued by officials of the Corporation.


None.

CORPORATION–13

SYSTEM NAME:

Legal Office Litigation/Correspondence Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:

Office of the General Counsel,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.


Individuals involved in litigationwhich requires General Counsel action.


Statements; affidavits/declarations;investigatory and administrative reports;personnel, financial, medical andbusiness records; discovery anddiscovery responses; motions; orders,rulings; letters; messages; forms; reports;surveys; audits; summons; Englishtranslations of foreign documents;photographs; legal opinions; subpoenas;pleadings; memos; relatedcorrespondence; briefs; petitions; courtrecords involving litigation; and relatedmatters.


These records are maintained undergeneral authority of the Office of theGeneral Counsel to represent theCorporation in connection with itsdealings with its employees, and thegeneral functions of the Office of theGeneral Counsel to provide advice andcounsel to the Chief Executive Officer ofthe Corporation and his or her staff.

PURPOSE(S):

To maintain files relating to litigationmatters involving the Corporation.


To prepare correspondence andmaterials for litigation.


STORAGE:

Records are maintained in file folderswhich are stored in locked metal filecabinets. Computerized files aremaintained on employee computers.

RETRIEVABILITY:

Name of individual and the yearlitigation commenced.

SAFEGUARDS:

Records are available only toemployees assigned to the GeneralCounsel Office or those officialsauthorized by the General Counsel witha need of such records in theperformance of their duties.


Records will be maintained in theOffice of the General Counsel for one (1)year after case closure. Records willthen be sent to the Federal RecordsCenter where they will be destroyedafter ten (10) years.


General Counsel, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC 20525.


Employees wishing to determine ifthis system contains records relating tothem should contact the Corporation forNational and Community Service,General Counsel Office, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.


Litigation files are not subject toaccess. Other files may be accessed inaccordance with agency-wideregulations.


Contest of information included inthese records should be sent to theSystem Manager.


Data is obtained from the followingcategories of sources: (1) Corporationemployees; (2) Correspondence andreports from persons and agenciesdealing with the agency and itsemployees; (3) Work product andresearch by lawyers of the office; and (4)Court records.


Any information compiled inreasonable anticipation of a civil actionor proceeding. 5 U.S.C. 552a(d)(5).



CORPORATION–14

SYSTEM NAME:Merit Promotion Plan Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Human Resources, Corporation for

National and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC 20525.


Applicants for employment with theCorporation.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:These files contain copies of

applications for employment (SF–612 orresumes) submitted by applicants andother background information regardingqualifications of the applicant forpositions in the Corporation.


of 1973, as amended, and the NationalCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):To provide documentation necessary

to support the Corporation’s meritselection process.


The contents of these records and filesmay be disclosed and used as follows:(1) To Human Resources with regard toany question of eligibility, suitability orqualifications of an applicant foremployment; and (2) to any sourcewhich requests information in thecourse of an inquiry as to thequalifications of an applicant to theextent necessary to identify theindividual, inform the source of thenature and purpose of the inquiry, andto identify the type of informationrequested. Also, see General RoutineUses contained in PreliminaryStatement.



which are stored in locked metal filecabinets.

RETRIEVABILITY:Records are indexed in order of

vacancy announcement number.

SAFEGUARDS:Records are generally available only

to Corporation employees with the needfor such records in the performance oftheir duties.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Records are destroyed when

applications are two (2) years old.Applications which resulted inappointment are filed in the OfficialPersonnel Folder and are subsequentlyretired to the Federal Records Center, St.Louis, Missouri.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Director, Human Resources,


NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:See the Notification paragraph in the


RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:See the Access and Contest paragraph


CONTESTING RECORD CATEGORIES:Same as Record Access Procedures

category.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:Information contained in the system

is obtained from the followingcategories of sources: Applications andother personnel forms furnished by theindividual; oral or written inquires fromsources disclosed by the applicant, suchas, employers, schools, references, etc.


CORPORATION–15

SYSTEM NAME:Office of the Inspector General

Investigative Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:Office of the Inspector General,



Subjects, complainants, and witnessesof investigations, complaints, or othermatters, including (but not necessarilylimited to) former and presentCorporation employees; former andpresent Corporation grant recipients,applicants, consultants, contractors andsubcontractors and their employees; andother parties doing business orproposing to conduct business with theCorporation or its recipients, contractorsand subcontractors.


All correspondence relevant to theinvestigation; all internal staffmemoranda; information provided bysubjects, witnesses, and governmental

investigatory or law enforcementorganizations; copies of all subpoenasissued during the investigation;affidavits, statements from witnesses,memoranda of interviews, transcripts oftestimony taken in the investigation andaccompanying exhibits; documents andrecords or copies obtained during theinvestigation; working papers of thestaff, investigative notes, and otherdocuments and records relating to theinvestigation; information aboutcriminal, civil, or administrativereferrals; and opening reports, progressreports, and closing reports, withrecommendations for corrective action.


The Inspector General Act of 1978, asamended, 5 U.S.C. app. 3.

PURPOSE(S):

To maintain files of investigative andreporting activities carried out by theOffice of the Inspector General.


1. Referral to Federal, state, local andforeign investigative or prospectiveauthorities. A record in the system ofrecords, which indicates either by itselfor in combination with otherinformation within the Corporation’spossession, a violation or potentialviolation of law, whether civil, criminalor regulatory and whether arising bygeneral statute or particular programstatute, or by regulation, rule or orderissued pursuant thereto, may bedisclosed, as a routine use, to theappropriate Federal, foreign, state orlocal agency or professionalorganization charged with theresponsibility of investigating orprosecuting such violation or chargedwith enforcing or implementing orinvestigating or prosecuting suchviolation or charged with enforcing orimplementing the statue or rule,regulation or order issued pursuantthereto.

2. Disclosure to a Federal or stategrand jury agent pursuant to a Federalor state grand jury subpoena orprosecution request that such record bereleased for the purpose of itsintroduction to a grand jury.

3. Referral to suspension/debarmentauthorities, internal to the Corporation,when the record released is germane toa determination of the propriety of, ornecessity for, a suspension or debarmentaction.

4. Referral to Federal, state, local andprofessional licensing authorities whenthe record to be released reflects on themoral, educational, or vocational



qualifications of an individual holding alicense or seeking to be licensed.

5. Disclosure to a contractor, grantee,or subgrantee or other recipient ofFederal funds, when the record to bereleased reflects serious inadequacieswith the recipient’s personnel, anddisclosure of the record is for thepurpose of permitting the recipient toeffect corrective action in theGovernment’s best interest.

6. Disclosure to a contractor, grantee,or subgrantee or other recipient ofFederal funds, when the recipient hasincurred an indebtedness to theGovernment through its receipt ofGovernment funds, and release of therecord is for the purpose of allowing thedebtor to effect a collection against athird party.

7. Disclosure to any source, eitherprivate or governmental, to the extentnecessary to secure from such sourceinformation relevant to, and sought infurtherance of, a legitimate investigationor audit.

8. Disclosure to a domestic, foreign orinternational governmental agencyconsidering personnel or other internalactions, such as assignment, hiring,promotion, or retention of anindividual, issuance of a securityclearance, reporting an investigation ofan individual, award or other benefit, tothe extent that the information isrelevant to such agency’s decision onthe matter.

9. Disclosure to the Office ofGovernment Ethics (OGE) for anypurpose consistent with OGE’s mission,including the compilation of statisticaldata, or the mission of the OIG.

10. Disclosure to a Board of ContractAppeals, the General Accounting Officeor other tribunal hearing a bid protestinvolving a Corporation or OIGprocurement.

11. Disclosure to a domestic, foreignor international government lawenforcement agency maintaining civil,criminal or other relevant enforcementinformation, or other pertinentinformation, in order that the OIG mayobtain information relevant to adecision concerning the assignment,hiring, promotion, or retention of anindividual, the issuance of a securityclearance, the letting of a contract, orthe issuance of a license, grant, or otherbenefit.

12. Disclosure to the Department ofJustice in order to obtain theDepartment’s advice regarding OIG’sobligations under the Freedom ofInformation Act.

13. Disclosure to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) in orderto obtain OMB’s advice regarding OIG’sobligations under the Privacy Act.

14. Disclosure to a member ofCongress making a request at the behestof a party protected under the PrivacyAct, when the member of Congressinforms the appropriate official that theindividual to whom the record pertainshas authorized the member of Congressto have access.

15. Disclosure to any Federal agencypursuant to the receipt of a validsubpoena.

16. Disclosure to the U.S. Departmentof the Treasury or the U.S. Departmentof Justice when the Corporation or theOIG is seeking to obtain taxpayerinformation from the Internal RevenueService.

17. Disclosure to debt collectioncontractors for the purpose of collectingdelinquent debts as authorized by theDebt Collection Improvement Act of1996 (31 U.S.C. 3713).

18. Disclosure to a ‘‘consumerreporting agency’’ as that term isdefined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act(15 U.S.C. 1681a(f)), and the FederalClaims Collection Act of 1966 (31 U.S.C.3701 (a)(3)), in order to obtaininformation in the course of aninvestigation or audit.

19. Disclosure to Corporation or OIGcounsel, an administrative hearingtribunal, or counsel to the adverse party,in Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act orother litigation.

20. Disclosure to a Federal, State, orlocal agency for use in computermatching programs to prevent anddetect fraud and abuse in benefit orother programs, to support civil andcriminal law enforcement activities ofthose agencies and their components,and to collect debts and overpaymentsowed to those agencies and theircomponents.

21. Disclosure to any court, magistrateor administrative authority during thecourse of any litigation or settlementnegotiations in which the Corporation isa party or has an interest. A record inthe system of records may be disclosedin a proceeding before a court oradjudicative body before which theCorporation or the OIG is authorized toappear, or in the course of settlementnegotiations involving—

(1) OIG, the Corporation, or anycomponent thereof;

(2) Any employee of the OIG or theCorporation in his or her officialcapacity;

(3) Any employee of the Corporationin his or her individual capacity, wherethe Government has agreed to representthe employee; or

(4) The United States, where the OIGdetermines that the litigation is likely toaffect the OIG or the Corporation or anyof its components.

22. Disclosure to OIG’s or theCorporation’s legal representative,including the U.S. Department of Justiceand other outside legal counsel, whenthe OIG or the Corporation is a party inactual or anticipated litigation or has aninterest in such litigation.


STORAGE:

The Office of the Inspector GeneralInvestigative Files consist of paperrecords maintained in folders and anautomated data base maintained oncomputer diskettes. The folders anddiskettes are stored in locked metal filecabinets. The file cabinets are located inthe Office of the Inspector General.

RETRIEVABILITY:

The records are retrieved by a uniquecontrol number assigned to eachinvestigation.

SAFEGUARD:

Records in the system are availableonly to those persons whose dutiesrequire such access. The records arekept in limited access areas during dutyhours and in locked file cabinets in alocked office at all other times.


Records will be held in the officepursuant to General Records Schedule22, June 1988, and will be destroyed byshredding or burning when no longerneeded.


Inspector General, Office of theInspector General, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC, 20525.


To determine whether this system ofrecords contains a record pertaining tothe requesting individual, theindividual should write to the SystemManager furnishing his or her name,address, telephone number, and socialsecurity number.


See Notification Procedures.


Individuals desiring to contest oramend information maintained in thissystem of records should write to theSystem Manager, setting forth the basisfor which the individual believes therecord is incomplete, irrelevant,incorrect or untimely.




Information in this system of recordsis obtained from: Corporation staff andofficial Corporation records; current andformer employees, contractors, granteesand their employees; subgrantees andtheir employees; AmeriCorps membersor former members in Corporation-funded programs; and non-Corporationpersons. Individuals to be interviewedand records to be examined are selectedbased on the nature of the allegationsbeing investigated.


The Office of Inspector Generalpublished exemptions under 5 U.S.C.552a(j) and (k).

CORPORATION–16

SYSTEM NAME:

Travel Authorization Files.

SYSTEM LOCATION:

Office of Accounting and FinancialManagement Services, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC 20525.


Corporation employees or any otherperson invited to travel at the expenseof the Corporation.


The records consist of travelauthorizations, vouchers, receipts,payment records, and other materialsrelated to official travel.


The Domestic Volunteer Service Actof 1973, as amended; the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended, and the Budget andAccounting Procedures Act of 1950, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):

To record and manage the payment ofexpenses for official travel.




STORAGE:

Records are maintained in file folderswhich are stored in locked metal filecabinets. records are indexedalphabetically by name.

SAFEGUARDS:

Records are available only to staff inthe Office of Accounting and FinancialManagement Services, and otherappropriate Corporation officials withthe need for such records in theperformance of their duties.


Records are held for three (3) yearsand then retired to the Federal RecordsCenter.


Director, Office of Accounting andFinancial Management Services,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue NW, Washington, DC 20525.


record in the system about anindividual, that individual shouldsubmit a request in writing to theSystem Manager giving name, taxpayeridentification number, and address.



information contained in this systemshould write to the System Manager andset forth the basis for which the recordis believed to be incomplete orincorrect.


Data in this system is obtained fromdocuments submitted by individualsengaging in official travel as well asdocuments issued by the Corporationofficials involved with authorizing andmanaging travel.


None.

CORPORATION–17

SYSTEM NAME:Momentum Financials Vendor Files.


Management Services, Corporation forNational and Community Service, 1201New York Avenue, NW, Washington,DC 20525.


All individuals with whom theCorporation does business.


The data recorded includes the nameand address of the entity doing businesswith the Corporation, ABA routing

number, financial institution name andaddress, depositor account number andthe taxpayer identification number; e.g.,the SSN of an individual and the TIN ofan organization.


of 1973, as amended; the National andCommunity Service Act of 1990, asamended, and the Budget andAccounting Procedures Act of 1950, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):To maintain a single registry of

entities with which the agency doesbusiness.


Data is shared with the Department ofHealth and Human Services in theservicing of Corporation grantrecipients; data may be disclosed to theU.S. Department of Justice, the U.S.Department of Treasury or the GeneralAccounting Office in connection withdebt servicing activities or to theInternal Revenue Service in thereporting of disbursements as requiredby the Internal Revenue Code. Also, seeGeneral Routine Uses contained inPreliminary Statement.


STORAGE:Data is stored on magnetic media in

a computer system with accesscontrolled by a security system thatrequires passwords and identification ofeach user.

RETRIEVABILITY:Data can be retrieved from the system

electronically by name or TIN.

SAFEGUARDS:Access to data stored on magnetic

media is controlled by a security systemthat requires password andidentification of each user.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Records are held for three (3) years

and then retired to the Federal RecordsCenter.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:Director, Office of Accounting and

Financial Management Services,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.


record in the system of records about an



individual, that individual shouldsubmit a request in writing to theSystem Manager giving name, taxpayeridentification number, and address.



information contained in this systemshould write to the System Manager andset forth the basis for which the recordis believed to be incomplete orincorrect.


documents submitted by individualscovered by the system as well asdocuments issued by the Corporationofficials involved with managing funds.


CORPORATION–18

SYSTEM NAME:AmeriCorps*VISTA Volunteer

Management System Files.


Management Services,AmeriCorps*VISTA Payroll Office,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.


Current and formerAmeriCorps*VISTA members.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:Records include name, address, social

security number, data concerning theindividual’s sex, marital status, skills,service as an AmeriCorps*VISTAmember, including dates served andprojects served, amounts paid to themember while serving, amountsoverpaid, and repayment records ofsuch overpayment.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:The Domestic Volunteer Service of

1973, as amended, and the Budget andAccounting Procedures Act of 1950, asamended.

PURPOSE(S):To record payments and allowances

to AmeriCorps*VISTA members.


See General Routine Uses containedin Preliminary Statement. Information isalso disclosed to the Social Security

Administration and the InternalRevenue Service about the funds paid tocomply with legal requirements thatenable these agencies to perform theirfunctions. Data from the system is alsodisclosed to the Financial ManagementService of the U.S. Department of theTreasury to enable payments to bemade.


STORAGE:Manual data is stored alphabetically

in locked filing cabinets that are kept ina room that is only used for storing suchmaterials. That room is kept lockedexcept when employees who work withthe AmeriCorps*VISTA member payrollsystem are using the data. Access by allother individuals is not allowed. Data isalso stored on magnetic media in acomputer system with access controlledby a security system that requirespasswords and identification of eachuser.

RETRIEVABILITY:Data can be retrieved by individual

name for manual records or by socialsecurity number for automated records.

SAFEGUARDS:The storage room is kept locked

except when employees who work withthe AmeriCorps*VISTA member payrollsystem are using the data. Access by allother individuals is not allowed. Accessto data stored on magnetic media iscontrolled by a security system thatrequires passwords and identification ofeach user.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:Records are held for three (3) years

and then retired to the Federal RecordsCenter.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND

Director, Office of Accounting andFinancial Management Services,Corporation for National andCommunity Service, 1201 New YorkAvenue, NW, Washington, DC 20525.


record in the system of records about anindividual, that individual shouldsubmit a request in writing to theSystem Manager giving name, taxpayeridentification number, and address.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:See Notification procedure.


information contained in this system

should write to the System Manager andset forth the basis for which the recordis believed to be incomplete orincorrect.


Data in this system is obtained fromdocuments submitted by individualscovered by the system as well asdocuments issued by Corporationofficials involved with managing funds.


None.Dated: July 25, 2000.

Thomasenia P. Duncan,General Counsel.[FR Doc. 00–19390 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6050–28–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Uniformed Services University of theHealth Sciences


AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:Uniformed Services University of theHealth Sciences.

TIME AND DATE: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,September 8, 2000.

PLACE: The United States Air ForceAcademy, Colorado Springs, Colorado.

STATUS: Open—under ‘‘Government inthe Sunshine Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)).

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 8:30 a.m. Meeting—Board of Regents

(1) Approval of Minutes—May 19,2000

(2) Faculty Matters(3) Departmental Reports(4) Financial Report(5) Report—President, USUHS(6) Report—Dean, School of Medicine(7) Report—Dean, Graduate School of

Nursing(8) Comments—Chairman, Board of

Regents(9) New Business

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Mr. Bobby D. Anderson, ExecutiveSecretary, Board of Regents, (301) 295–3116.

Dated: July 26, 2000.C.M. Robinson,OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer,Department of Defense.[FR Doc. 00–19437 Filed 7–27–00; 4:35 pm]BILLING CODE 5001–10–M



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

National Committee on ForeignMedical Education and Accreditation;Meeting

AGENCY: National Committee on ForeignMedical Education and Accreditation,Department of Education.

What Is the Purpose of This Notice?The purpose of this notice is to

announce the upcoming meeting of theNational Committee on Foreign MedicalEducation and Accreditation. Parts ofthis meeting will be open to the public,and the public is invited to attend thoseportions.

When and Where Will the MeetingTake Place?

We will hold the meeting onSeptember 15, 2000 beginning at 9:00a.m. at the U.S. Department ofEducation, in the 8th Floor ConferenceCenter, 1990 K Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20006.

What Access Does the ConferenceCenter Provide for Individuals WithDisabilities?

The meeting site is accessible toindividuals with disabilities. If you willneed an auxiliary aid or service toparticipate in the meeting (e.g.,interpreting service, assistive listeningdevice, or materials in an alternateformat), notify the contact person listedin this notice at least two weeks beforethe scheduled meeting date. Althoughwe will attempt to meet a requestreceived after that date, we may not beable to make available the requestedauxiliary aid or service because ofinsufficient time to arrange it.

What Are the Functions of theCommittee?

The National Committee on ForeignMedical Education and Accreditationwas established by the Secretary ofEducation under section 102 of theHigher Education Act of 1965, asamended by Public Law 105–244. TheCommittee’s responsibilities are to (1)evaluate the standards of accreditationapplied to applicant foreign medicalschools; and (2) determine thecomparability of those standards tostandards for accreditation applied toUnited States medical schools.

What Are the Issues To Be ConsideredAt This Meeting?

The National Committee on ForeignMedical Education and Accreditationwill review the standards ofaccreditation applied to medical schoolsby several foreign countries todetermine whether those standards are

comparable to the standards ofaccreditation applied to medical schoolsin the United States. Discussions of thestandards of accreditation will be heldin sessions open to the public.Discussions that focus on specificdeterminations of comparability areclosed to the public in order that eachcountry may be properly notified of thedecision. Beginning August 18, you maycall to obtain the identity of thecountries whose standards are to beevaluated during this meeting.

Who Is the Contact Person for theMeeting?

Please contact Bonnie LeBold, who isthe Executive Director of the NationalCommittee on Foreign MedicalEducation and Accreditation, if youhave questions about the meeting. Youmay contact her at the U.S. Departmentof Education, 7th Floor—Rm. 7007,1990 K St. N.W., Washington, D.C.20006, telephone: (202) 219–7009, fax:(202) 219–7008, e-mail:[email protected]. Individualswho use telecommunications device forthe deaf (TDD) may call the FederalInformation Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339.

A. Lee Fritschler,Assistant Secretary for PostsecondaryEducation.[FR Doc. 00–19338 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Agency Information Collection UnderReview by the Office of Managementand Budget

AGENCY: Department of Energy.ACTION: Submission for OMB review;comment request.

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy(DOE) has submitted renewals for anadditional three years for theinformation collection(s) listed at theend of this notice to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) forreview under sections 3507(h)(1) and3506(c) of the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13).

Each entry contains the followinginformation: (1) The collection numberand title; (2) a summary of the collectionof information, type of request (new,revision, extension, or reinstatement),response obligation (mandatory,voluntary, or required to obtain or retainbenefits); (3) a description of the needand proposed use of the information; (4)a description of the likely respondents;and (5) an estimate of the total annualreporting burden (i.e., the estimated

number of likely respondents times theproposed frequency of response per yeartimes the average hours per response).DATES: Comments must be filed on orbefore October 2, 2000. If you anticipatethat you will be submitting commentsbut find it difficult to do so within thetime allowed by this notice, you shouldadvise the OMB DOE Desk Officer listedbelow of your intention to do so as soonas possible. The OMB DOE Desk Officermay be telephoned at (202) 395–3084.(Also, please notify the DOE contactlisted below.)ADDRESSES: Address comments to theDepartment of Energy Desk Officer,Office of Information and RegulatoryAffairs, Office of Management andBudget, 726 Jackson Place NW.,Washington, D.C. 20503. (Commentsshould also be addressed to the Officeof Information, Records and ResourceManagement at the address below.)FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Requests for additional informationshould be directed to Peter J. Grahn, Jr.,Office of Information, Records andResource Management (SO–31),Forrestal Building, U.S. Department ofEnergy, Washington, D.C. 20585–0670.Mr. Grahn may be contacted bytelephone at (301) 903–4653, FAX at(301) 903–6223, or e-mail [email protected] INFORMATION:

The information collections submittedto OMB for review were:

1. Current OMB No.: 1910–0400.Package Title: Financial Assistance.Summary: A three-year extension isrequested, which includes bothmandatory and response to obtain orretain benefits. Purpose: Thisinformation is required by theDepartment to manage all phases of theprocess of awarding, administering andclosing out financial assistance awards.The package contains 58 informationand/or recordkeeping requirements.Type of Respondents: DOE managementand operating contractors and offsitecontractors. Estimated Number ofResponses: 66,705. Estimated TotalBurden Hours: 664,673.

2. Current OMB No.: 1910–1000.Package Title: Personal Property.Summary: A three-year extension isrequested for these mandatory responseobligations. Purpose: This provides theDepartment with the informationnecessary for the management, control,reutilization, and disposal ofgovernment personal property. Thepackage contains 29 information and/orrecordkeeping requirements. Type ofRespondents: DOE management andoperating contractors and offsitecontractors. Estimated Number of



Responses: 3,857. Estimated TotalBurden Hours: 247,374.

3. Current OMB No.: 1910–1800.Package Title: Safeguards and Security.Summary: A three-year extension isrequested for these mandatory responseobligations. Purpose: This informationis required by the Department for guardservice contracts, security classifiedrecords, facility security, nuclear facilitysafety, and nuclear facility security. Thepackage contains 27 information and/orrecordkeeping requirements. Type ofRespondents: DOE management andoperating contractors and offsitecontractors. Estimated Number ofResponses: 86,596. Estimated TotalBurden Hours: 612,985.

Statutory Authority: Sections 3507(h)(1)and 3506(c) of the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104–13).

Issued in Washington, D.C., July 20, 2000.Peter J. Grahn, Jr.,Director, Office of Records and Resource,Management.[FR Doc. 00–19354 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6450–01–P


Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Kirtland AreaOffice—Sandia National Lab

AGENCY: Department of Energy.ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces ameeting of the EnvironmentalManagement Site-Specific AdvisoryBoard (EM SSAB), Kirtland Area Office-Sandia National Lab. The FederalAdvisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that publicnotice of these meetings be announcedin the Federal Register.DATES: Wednesday, August 16, 20005:30 p.m.–9 p.m. (MST)ADDRESSES: Thomas Bell CommunityCenter, 3001 University Boulevard, SE,Albuquerque, NM 87106, (505) 768–3499.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mike Zamorski, Acting Manager,Department of Energy, Kirtland AreaOffice, P.O. Box 5400, MS–0184,Albuquerque, NM 87185, Phone (505)845–4094, Fax (505) 845–6867.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose of the Board: The purpose ofthe Board is to make recommendationsto DOE and its regulators in the areas ofenvironmental restoration, wastemanagement, and related activities.Tentative Agenda5:30 pm—Check in/Minutes/Agenda5:45—DOE Quarterly Meeting

6:15—Mixed Waste Landfill ProposedRecommendations from Ad HocCommittee

7:15—Break7:30—Public Comment Period7:45—Transition into Long-Term

Stewardship Community ResourcesPresentation (Questions andAnswers)

8:30—Report of meeting withCongressional Delegation

8:40—Task Group Reports8:50—End of Meeting

Public Participation: The meeting isopen to the public. Written statementsmay be filed with the Board eitherbefore or after the meeting. Individualswho wish to make oral statementspertaining to agenda items shouldcontact Mike Zamorski at the address ortelephone number listed above.Requests must be received at least 5days prior to the meeting and reasonableprovision will be made to include thepresentation in the agenda. The DeputyDesignated Federal Officer isempowered to conduct the meting in afashion that will facilitate the orderlyconduct of business. Each individualwishing to make public comment willbe provided a maximum of 5 minutes topresent their comments.

Minutes: The minutes of this meetingwill be available for public review andcopying at the Freedom of InformationPublic Reading Room, 1E–190, ForrestalBuilding, 1000 Independence Avenue,SW, Washington, DC 20585 between 9a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday–Friday, exceptFederal holidays. Minutes will also beavailable by writing or calling MikeZamorski, Acting Manager, Departmentof Energy, Kirtland Area Office, P.O.Box 5400, MS–0184, Albuquerque, NM87185, or by calling (505) 845–4094.

Issued at Washington, DC on July 31, 2000.Carol A. Kennedy,Acting Advisory Committee ManagementOfficer.[FR Doc. 00–19353 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6450–01–P


[Docket Nos. FE C&E 00–14; CertificationNotice—188]

Office of Fossil Energy; Notice ofFiling of Coal Capability of FreestonePower Generation, L.P. Powerplant andIndustrial Fuel Use Act

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy,Department of Energy.ACTION: Notice of Filing.

SUMMARY: Freestone Power Generation,L.P. submitted coal capability self-

certifications pursuant to section 201 ofthe Powerplant and Industrial Fuel UseAct of 1978, as amended.ADDRESSES: Copies of self-certificationfilings are available for publicinspection, upon request, in the Officeof Coal & Power Im/Ex, Fossil Energy,Room 4G–039, FE–27, ForrestalBuilding, 1000 Independence Avenue,S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Ellen Russell at (202) 586–9624SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title II ofthe Powerplant and Industrial Fuel UseAct of 1978 (FUA), as amended (42U.S.C. 8301 et seq.), provides that nonew baseload electric powerplant maybe constructed or operated without thecapability to use coal or anotheralternate fuel as a primary energysource. In order to meet the requirementof coal capability, the owner or operatorof such facilities proposing to usenatural gas or petroleum as its primaryenergy source shall certify, pursuant toFUA section 201(d), to the Secretary ofEnergy prior to construction, or prior tooperation as a base load powerplant,that such powerplant has the capabilityto use coal or another alternate fuel.Such certification establishescompliance with section 201(a) as of thedate filed with the Department ofEnergy. The Secretary is required topublish a notice in the Federal Registerthat a certification has been filed. Thefollowing owner/operator of theproposed new baseload powerplanthave filed a self-certification inacccordance with section 201(d).

Owner: Freestone Power Generation,L.P. (C&E 00–14).

Operator: Freestone PowerGeneration, L.P.

Location: Fairfield, Texas.Plant Configuration: Combined-cycle.Capacity: 1,030 MW.Fuel: Natural gas.Purchasing Entities: Not yet

determined.In-Service Date: April 1, 2002.Issued in Washington, D.C., July 25, 2000.

Anthony J. Como,Deputy Director, Electric Power Regulation,Office of Coal & Power Im/Ex, Office of Coal& Power Systems, Office of Fossil Energy.[FR Doc. 00–19355 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6450–01–P


[Docket No. EA–168–B]

Application to Export Electric Energy;PG&E Energy Trading-Power, L.P.

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.ACTION: Notice of application.



SUMMARY: PG&E Energy Trading-Power,L.P. (‘‘PGET-Power’’) has applied forrenewal of its authority to transmitelectric energy from the United States toCanada pursuant to section 202(e) of theFederal Power Act.DATES: Comments, protests or requeststo intervene must be submitted on orbefore August 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: Comments, protests orrequests to intervene should beaddressed as follows: Office of Coal &Power Im/Ex (FE–27), Office of FossilEnergy, U.S. Department of Energy,1000 Independence Avenue, SW,Washington, DC 20585–0350 (FAX 202–287–5736).FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Rosalind Carter (Program Office) 202–586–7983 or Michael Skinker (ProgramAttorney) 202–586–2793.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports ofelectricity from the United States to aforeign country are regulated andrequire authorization under section202(e) of the Federal Power Act (FPA)(16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

On February 25, 1998, the Office ofFossil Energy (FE) of the Department ofEnergy (DOE) authorized PGET-Powerto transmit electric energy from theUnited States to Canada using theinternational transmission facilities ofDetroit Edison, Minnesota Power,Niagara Mohawk and New York PowerAuthority. On August 25, 1998, in OrderEA–168–A, DOE amended PGET-Power’s electricity export authorizationto add the remaining major transmissioninterconnections with Canada. That twoyear order will expire on August 25,2000. On July 6, 2000, PEGET-Powerfiled an application with FE for renewalof its export authority and requestedthat authorization be issued for twoyears.

PGET-Power, is a power marketer thatdoes not own or control any electricgeneration or transmission facilities nordoes it have any franchised electricservice territory in the United States.PGET-Power will purchase the electricenergy to be exported at wholesale fromelectric utilities and Federal PowerMarketing Administrations in theUnited States.

PGET-Power proposes to arrange forthe delivery of electric energy to Canadaover the international transmissionfacilities owned by Basin Electric PowerCooperative, Bonneville PowerAdministration, Citizens Utilities,Detroit Edison Company, Eastern MaineElectric Cooperative, Joint Owners ofthe Highgate Project, Long Sault, Inc.,Maine Electric Power Company, MainePublic Service Company, MinnesotaPower Inc., Minnkota Power

Cooperative, New York PowerAuthority, Niagara Mohawk PowerCorporation, Northern States Power, andVermont Electric TransmissionCompany. The construction, operation,maintenance, and connection of each ofthe international transmission facilitiesto be utilized by PGET-Power, as morefully described in the application, haspreviously been authorized by aPresidential permit issued pursuant toExecutive Order 10485, as amended.

Procedural Matters

Any person desiring to become aparty to this proceeding or to be heardby filing comments or protests to thisapplication should file a petition tointervene, comment or protest at theaddress provided above in accordancewith §§ 385.211 or 385.214 of theFERC’s Rules of Practice and Procedures(18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Fifteencopies of each petition and protestshould be filed with the DOE on orbefore the date listed above.

Comments on the PGET-Powerapplication to export electric energy toCanada should be clearly marked withDocket EA–168–B. Additional copiesare to be filed directly with Sanford L.Hartman, Assistant General Counsel,PG&E Energy Trading-Power, L.P., 7500Old Georgetown Road, Suite 1300,Bethesda, MD 20814–6161 and Ms.Sarah Barpoulis, Senior Vice President,PG&E Energy Trading-Power, L.P., 7500Old Georgetown Road, Suite 1300,Bethesda, MD 20814–6161.

DOE notes that the circumstancesdescribed in this application arevirtually identical to those for whichexport authority had previously beengranted in FE Order EA–168.Consequently, DOE believes that it hasadequately satisfied its responsibilitiesunder the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act of 1969 through thedocumentation of a categoricalexclusion in the FE Docket EA–168proceeding.

Copies of this application will bemade available, upon request, for publicinspection and copying at the addressprovided above or by accessing theFossil Energy Home Page at http://www.fe.doe.gov. Upon reaching theFossil Energy Home page, select‘‘Regulatory Programs,’’ then‘‘Electricity Regulation,’’ and then‘‘Pending Proceedings’’ from the optionsmenus.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 25,2000.Anthony J. Como,Deputy Director, Electric Power Regulation,Office of Coal & Power Im/Ex, Office of Coal& Power Systems, Office of Fossil Energy.[FR Doc. 00–19356 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6450–01–P


Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission

[Docket No. RP00–416–000]

Great Lakes Gas Transmission LimitedPartnership; Notice of Tariff Filing

July 26, 2000.Take notice that on July 21, 2000,

Great Lakes Gas Transmission LimitedPartnership (Great Lakes) tendered forfiling as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,Second Revised Volume No. 1, thefollowing tariff sheets proposed to beeffective August 1, 2000:First Revised Sheet No. 39ASeventh Revised Sheet No. 40Third Revised Sheet No. 40BFifth Revised Sheet No. 41Fourth Revised Sheet No. 45

Great Lakes states that these tariffsheets are being filed to comply with theCommission’s Order Nos. 637 and 637–A issued on February 9, 2000 and May19, 2000, respectively, in Docket Nos.RM98–10 and RM98–12, et al 90 FERC¶ 61,109 (2000); 91 FERC ¶ 61,169(2000). Among other things, Order Nos.637 and 637–A waived the rate ceilingfor short-term capacity releasetransactions and limited the availabilityof the Right of First Refusal to contractsat the maximum tariff rate having a termof twelve consecutive months or longeror, for services not available for 12consecutive months, for a term of morethan one year.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a motionto intervene or a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.20426, in accordance with Sections385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’sRules and Regulations. All such motionsor protests must be filed in accordancewith Section 154.210 of theCommission’s Regulations. Protests willbe considered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceedings.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a motion to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection in the Public Reference



Room. This filing may be viewed on theweb at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 forassistance).

David P. Boergers,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19321 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717–01–M




Kern River Gas TransmissionCompany; Notice of ProposedChanges in FERC Gas Tariff


Kern River Gas Transmission Company(Kern River) tendered a non-conformingservice agreement and the followingtariff sheets for filing as part of its FERCGas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No.1, to be effective August 20, 2000.First Revised Sheet No. 2Sheet Nos. 423–489 (Reserved)Original Sheet No. 490Sheet Nos. 491–499 (Reserved)First Revised Sheet No. 911

Kern River states that the purpose ofthis filing is to submit a Rate ScheduleKRF–1 transportation service agreementbetween Southwest Gas Corporation andKern River that does not conform toKern River’s Rate Schedule KRF–1, andto reference this agreement in KernRiver’s tariff.

Kern River states that it has served acopy of this filing upon its customersand interested state regulatorycommissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a motionto intervene or a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.20426, in accordance with Sections385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’sRules and Regulations. All such motionsor protests must be filed in accordancewith Section 154.210 of theCommission’s Regulations. Protests willbe considered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceedings.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a motion to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection in the Public ReferenceRoom. This filing may be viewed on theweb at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/

rims.htm (call 202–08–2222 forassistance).





Kinder Morgan Interstate GasTransmission LLC; Notice of RefundReport

July 26, 2000.

Take notice that on May 18, 2000,Kinder Morgan Interstate GasTransmission LLC (KMIGT) tendered forfiling its refund report in the above-referenced docket pursuant to theCommission’s Order Denying Petitionsfor Adjustment and EstablishingProcedures for the Payment of Refundsfor Kansas Ad Valorem Taxes datedSeptember 10, 1997 (September 10,1997 Order).

KMIGT states that the refund reportsummarizes the amounts received fromproducers or royalty owners by KMIGTthrough April 30, 2000, for Kansas advalorem tax overpayments for the periodOctober 4, 1983, through June 28, 1988.KMIGT states that the refund report alsoshows how KMIGT distributed theserefunds to its former FERC-jurisdictional customers. In instanceswhere payment has not been madewithin 30 days of receipt fromproducers, appropriate interest has beencomputed as provided for in the Order.

KMIGT states that copies of KMIGT’sfiling have been served on KMIGT’sformer FERC-jurisdictional customers,interested state commissions, and allparties to the proceeding.

Any person desiring to protest saidfiling should file a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.20426, in accordance with Section385.211 of the Commission’s Rules andRegulations. All such protests must befiled on or before August 2, 2000.Protests will be considered by thecommission in determining theappropriate action to be taken, but willnot serve to make protestants parties tothe proceedings. Copies of this filing areon file with the Commission and areavailable for public inspection in thePublic Reference Room. This filing maybe viewed on the web at http://

www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call202–208–2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19318 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M



[Docket No. IN00–1–001]

Kinder Morgan Interstate GasTransmission LLC, et al; Notice ofFiling of Refund Report

July 26, 2000.

Take notice that on June 26, 2000,Kinder Morgan Interstate GasTransmission LLC, et al. (KinderMorgan Interstate, et al.), filed a refundreport pursuant to a stipulation andconsent agreement approved by theCommission’s March 29, 2000 order inDocket No. IN00–1–000.

Kinder Morgan Interstate, et al., statesthat the refund report indicates that therefunds, inclusive of interest, were sentto shippers on May 26, 2000. The refundreport details the shippers receiving therefunds and the amount of the refunds.

Any person desiring to protest saidfiling should file a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC20426, in accordance with Section385.211 of the Commission’s Rules andRegulations. All such protests must befiled on or before August 7, 2000.Protests will be considered by theCommission in determining theappropriate action to be taken, but willnot serve to make protestants parties tothe proceedings. Copies of this filing areon file with the Commission and areavailable for public inspection in thePublic Reference Room. This filing maybe viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call202–208–2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,Acting Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19315 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]






[Docket No. MT00–12–000]

Mid Louisiana Gas Company; Notice ofProposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

July 26, 2000.Take notice that on July 20, 2000, Mid

Louisiana Gas Company (MIDLA)tendered for filing as part of its FERCGas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1,the following tariff sheets:Sixth Revised Sheet No. 130Ninth Revised Sheet No. 131Second Revised Sheet No. 132

MIDLA states that the primarypurpose of the filing Revised Tariffsheets is to update its tariff to reflectrecent changes in shared personnel andfacilities, and to reflect minorhousekeeping changes for clarificationof MIDLA’s FERC Gas Tariff.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a motionto intervene or a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.20426, in accordance with Sections385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’sRules and Regulations. All such motionsor protests must be filed in accordancewith Section 154.210 of theCommission’s Regulations. Protests willbe considered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceedings.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a motion to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection in the Public ReferenceRoom. This filing may be viewed on theweb at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 forassistance).




[Docket No. MT00–11–000]

Midcoast Gas Transmission, Inc.;Notice of Proposed Changes in FERCGas Tariff


Midcoast Gas Transmission, Inc. (MIT)

tendered for filing as part of FERC GasTariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1,the following the tariff sheets, with aneffective date of August 20, 2000:

Fifth Revised Sheet No. 148Fourth Revised Sheet No. 149Fourth Revised Sheet No. 150

MIT states that the primary purpose ofthe filing Revised Tariff sheets is toupdate its tariff to reflect recent changesin shared personnel and facilities, andto reflect minor housekeeping changesfor clarification of MIT’s FERC GasTariff.

Any person desiring to be heard or toprotest said filing should file a motionto intervene or a protest with theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.20426, in accordance with Sections385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’sRules and Regulations. All such motionsor protests must be filed in accordancewith Section 154.210 of theCommission’s Regulations. Protests willbe considered by the Commission indetermining the appropriate action to betaken, but will not serve to makeprotestants parties to the proceedings.Any person wishing to become a partymust file a motion to intervene. Copiesof this filing are on file with theCommission and are available for publicinspection in the Public ReferenceRoom. This filing may be viewed on theweb at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 forassistance).





Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C., Noticeof Technical Conference

July 26, 2000.

In the Commission’s order issued onMay 31, 2000, the Commission directedthat a technical conference be held toaddress issues raised by the filing.

Take notice that the technicalconference will be held on Wednesday,August 16, 2000, at 10:00 am, in a roomto be designated at the offices of theFederal Energy Regulatory Commission,888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC20426.

All interested parties and Staff arepermitted to attend.




Sunshine Act Meeting; Notice

AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission.FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUSANNOUNCEMENT: July 24, 2000, 65 FR45596.PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OFMEETING: July 26, 2000, 10 a.m.CHANGE IN THE MEETING: The followingDocket Nos. and Companies have beenadded to Item CAE–2 on the Agendascheduled for the July 26, 2000 meeting.

Item No. Docket No. and Company

CAE–2 ...... EL00–83–001, NSTAR ServicesCompany v. New EnglandPower.

Pool ER00–2811–000, 001, ISONew England, Inc.

ER00–2937–000, ISO New Eng-land, Inc.

EL00–62–000, ISO New Eng-land, Inc.



[FRL–6843–4]

Notice of Prevention of SignificantDeterioration (PSD) FinalDetermination for RockGen EnergyCenter, Town of Christiana, DaneCounty, Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Notice of final action.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice isto announce that on March 3, 2000, theEnvironmental Appeals Board (EAB) ofthe United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) dismissed apetition for review of a revised permitissued for the RockGen Energy Centerby the Wisconsin Department of NaturalResources (WDNR) pursuant to the



Prevention of Significant Deteriorationof Air Quality (PSD) regulations under40 CFR 52.21.DATES: The effective date for the Board’sdecision is March 3, 2000. Judicialreview of this permit decision, to theextent it is available pursuant to section307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, may besought by filing a petition for review inthe United States Court of Appeals forthe Seventh Circuit within 60 days oftoday’s date.ADDRESSES: The documents relevant tothe above action are available for publicinspection during normal businesshours at the following address by callingRaj Vakharia at (608) 267–2015 toarrange a visit: Department of NaturalResources, Bureau of Air Management,101 South Webster Street, 7th Floor,Madison, WI.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.Constantine Blathras (AR–18J), UnitedStates Environmental ProtectionAgency, Region 5, 77 West JacksonBoulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, at(312) 886–0671.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OnJanuary 25, 1999, the WDNR issued PSDpermit 98–RV–150 to RockGen EnergyCenter for the construction of a new 525MW electric power generating facility inthe Town of Christiana, Dane County,Wisconsin. The facility will includethree 175-MW simple cycle combustionturbines using natural gas as a primaryfuel and low sulfur No. 2 fuel oil as aback-up. The facility is subject to PSDfor nitrogen oxides (NOX) and carbonmonoxide (CO).

On April 5, 1999, the Responsible Useof Rural and Agricultural Land (RURAL)petitioned the EAB to review this permitalleging: (i) WDNR’s selection of BACTfor NOX was clearly erroneous; (ii)WDNR abused its discretion by failingto consider demand side managementalternatives to the construction of thefacility; (iii) WDNR’s characterization ofthe facility as a ‘‘peak power generatingfacility’’ and its inclusion in the finalpermit of a continuous emissionmonitoring (CEM) exemption provisionare inconsistent with applicableregulations; (iv) the start-up and shut-down provision in the final permit isnot federally enforceable; and (5) WDNRfailed to adequately reply to writtencomments on the draft permit or toexplain changes to the draft permit.

On June 11, 1999, EPA filed anAmicus Brief that commented on (i)WDNR’s BACT analysis, (ii) WDNR’sconclusion that DLN was technicallyfeasible as a control option, (iii) thepermit provision regarding emissionsduring start-up and shutdown, and (iii)

demand-side management or otheralternatives.

On August 25, the EAB issued itsorder remanding the permit as to (i) theconditions under which NOX estimationprocedures may be used in lieu of CEM,(ii) the permit provision relating toexceedances of the permit’s emissionlimitations during start-up or shutdownof the facility, and (iii) WDNR’s reply towritten comments, and denying reviewas to the BACT determination issue andthe demand-side alternatives issue,which were not properly preserved forreview, and all other issues raised in thepetition.

On October 15, 1999, WDNR issuedrevised permit 98–RV–150–R1 toRockGen Energy Center and a revisedresponse to comments. The revisedpermit strikes the permit conditionconcerning exceedances of emissionslimits during start-up and shut-downand amends the permit conditionsunder which NOX estimationprocedures may be used in lieu of CEMto reflect the language of applicableregulatory language under 40 CFR 72.2.

RURAL filed a petition for review ofthe revised permit on November 17,1999, alleging that WDNR erroneouslyrefused to consider the opposition oflocal and county zoning authorities tothe permit. On March 3, 2000, the EABdenied the petition for review on thegrounds that the issue had not beenproperly preserved.

Dated: July 21, 2000.Francis X. Lyons,Regional Administrator, Region 5.[FR Doc. 00–19374 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6560–50–P


[OPP–30498; FRL–6737–2]

Pesticide Product; RegistrationApplications

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces receiptof applications to register pesticideproducts containing new activeingredients not included in anypreviously registered products pursuantto the provisions of section 3(c)(4) of theFederal Insecticide, Fungicide, andRodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended.DATES: Written comments, identified bythe docket control number OPP–30498,must be received on or before August31, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments may besubmitted by mail, electronically, or inperson. Please follow the detailedinstructions for each method asprovided in Unit I. of theSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensureproper receipt by EPA, it is imperativethat you identify docket control numberOPP–30498 in the subject line on thefirst page of your response.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bymail: James Tompkins, (PM–25),Registration Division, Office of PesticidePrograms (7505C), EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1200 PennsylvaniaAve., NW., Washington, DC 20460;telephone number: (703) 305–5697; ande-mail address: [email protected] INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action ifyou are an agricultural producer, foodmanufacturer, or pesticidemanufacturer. Potentially affectedcategories and entities may include, butare not limited to:

Cat-egories

NAICScodes

Examples of poten-tially affected entities

Industry 111 Crop production112 Animal production311 Food manufacturing32532 Pesticide manufac-

turing

This listing is not intended to beexhaustive, but rather provides a guidefor readers regarding entities likely to beaffected by this action. Other types ofentities not listed in the table could alsobe affected. The North AmericanIndustrial Classification System(NAICS) codes have been provided toassist you and others in determiningwhether or not this action might applyto certain entities. If you have questionsregarding the applicability of this actionto a particular entity, consult the personlisted under FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT.

B. How Can I Get AdditionalInformation, Including Copies of thisDocument and Other RelatedDocuments?

1. Electronically. You may obtainelectronic copies of this document, andcertain other related documents thatmight be available electronically, fromthe EPA Internet Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/. To access thisdocument, on the Home Page select‘‘Laws and Regulations’’ and then lookup the entry for this document underthe ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental



Documents.’’ You can also go directly tothe Federal Register listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

2. In person. The Agency hasestablished an official record for thisaction under docket control numberOPP–30498. The official record consistsof the documents specifically referencedin this action, any public commentsreceived during an applicable commentperiod, and other information related tothis action, including any informationclaimed as confidential businessinformation (CBI). This official recordincludes the documents that arephysically located in the docket, as wellas the documents that are referenced inthose documents. The public version ofthe official record does not include anyinformation claimed as CBI. The publicversion of the official record, whichincludes printed, paper versions of anyelectronic comments submitted duringan applicable comment period, isavailable for inspection in the PublicInformation and Records IntegrityBranch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall#2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,Monday through Friday, excluding legalholidays. The PIRIB telephone numberis (703) 305–5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I SubmitComments?

You may submit comments throughthe mail, in person, or electronically. Toensure proper receipt by EPA, it isimperative that you identify docketcontrol number OPP–30498 in thesubject line on the first page of yourresponse.

1. By mail. Submit your comments to:Public Information and RecordsIntegrity Branch (PIRIB), InformationResources and Services Division(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs(OPP), Environmental ProtectionAgency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,DC 20460.

2. In person or by courier. Deliveryour comments to: Public Informationand Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB),Information Resources and ServicesDivision (7502C), Office of PesticidePrograms (OPP), EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Rm. 119, CrystalMall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday throughFriday, excluding legal holidays. ThePIRIB telephone number is (703) 305–5805.

3. Electronically. You may submityour comments electronically by e-mailto: ‘‘[email protected],’’ or you cansubmit a computer disk as describedabove. Do not submit any informationelectronically that you consider to be

CBI. Avoid the use of special charactersand any form of encryption. Electronicsubmissions will be accepted inWordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII fileformat. All comments in electronic formmust be identified by docket controlnumber OPP–30498. Electroniccomments may also be filed online atmany Federal Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Wantto Submit to the Agency?

Do not submit any informationelectronically that you consider to beCBI. You may claim information thatyou submit to EPA in response to thisdocument as CBI by marking any part orall of that information as CBI.Information so marked will not bedisclosed except in accordance withprocedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.In addition to one complete version ofthe comment that includes anyinformation claimed as CBI, a copy ofthe comment that does not contain theinformation claimed as CBI must besubmitted for inclusion in the publicversion of the official record.Information not marked confidentialwill be included in the public versionof the official record without priornotice. If you have any questions aboutCBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,please consult the person identifiedunder FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider as I PrepareMy Comments for EPA?

You may find the followingsuggestions helpful for preparing yourcomments:

1. Explain your views as clearly aspossible.

2. Describe any assumptions that youused.

3. Provide copies of any technicalinformation and/or data you used thatsupport your views.

4. If you estimate potential burden orcosts, explain how you arrived at theestimate that you provide.

5. Provide specific examples toillustrate your concerns.

6. Offer alternative ways to improvethe registration activity.

7. Make sure to submit yourcomments by the deadline in thisnotice.

8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,be sure to identify the docket controlnumber assigned to this action in thesubject line on the first page of yourresponse. You may also provide thename, date, and Federal Registercitation.

II. Registration Applications

EPA received applications as followsto register pesticide products containingactive ingredients not included in anypreviously registered products pursuantto the provision of section 3(c)(4) ofFIFRA. Notice of receipt of theseapplications does not imply a decisionby the Agency on the applications.

Products Containing Active Ingredientsnot Included in any PreviouslyRegistered Products

1. File Symbol: 8033–RE. Applicant:Nippon Soda Co., Ltd. c/o NissoAmerica, 220 E. 42nd St., Suite 3002,New York, NY 10017. Product name:Equinox Herbicide. Active ingredient:Tepraloxydim [(EZ-(RS)-2-[1-[(2E)-3-chloro-allyloxyimino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-perhydropyran-4-ylcyclohex-2-en-1-one] at 20%. Proposedclassification/Use: None. For use tocontrol grasses in cotton, soybeans, andcanola.

2. File Symbol: 8033–RG. Applicant:Nippon Soda Co., Ltd. Product name:BAS 620 H MUP. Active ingredient:Tepraloxydim [(EZ-(RS)-2-[1-[(2E)-3-chloro-allyloxyimino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-perhydropyran-4-ylcyclohex-2-en-1-one] at 94.8%. Proposedclassification/Use: None. For use tocontrol grasses in cotton, soybeans, andcanola.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Pesticidesand pest.

Dated: July 20, 2000.James Jones,Director, Registration Division, Office ofPesticide Programs.[FR Doc. 00–19349 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6560–50–F


[PF–955; FRL–6595–4]

Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petitionsto Establish Tolerances for CertainPesticide Chemicals in or on Food

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces theinitial filing of pesticide petitionsproposing the establishment ofregulations for residues of certainpesticide chemicals in or on variousfood commodities.



DATES: Comments, identified by docketcontrol number PF–955, must bereceived on or before August 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: Comments may besubmitted by mail, electronically, or inperson. Please follow the detailedinstructions for each method asprovided in Unit I.C. of theSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensureproper receipt by EPA, it is imperativethat you identify docket control numberPF–955 in the subject line on the firstpage of your response.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bymail: Alan Reynolds, Biopesticides andPollution Prevention Division (7511C),Office of Pesticide Programs,Environmental Protection Agency, 1200Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,DC 20460; telephone number: (703)605–0515; e-mail address:[email protected] INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?You may be affected by this action if

you are an agricultural producer, foodmanufacturer or pesticide manufacturer.Potentially affected categories andentities may include, but are not limitedto:

Cat-egories

NAICScodes

Examples of poten-tially affected entities

Industry 111 Crop production112 Animal production311 Food manufacturing32532 Pesticide manufac-

turing

This listing is not intended to beexhaustive, but rather provides a guidefor readers regarding entities likely to beaffected by this action. Other types ofentities not listed in the table could alsobe affected. The North AmericanIndustrial Classification System(NAICS) codes have been provided toassist you and others in determiningwhether or not this action might applyto certain entities. If you have questionsregarding the applicability of this actionto a particular entity, consult the personlisted under FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT.

B. How Can I Get AdditionalInformation, Including Copies of thisDocument and Other RelatedDocuments?

1. Electronically. You may obtainelectronic copies of this document, andcertain other related documents thatmight be available electronically, fromthe EPA Internet Home Page at http://

www.epa.gov/. To access thisdocument, on the Home Page select‘‘Laws and Regulations’’ and then lookup the entry for this document underthe ‘‘Federal Register—EnvironmentalDocuments.’’ You can also go directly tothe Federal Register listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

2. In person. The Agency hasestablished an official record for thisaction under docket control number PF–955. The official record consists of thedocuments specifically referenced inthis action, any public commentsreceived during an applicable commentperiod, and other information related tothis action, including any informationclaimed as confidential businessinformation (CBI). This official recordincludes the documents that arephysically located in the docket, as wellas the documents that are referenced inthose documents. The public version ofthe official record does not include anyinformation claimed as CBI. The publicversion of the official record, whichincludes printed, paper versions of anyelectronic comments submitted duringan applicable comment period, isavailable for inspection in the PublicInformation and Records IntegrityBranch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall#2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,Monday through Friday, excluding legalholidays. The PIRIB telephone numberis (703) 305–5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I SubmitComments?

You may submit comments throughthe mail, in person, or electronically. Toensure proper receipt by EPA, it isimperative that you identify docketcontrol number PF–955 in the subjectline on the first page of your response.

1. By mail. Submit your comments to:Public Information and RecordsIntegrity Branch (PIRIB), InformationResources and Services Division(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs(OPP), Environmental ProtectionAgency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,Washington, DC 20460.

2. In person or by courier. Deliveryour comments to: Public Informationand Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB),Information Resources and ServicesDivision (7502C), Office of PesticidePrograms (OPP), EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Rm. 119, CrystalMall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday throughFriday, excluding legal holidays. ThePIRIB telephone number is (703) 305–5805.

3. Electronically. You may submityour comments electronically by e-mail

to: ‘‘[email protected],’’ or you cansubmit a computer disk as describedabove. Do not submit any informationelectronically that you consider to beCBI. Avoid the use of special charactersand any form of encryption. Electronicsubmissions will be accepted inWordperfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII fileformat. All comments in electronic formmust be identified by docket controlnumber PF–955. Electronic commentsmay also be filed online at many FederalDepository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI That IWant to Submit to the Agency?

Do not submit any informationelectronically that you consider to beCBI. You may claim information thatyou submit to EPA in response to thisdocument as CBI by marking any part orall of that information as CBI.Information so marked will not bedisclosed except in accordance withprocedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.In addition to one complete version ofthe comment that includes anyinformation claimed as CBI, a copy ofthe comment that does not contain theinformation claimed as CBI must besubmitted for inclusion in the publicversion of the official record.Information not marked confidentialwill be included in the public versionof the official record without priornotice. If you have any questions aboutCBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,please consult the person identifiedunder FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider as I PrepareMy Comments for EPA?

You may find the followingsuggestions helpful for preparing yourcomments:

1. Explain your views as clearly aspossible.

2. Describe any assumptions that youused.

3. Provide copies of any technicalinformation and/or data you used thatsupport your views.

4. If you estimate potential burden orcosts, explain how you arrived at theestimate that you provide.

5. Provide specific examples toillustrate your concerns.

6. Make sure to submit yourcomments by the deadline in thisnotice.

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,be sure to identify the docket controlnumber assigned to this action in thesubject line on the first page of yourresponse. You may also provide thename, date, and Federal Registercitation.



II. What Action is the Agency Taking?EPA has received pesticide petitions

as follows proposing the establishmentand/or amendment of regulations forresidues of certain pesticide chemicalsin or on various food commoditiesunder section 408 of the Federal Food,Drug, and Comestic Act (FFDCA), 21U.S.C. 346a. EPA has determined thatthese petitions contain data orinformation regarding the elements setforth in section 408(d)(2); however, EPAhas not fully evaluated the sufficiencyof the submitted data at this time orwhether the data support granting of thepetitions. Additional data may beneeded before EPA rules on thepetitions.

List of SubjectsEnvironmental protection,

Agricultural commodities, Feedadditives, Food additives, Pesticidesand pests, Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

July 18, 2000.Janet L. Andersen,Director, Biopesticides and PollutionPrevention Division, Office of PesticidePrograms.

Summaries of PetitionsThe petitioner summaries of the

pesticide petitions are printed below asrequired by section 408(d)(3) of theFFDCA. The summaries of the petitionswere prepared by the petitioners andrepresent the view of the petitioners.The petition summaries announces theavailability of a description of theanalytical methods available to EPA forthe detection and measurement of thepesticide chemical residues or anexplanation of why no such method isneeded.

I. Natural Industries, Inc.

0F6163EPA has received a pesticide petition

0F6163 from Natural Industries, Inc.,6223 Theall Road, Houston, TX 77066,proposing pursuant to section 408(d) ofthe Federal Food, Drug, and CosmeticAct (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), toamend 40 CFR part 180 to establish anexemption from the requirement of atolerance for microbial pesticideStreptomyces lydicus WYEC 108.

Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) ofthe FFDCA, as amended, NaturalIndustries, Inc. has submitted thefollowing summary of information, data,and arguments in support of theirpesticide petition. This summary wasprepared by Natural Industries, Inc. andEPA has not fully evaluated the meritsof the pesticide petition. The summarymay have been edited by EPA if the

terminology used was unclear, thesummary contained extraneousmaterial, or the summaryunintentionally made the readerconclude that the findings reflectedEPA’s position and not the position ofthe petitioner.

A. Product Name and Proposed UsePractices

The active ingredient Streptomyceslydicus WYEC 108 is intended for use asa biological fungicide for the control ofsoil borne plant root rot and damping-off fungi. Fungi controlled include:Fusarium, Rhizoctonia, Pythium,Phytophthora, Phytomatotricum,Aphanomyces, Monosprascus,Armillaria and other root-decay fungi.The active ingredient colonizes the rootsystem, thus out competing otherharmful fungi, and enhances plantvitality.

B. Product Identity/Chemistry1. Identity of the pesticide and

corresponding residues. Streptomyceslydicus WYEC 108 colonizes thegrowing root tips of plants and acts asa mycoparasite of fungal root pathogensto protect plants. Root colonization is aform of competitive exclusion of apathogen from the root system. Othermechanisms of action include theproduction and excretion of anti-fungalmetabolites (e.g., antibiotics and/or lowmolecular weight anti-fungalcompounds) into the rhizospheresurrounding the roots of colonizedplants, and mycoparasitism of thespores and vegetative mycelium of thefungal pathogens (e.g., via colonizationof the spores of hyphae of the fungus,followed by the production of lyticenzymes such as chitinase). Nodeleterious effects to plants have beenobserved as a result of excretion of anti-fungal compounds from Streptomyceslydicus WYEC 108.

2. A statement of why an analyticalmethod for detecting and measuring thelevels of the pesticide residue are notneeded. An analytical method forresidues is not applicable. End-useproducts of Streptomyces lydicus WYEC108 will be intended for greenhouse,nursery and turf grass use (food andnon-food) as a soil mix or a soil drench.The products will be applied only to thesoil, not to growing crops directly, andare not intended for use in irrigationsystems. Residues of Streptomyceslydicus WYEC 108 are not expected onagricultural commodities.

C. Mammalian Toxicological ProfileThe active ingredient Streptomyces

lydicus WYEC 108 and the end-useproduct Actinovatetm Soluble have been

evaluated for toxicity through oral,dermal, pulmonary, and eye routes ofexposure. The results of the studieshave indicated toxicity category IV,which pose no significant human healthrisks.

For the active ingredient, the acutepulmonary toxicity/pathogenicity in ratsis greater than 9.1 x 108 colony formingunits (CFU) per animal and the acuteinjection toxicity/pathogenicity in ratsis greater than 9.33 x 108 cfu per animal.No pathogenic or infective effects wereobserved in the studies. For the end-useformulation, the acute oral toxicity inrats was greater than 5,050 milligramsper kilograms (mg/kg) (toxicity categoryIV), eye irritation in rabbits was notobserved at a dose of 0.1 milliliters (mL)(toxicity category IV) and skin irritationin rabbits was not observed at a dose of0.5 mL (toxicity category IV). Since itsdiscovery no incidents ofhypersensitivity have been reported byresearchers, manufacturers or users.

A waiver is being requested for acutedermal toxicity/pathogenicity based onthe fact that there was no toxicity orpathogenicity in the pulmonary andinjection studies, and no effects wereobserved in the skin irritation study.Dermal toxicity or pathogenicity wouldnot be expected for this activeingredient. Finally, the organism hasnever been reported as a pathogen ofhumans, or as causing any type ofadverse effect to humans, in publishedliterature or through commercial use.

D. Aggregate Exposure1. Dietary exposure—i. Food. Dietary

exposure from use of Streptomyceslydicus WYEC 108, as proposed, isminimal. Streptomyces lydicus WYEC108 is applied as a soil mix or soildrench. It is not applied to growingcrops directly. Residues of Streptomyceslydicus WYEC 108 are not expected onagricultural commodities.

ii. Drinking water. Similarly, exposureto humans from residues ofStreptomyces lydicus WYEC 108 inconsumed drinking water would beunlikely. Streptomyces lydicus WYEC108 is a naturally-occurring soilmicroorganism found in soil typesworld-wide. While spores ofStreptomyces lydicus WYEC 108 may befound in aquatic environments, possiblybecause they are washed-in fromsurrounding terrestrial habitats, they arenot known to grow or thrive in aquaticenvironments.

2. Non-dietary exposure. Thepotential for non-dietary exposure to thegeneral population, including infantsand children, is unlikely as theproposed use sites are agricultural andhorticultural settings. However, non-



dietary exposures would not beexpected to pose any quantifiable riskdue to a lack of residues of toxicologicalconcern. Person protective equipmentmitigates the potential for exposure toapplicators and handlers of theproposed products, when used inagricultural and horticultural settings.

E. Cumulative ExposureIt is not expected that, when used as

proposed, Streptomyces lydicus WYEC108 would result in residues that wouldremain in human food items.

F. Safety Determination1. U.S. population. Streptomyces

lydicus WYEC 108 is not pathogenic orinfective to mammals. There have beenno reports of toxins or secondarymetabolites associated with theorganism, and acute toxicity studieshave shown that Streptomyces lydicusWYEC 108 is non-toxic, non-pathogenic,and non-irritating. Streptomyces lydicusWYEC 108 is applied to the soil. It is notapplied to growing crops directly.Residues of Streptomyces lydicus WYEC108 are not expected on agriculturalcommodities, and therefore, exposure tothe general U.S. population, from theproposed uses, is not anticipated.

2. Infants and children. As mentionedabove, residues of Streptomyces lydicusWYEC 108 are not expected onagricultural commodities. There is areasonable certainty of no harm forinfants and children from exposure toStreptomyces lydicus WYEC 108 fromthe proposed uses.

G. Effects on the Immune and EndocrineSystems

Streptomyces lydicus WYEC 108 is anaturally-occurring, non-pathogenic soilorganism. To date there is no evidenceto suggest that Streptomyces lydicusWYEC 108 functions in a mannersimilar to any known hormone, or thatit acts as an endocrine disrupter.

H. Existing TolerancesThere is no U.S. EPA tolerance

established for Streptomyces lydicusWYEC 108.

I. International TolerancesA Codex Alimentarium Commission

Maximum Residue Level is not requiredfor Streptomyces lydicus WYEC 108.

II. Encore Technologies LLC

0F6170EPA has received a pesticide petition

0F6170 from Encore Technologies LLC,111 Cheshire Lane, Minnetonka, MN55305, proposing pursuant to section408(d) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d),to amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish

an exemption from the requirement of atolerance for microbial pesticideColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae.

Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) ofthe FFDCA, as amended, EncoreTechnologies LLC has submitted thefollowing summary of information, data,and arguments in support of theirpesticide petition. This summary wasprepared by Encore Technologies LLCand EPA has not fully evaluated themerits of the pesticide petition. Thesummary may have been edited by EPAif the terminology used was unclear, thesummary contained extraneousmaterial, or the summaryunintentionally made the readerconclude that the findings reflectedEPA’s position and not the position ofthe petitioner.

A. Product Name and Proposed UsePractices

Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae is a naturally occurring fungusthat is pathogenic to the weeds round-leaved mallow (Malva pusila), smallflowered mallow (Malva parviflora),common mallow (Malva neglecta), andvelvet leaf (Abutilon theophrasti), all ofwhich are members of the familyMalvaceae. The organism will infectand kill round-leaved and smallflowered mallows at any stage ofgrowth, from seedling to mature plant.Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae causes disease lesions that willcompletely encircle the stems andpetioles of mallow, causing the plant tocollapse in 2 to 4 weeks.

The end-use formulation, Mallet WP,is a two-component product. Mallet WPComponent A consists of a 16-oz. bottlecontaining a water soluble sporenutrient and rehydrating agent thatactivates the spores prior to application.Mallet WP Component M consists of abag containing a water suspendibledried fungal spore formulation ofColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae. The product is applied to fieldcrops at an early stage to control targetweeds.

B. Product Identity/Chemistry1. Identity of the pesticide and

corresponding residues. Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae wasoriginally isolated and characterized byDr. Knud Mortensen, AgricultureCanada Research Scientist, Regina,Saskatchewan in 1982. Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae has beenreported as indigenous to the provincesof Saskatchewan and Manitoba,occurring as an endemic pathogen ofround-leaved mallow producing lesionson aerial parts. The active ingredient is

registered in Canada as BioMal forcontrol of round-leaved mallow in fieldcrops. Extensive efficacy and fieldresearch trials were conducted inCanada, with results showing that theorganism provided consistent andeffective control over a wide variety ofenvironmental conditions. Since it’sdiscovery in 1982, there have been noreports of adverse effects, sensitivity orreaction of any type related to use orhandling of this organism.

2. A statement of why an analyticalmethod for detecting and measuring thelevels of the pesticide residue are notneeded. An analytical method forresidues is not applicable. The use ofColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae calls for application to fieldcrops at an early stage for control ofmallow species. Consequently, there isa considerable time lag betweenapplication and harvesting of crops.Since survival of the organism is in partdependent on existence of the hostplant, it is unlikely that application willresult in the presence of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae in foodcrops. Furthermore, the host weedspecies are not palatable forage for cattleor other livestock populations, eitherthrough direct feeding upon diseasedplants, or indirectly through feedingupon crops that have been treated withColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae. Residues of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae are notexpected on agricultural commodities.

C. Mammalian Toxicological ProfileThe active ingredient Colletotrichum

gloeosporioides f. sp. malvae has beenevaluated for toxicity through oral,dermal, pulmonary, intraperitoneal, andeye routes of exposure. The results ofthe studies have indicated there are nosignificant human health risks.

For the active ingredient, the acuteoral toxicity/pathogenicity in rats isgreater than 6 x 105 cfu/(g) grams, theacute dermal toxicity/pathogenicity inrats is greater than 4.21 x 107 cfu/g, theacute pulmonary toxicity/pathogenicityin rats is greater than 4.55 x 104 cfu peranimal, and the acute intraperitonealtoxicity/pathogenicity in rats is greaterthan 5.7 x 105 cfu per animal. Nopathogenic or infective effects wereobserved in the studies. Data on theend-use formulation is cited from thesubstantially similar product Collego(Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.aeschynomene, EPA Reg. No. 70571–1).For the end-use formulation, slight eyeirritation in rabbits was observed at adose of 0.1 mL (toxicity category IV) andskin irritation in rabbits was notobserved at a dose of 0.5 mL (ToxicityCategory IV). Since its discovery, no



incidents of hypersensitivity have beenreported by researchers, manufacturersor users.

D. Aggregate Exposure1. Dietary exposure—i. Food. Dietary

exposure from use of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae, asproposed, is minimal. The use ofColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae calls for application to fieldcrops at an early stage for control ofmallow species. Consequently, there isa considerable time lag betweenapplication and harvesting of crops.Since survival of the organism is in partdependent on existence of the hostplant, it is unlikely that application willresult in the presence of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae in foodcrops. Residues of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae are notexpected on agricultural commodities.

ii. Drinking water. Similarly, exposureto humans from residues ofColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae in consumed drinking waterwould be unlikely. Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae is anaturally-occurring microorganismknown to exist in terrestrial habitats inthe presence of a host plant, it is notknown to grow or thrive in aquaticenvironments.

2. Non-dietary exposure. Thepotential for non-dietary exposure to thegeneral population, including infantsand children, is unlikely as theproposed use sites are agriculturalsettings. However, non-dietaryexposures would not be expected topose any quantifiable risk due to a lackof residues of toxicological concern.Person protective equipment mitigatesthe potential for exposure to applicatorsand handlers of the proposed products,when used in agricultural settings.

E. Cumulative ExposureIt is not expected that, when used as

proposed, Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f.sp. malvae wouldresult in residues that would remain inhuman food items.

F. Safety Determination1. U.S. population. Colletotrichum

gloeosporioides f. sp. malvae is notpathogenic or infective to mammals.There have been no reports of toxins orsecondary metabolites associated withthe organism, and acute toxicity studieshave shown that Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae is non-toxic, non-pathogenic, and non-irritating. Residues of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae are notexpected on agricultural commodities,and therefore, exposure to the general

U.S. population, from the proposeduses, is not anticipated.

2. Infants and children. As mentionedabove, residues of Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae are notexpected on agricultural commodities.There is a reasonable certainty of noharm for infants and children fromexposure to Colletotrichumgloeosporioides f. sp. malvae from theproposed uses.

G. Effects on the Immune and EndocrineSystems

Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae is a naturally-occurring, non-pathogenic microorganism. To datethere is no evidence to suggest thatColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae functions in a manner similar toany known hormone, or that it acts asan endocrine disrupter.

H. Existing Tolerances

There is no U.S. EPA Tolerance forColletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae.

I. International Tolerances

A Codex Alimentarium CommissionMaximum Residue Level is not requiredfor Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp.malvae.[FR Doc. 00–19347 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6560–50–F


[FRL–6843–6]

Notification of Additional PublicListening Session on the Draft Title VIGuidance Documents

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Notice of public listeningsession.

SUMMARY: This notice announces theaddition of a seventh public listeningsession on the draft Title VI guidancedocuments. On June 27, 2000, EPApublished a Federal Register notice (65FR 39649) containing two draft Title VIguidance documents for publiccomment regarding Title VI of the CivilRights Act of 1964. The first documentis entitled the Title VI Guidance for EPAAssistance Recipients AdministeringEnvironmental Permitting Programs(‘‘Draft Recipient Guidance’’). Thesecond document is entitled the DraftRevised Guidance for Investigating TitleVI Administrative ComplaintsChallenging Permits (‘‘Draft RevisedInvestigation Guidance’’).

EPA previously announced that sixpublic listening sessions would be heldto receive comments on the draft TitleVI guidance documents. The first publiclistening session, held in the mid-Atlantic area, occurred the day beforethe documents were published in theFederal Register. In an effort to allowthe public the opportunity to review thedraft documents prior to attending alistening session, EPA will hold anothersession in that region.

The meeting will be held onWednesday, August 9, 2000, from 4:00p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the ShenandoahRoom (4th floor) of the U.S.Environmental Protection AgencyRegion 3 office located at 1650 ArchStreet in Philadelphia, PA. Consistentwith the other listening sessions, thismeeting will be attended by the Directorof the Office of Civil Rights and keyregional personnel. Members of thepublic wishing to make oral commentsduring the public listening session willbe limited to not more than five (5)minutes and must register at themeeting site the day of the conference.Seating will be limited and available ona first come, first-served basis. If anyoneattending the listening session needsspecial accommodations (i.e., signlanguage interpreter, alternative textformat for materials), please contactMavis Sanders of the EPA Office of CivilRights (OCR) at (202) 564–7272 at leastthree business days before the EPAlistening session.DATES: The meeting will be held onAugust 9, 2000.ADDRESSES: The meeting will be heldfrom 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in theShenandoah Room (4th floor) of the U.S.Environmental Protection AgencyRegion 3 office located at 1650 ArchStreet, Philadelphia, PA.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mavis Sanders, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Office of Civil Rights(1201A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,NW, Washington, DC, 20460, telephone(202) 564–7272.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Allcomments on the draft Title VI guidancedocuments must be received in writingby EPA before August 28, 2000.Comments received by the Agency willbe carefully considered in the revisionof the draft guidance documents. Publiccomments should be mailed to: Title VIGuidance Comments, Office of CivilRights (1201A), 1200 PennsylvaniaAvenue NW, Washington DC, 20460, orsubmitted to the following e-mailaddress: [email protected]. Pleaseinclude your name and address, and,optionally, your affiliation.



Information regarding the other publiclistening sessions, a current list ofscheduled outreach activities, as well asthe June 27, 2000, Federal Registernotice containing the draft guidancedocuments is available on the EPA OCRWeb site at www.epa.gov/civilrights.


Ann E. Goode,Director, Office of Civil Rights.[FR Doc. 00–19377 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]


EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THEUNITED STATES

Notice of Open Special Meeting of theAdvisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United States(Export-Import Bank)

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee wasestablished by P.L. 98–181, November30, 1983, to advise the Export-ImportBank on its programs and to providecomments for inclusion in the reports ofthe Export-Import Bank of the UnitedStates to Congress.

TIME AND PLACE: Friday, August 11,2000, at 9:30 a.m.to 12:00 p.m. Themeeting will be held at the Export-Import Bank in Room 1143, 811Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC20571.

AGENDA: This meeting will include adiscussion of the joint NationalAcademy of Science and Institute ofInternational Economics study titled‘‘The Future of the U.S. Ex-Im Bank’’,and other matters.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The meeting willbe open to public participation, and thelast 10 minutes will be set aside for oralquestions or comments. Members of thepublic may also file written statement(s)before or after the meeting. If any personwishes auxiliary aids (such as a signlanguage interpreter) or other specialaccommodations, please contact, priorto August 4, 2000, Teri Stumpf, Room1215, Vermont Avenue, NW,Washington, DC 20571, Voice: (202)565–3502 or TDD (202) 565–3377.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Forfurther information, contact TeriStumpf, Room 1215, 811 Vermont Ave.,NW, Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565–3502.

John M. Niehuss,General Counsel.[FR Doc. 00–19379 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]


FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCECORPORATION

Notice of Agency Meeting

Pursuant to the provisions of the‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ (5U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given thatat 10:24 a.m. on Thursday, July 27,2000, the Board of Directors of theFederal Deposit Insurance Corporationmet in closed session to considermatters relating to the Corporation’scorporate and supervisory activities.

In calling the meeting, the Boarddetermined, on motion of Director EllenS. Seidman (Director, Office of Thrift,Supervision), seconded by Director JohnD. Hawke, Jr. (Comptroller of theCurrency), concurred in by ViceChairman Andrew C. Hove, Jr., thatCorporation business required itsconsideration of the matters on less thanseven days’ notice to the public; that nonotice of the meeting earlier than July25, 2000, was practicable; that thepublic interest did not requireconsideration of the matters in ameeting open to public observation; andthat the matters could be considered ina closed meeting by authority ofsubsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8),(c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(10) of the‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ (5U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8),(c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(10)).

The meeting was held in the BoardRoom of the FDIC Building located at550—17th Street, N.W., Washington,DC.

Dated: July 27, 2000.Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.James D. LaPierre,Deputy Executive Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19472 Filed 7–28–00; 11:05 am]BILLING CODE 6714–01–M

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Announcement of BoardApproval Under Delegated Authorityand Submission to OMB

SUMMARY:

BackgroundNotice is hereby given of the final

approval of proposed informationcollection(s) by the Board of Governorsof the Federal Reserve System (Board)under OMB delegated authority, as per5 CFR 1320.16 (OMB Regulations onControlling Paperwork Burdens on thePublic). Board-approved collections ofinformation are incorporated into theofficial OMB inventory of currentlyapproved collections of information.

Copies of the OMB 83–Is and supportingstatements and approved collection ofinformation instruments are placed intoOMB’s public docket files. The FederalReserve may not conduct or sponsor,and the respondent is not required torespond to, an information collectionthat has been extended, revised, orimplemented on or after October 1,1995, unless it displays a currently validOMB control number.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Federal Reserve Board ClearanceOfficer—Mary M. West—Division ofResearch and Statistics, Board ofGovernors of the Federal ReserveSystem, Washington, DC 20551 (202–452–3829). OMB Desk Officer—Alexander T. Hunt—Office ofInformation and Regulatory Affairs,Office of Management and Budget, NewExecutive Office Building, Room 3208,Washington, DC 20503 (202–395–7860).

Final Approval Under OMB DelegatedAuthority of the Extension for ThreeYears, With Revision of the FollowingReports

1. Report title: Monthly Survey ofIndustrial Electricity Use.

Agency form number: FR 2009.OMB Control number: 7100–0057.Frequency: Monthly.Reporters: FR 2009a/c: Electric utility

companies; FR 2009b: Cogenerators.Annual reporting hours: FR 2009a/c:

2,196 hours; FR 2009b: 1,188 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

FR 2009a/c: 1 hour; FR 2009b: 30minutes.

Number of respondents: FR 2009a/c:183; FR 2009b: 198.

Small businesses are affected.General description of report: This

information collection is voluntary (12U.S.C. 225a, 263, 353 et seq., and 461)and individual respondent data aregiven confidential treatment (5 U.S.C.552(b)(4)).

Abstract: The survey collectsinformation on the volume of electricpower delivered during the month toclasses of industrial customers. Thereare now three versions of the survey: theFR 2009a, collects information fromelectric utilities that report using theStandard Industrial Classification (SIC)codes, the FR 2009b collectsinformation from manufacturing andmining facilities that generate electricpower for their own use, and the 2009c,collects information from electricutilities that report using the NorthAmerican Industry ClassificationSystem (NAICS).

Current Actions: During the next twoyears the industrial output index will berevised to reflect the new NAICS. Thepublished series will be categorized



under the NAICS codes instead of thecurrent SIC codes. To facilitate thistransition process, the Federal Reservewill ask utilities to reclassify theircustomers using the new codes. The FR2009c has been created in the NAICSformat for use by respondents that havemade the transition from SIC to NAICScodes. The FR 2009a would becompleted only by the respondents thatchoose to report SIC codes. Thisapproach would not impose any addedburden on the respondents. The FederalReserve also proposes to eliminate theFR 2009a after the two-year transitionperiod.

Final Approval Under OMB DelegatedAuthority of the Extension for ThreeYears, Without Revision, of theFollowing Reports

1. Report titles: Quarterly Report ofInterest Rates on Selected DirectConsumer Installment Loans; QuarterlyReport of Credit Card Plans.

Agency form number: FR 2835; FR2835a.

OMB Control number: 7100–0085.Frequency: Quarterly.Reporters: Commercial Banks.Annual reporting hours: FR 2835: 90

hours; FR 2835a: 200 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

FR 2835: 9 minutes; FR 2835a: 30minutes.

Number of respondents: FR 2835: 150;FR 2835a: 100.

Small businesses are not affected.General description of report: These

information collections are voluntary(12 U.S.C. 248(a)(2)). The FR 2835aindividual respondent data are givenconfidential treatment (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)), the FR 2835 data however, is notgiven confidential treatment.

Abstract: The FR 2835 collects themost common interest rate charged at asample of 150 commercial banks on twotypes of consumer loans made in a givenweek each quarter: new auto loans andother loans for consumer goods andpersonal expenditures. The data arereported for the calendar weekbeginning on the first Monday of eachsurvey month (February, May, August,and November).

The FR 2835a collects information ontwo measures of credit card interestrates from a sample of 100 commercialbanks (authorized panel size), selectedto include banks with $1 billion or morein credit card receivables, and arepresentative group of smaller issuers.The data are representative of interestrates paid by consumers on bank creditcards because the panel includesvirtually all large issuers and anappropriate sample of other issuers.

2. Report title: Report of Changes inForeign Investments (Made Pursuant toRegulation K).

Agency form number: FR 2064.OMB Control number: 7100–0109.Frequency: Event-generated.Reporters: Member banks, Edge and

agreement corporations, and bankholding companies.

Annual reporting hours: 750 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

30 minutes.Number of respondents: 50.Small businesses are not affected.General description of report: This

information collection is mandatory (12U.S.C. 602, 625 and 1844) and is givenconfidential treatment (5 U.S.C.552(b)(4)).

Abstract: Member banks, Edge andagreement corporations, and bankholding companies are required to filethe FR 2064 to record changes in theirinternational investments. The FR 2064report is event generated and is filed nolater than the last day of the monthfollowing the month in which thechange occurred. The Federal Reserveuses the information to monitorinvestments in the internationaloperations of U.S. banking organizationsand to fulfill its supervisoryresponsibility under Regulation K.

Final Approval Under OMB DelegatedAuthority of the Discontinuation of theFollowing Reports

1. Report title: Quarterly GasolineCompany Report.

Agency form number: FR 2580.OMB control number: 7100–0009.Frequency: Quarterly.Reporters: Gasoline companies.Annual reporting hours: 4 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

9 minutes.Number of respondents: 7.Small businesses are not affected.Abstract: The FR 2580 collected

outstanding balances on retail creditcard accounts at gasoline companies.The number of FR 2580 reporters hasdeclined over time as the industrystructure has changed. Initially, the datawere collected from the universe ofapproximately thirty gasolinecompanies; subsequently, some smallercompanies withdrew from the sample orwere merged into other companies. Inrecent years some major companieshave entered into Aco-branding@arrangements with banks and havesignificantly reduced, or eliminated,their own credit card portfolios. TheFederal Reserve will discontinue the FR2580 as of July 31, 2000 primarilybecause the number of respondents hasdwindled. The decrease in reporting isdue in part to the purchase of some of

the gasoline companies’ receivables bydepository institutions in recent years.Because of the difficulty in maintaininga meaningful sample and because of thesmall fraction of consumer credit thatthese receivables represent, the FederalReserve does not believe it is useful tocontinue the report.

Board of Governors of the Federal ReserveSystem, July 26, 2000.Jennifer J. Johnson,Secretary of the Board.[FR Doc. 00–19313 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6210–01–P


Agency Information CollectionActivities: Announcement of BoardApproval Under Delegated Authorityand Submission to OMB

Background

Notice is hereby given of the finalapproval of proposed informationcollection(s) by the Board of Governorsof the Federal Reserve System (Board)under OMB delegated authority, as per5 CFR 1320.16 (OMB Regulations onControlling Paperwork Burdens on thePublic). Board-approved collections ofinformation are incorporated into theofficial OMB inventory of currentlyapproved collections of information.Copies of the OMB 83–Is and supportingstatements and approved collection ofinformation instrument(s) are placedinto OMB’s public docket files. TheFederal Reserve may not conduct orsponsor, and the respondent is notrequired to respond to, an informationcollection that has been extended,revised, or implemented on or afterOctober 1, 1995, unless it displays acurrently valid OMB control number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Federal Reserve Board ClearanceOfficer—Mary M. West—Division ofResearch and Statistics, Board ofGovernors of the Federal ReserveSystem, Washington, DC 20551 (202–452–3829); OMB Desk Officer—Alexander T. Hunt—Office ofInformation and Regulatory Affairs,Office of Management and Budget, NewExecutive Office Building, Room 3208,Washington, DC 20503 (202–395–7860).

Final Approval Under OMB DelegatedAuthority of the Extension for ThreeYears, Without Revision, of theFollowing Reports

1. Report title: Report of TransactionAccounts, Other Deposits, and VaultCash; Report of Certain EurocurrencyTransactions.



Agency form number: FR 2900; FR2950/2951.

OMB control number: 7100–0087.Frequency: Weekly, quarterly.Reporters: Depository institutions.Annual reporting hours: 984,138

hours.Estimated average hours per response:

FR 2900: 3.50; FR 2950/2951: 1.00.Number of respondents: FR 2900:

4,813 weekly, and 5,880 quarterly; FR2950/2951: 497 weekly, and 2 quarterly.

Small businesses are affected.General description of report: These

information collections are mandatory:FR 2900 and FR 2950 (12 U.S.C. 248(a),461, 603, and 615) and FR 2951 (12U.S.C. 248(a), 461, and 347d) and aregiven confidential treatment (5 U.S.C.552(b)(4)).

Abstract: The FR 2900 report collectsinformation on deposits and relateditems from depository institutions thathave transaction accounts ornonpersonal time deposits and that arenot fully exempt from reserverequirements (‘‘nonexemptinstitutions’’). These institutions fileweekly if their total deposits are greaterthan or equal to the nonexempt depositcutoff and quarterly if their totaldeposits are less than the nonexemptdeposit cutoff. The FR 2950/2951collects information on Eurocurrencytransactions from depositoryinstitutions that obtain funds fromforeign (non-U.S.) sources or thatmaintain foreign branches. The FederalReserve raised the deposit cutoff used todetermine weekly versus quarterly FR2900 reporting (the ‘‘nonexempt cutoff’’)above its indexed level of $84.5 millionto $95 million. These mandatory reportsare used by the Federal Reserve foradministering Regulation D (ReserveRequirements of Depository Institutions)and for constructing, analyzing, andcontrolling the monetary and reserveaggregates.

2. Report title: Annual Report of TotalDeposits and Reservable Liabilities.

Agency form number: FR 2910a.OMB control number: 7100–0175.Frequency: Annual.Reporters: Depository institutions.Annual reporting hours: 2,734 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

30 minutes.Number of respondents: 5,468.Small businesses are affected.General description of report: This

information collection is mandatory (12U.S.C. 248(a) and 461) and is givenconfidential treatment (5 U.S.C.552(b)(4)).

Abstract: This report collects twoitems of information from depositoryinstitutions (other than U.S. branchesand agencies of foreign banks and Edge

and agreement corporations) that arefully exempt from reserve requirementsunder the Garn-St Germaine DepositoryInstitutions Act of 1982. This mandatoryreport is used by the Federal Reserve foradministering Regulation D (ReserveRequirements of Depository Institutions)and for constructing, analyzing, andcontrolling the monetary and reserveaggregates.

3. Report title: Allocation of LowReserve Tranche and ReservableLiabilities Exemption.

Agency form number: FR 2930/2930a.OMB control number: 7100–0088.Frequency: Annually, and on

occasion.Reporters: Depository institutions.Annual reporting hours: 64 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

15 minutes.Number of respondents: 255.Small businesses are affected.General description of report: This

information collection is mandatory: FR2930 (12 U.S.C. 248(a), 461, 603, and615) and FR 2930a (12 U.S.C. 248(a) and461). It is also given confidentialtreatment (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)).

Abstract: The FR 2930 and the FR2930a collect information on theallocation of the low reserve trancheand reservable liabilities exemption fordepository institutions having offices (orgroups of offices) that submit separateFR 2900 deposits reports. The datacollected on these reports are needed forthe calculation of required reserves.

4. Report title: Report of Foreign (Non-U.S.) Currency Deposits.

Agency form number: FR 2915.OMB control number: 7100–0237.Frequency: Quarterly.Reporters: Depository institutions.Annual reporting hours: 366 hours.Estimated average hours per response:


information collection is mandatory (12U.S.C. 248(a)(2) and 347d) and is givenconfidential treatment (5 U.S.C.552(b)(4)).

Abstract: The FR 2915 collects weeklyaverages of the amounts outstanding forforeign (non-U.S.) currency depositsheld at U.S. offices of depositoryinstitutions, converted to U.S. dollarsand included on the FR 2900 (OMB No.7100–0087), the principal depositsreport that is used for the calculation ofrequired reserves and for theconstruction of the monetary aggregates.Foreign currency deposits are subject toreserve requirements and, therefore, areincluded in the FR 2900. However,foreign currency deposits are notincluded in the monetary aggregates.

The FR 2915 data are used to backforeign currency deposits out of the FR2900 data for construction andinterpretation of the monetaryaggregates. The FR 2915 data are alsoused to monitor the volume of foreigncurrency deposits.

Final Approval Under OMB DelegatedAuthority of the Extension for ThreeYears, With Revision, of the FollowingReport

1. Report title: Daily Advance Reportof Deposits.

Agency form number: FR 2000.OMB control number: 7100–0087.Frequency: Daily.Reporters: Depository institutions.Annual reporting hours: 24,960 hours.Estimated average hours per response:



Abstract: This advance report iscommonly referred to as the Markstat D.The Markstat D report collects selecteddeposit and vault cash data for the mostrecent reporting week from a sample oflarge commercial banks and thriftsbefore such data become available forthe universe of all FR 2900 weeklyreporters. At present, ten data items (asubset of those on the FR 2900) arecollected on the report. The advancereport is used in the construction ofpreliminary estimates of the monetaryaggregates for the week just ending.

Current actions: The Federal Reservedropped three items from the FR 2000and reduced the authorized panel sizefrom 186 to 160 institutions. Theelimination of the three reporting itemsand the reduction of the authorizedpanel size reduces the reporting burdenby 15,662 hours.

Discontinuance of the Following ReportUnder OMB Delegated Authority

1. Report title: Quarterly Report ofSelected Deposits, Vault Cash, andReserve Liabilities.

Agency form number: FR 2910q.OMB control number: 7100–0175.Frequency: Quarterly.Reporters: Depository institutions.Annual reporting hours: 3,936 hours.Estimated average hours per response:

2 hours.Number of respondents: 492.Small businesses are affected.General description of report: This




Abstract: This report collectedinformation from depository institutions(other than U.S. branches and agenciesof foreign banks and Edge andagreement corporations) that are fullyexempt from reserve requirementsunder the Garn-St Germaine DepositoryInstitutions Act of 1982. This report wasused by the Federal Reserve foradministering Regulation D (ReserveRequirements of Depository Institutions)and for constructing, analyzing, andcontrolling the monetary and reserveaggregates. The Federal Reserveeliminated the exempt deposit cutoffand discontinued this report associatedwith that cutoff. The Federal Reservebelieves that, for exempt institutions,the quarterly reports of condition areadequate for quarterly benchmarking ofthe monetary aggregates. The FederalReserve also believes that by shifting thecurrent FR 2910q reporters to theannual, two-item FR 2910a, the Boardwill be able to adequately monitorcompliance with Regulation D. The shiftin reporting frequency of the almost 500FR 2910q respondents to the FR 2910awould reduce reporting burden by 3,690hours.



Agency Information CollectionActivities: Submission for OMBReview; Comment Request

AGENCY: Board of Governors of theFederal Reserve System (Board).

ACTION: Notice of information collectionto be submitted to OMB for review andapproval under the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995.

SUMMARY: In accordance with therequirements of the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.chapter 35), the Board, the FederalDeposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC),and the Office of the Comptroller of theCurrency (OCC) (collectively, the‘‘agencies’’), hereby give notice that theyplan to submit to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB)requests for review of the informationcollection system described below. TheAgencies may not conduct or sponsor,and the respondent is not required torespond to, an information collectionthat has been extended, revised, orimplemented on or after October 1,

1995, unless it displays a currently validOMB control number.

On May 22, 2000, the agencies, underthe auspices of the Federal FinancialInstitutions Examination Council(FFIEC), requested public comment for60 days on the extension, withoutrevision, of the currently approvedinformation collection: the CountryExposure Report for U.S. Branches andAgencies of Foreign Banks (FFIEC 019).The agencies, however, are making aminor clarification to the FFIEC 019general instructions regarding thetreatment of credit derivatives asguarantees, effective September 30,2000.DATES: Comments must be submitted onor before August 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: Comments, which shouldrefer to the OMB control number,should be addressed to the OMB deskofficer: Alexander T. Hunt, Office ofInformation and Regulatory Affairs,Office of Management and Budget, NewExecutive Office Building, Room 3208,Washington, DC 20503.

Board: Written comments on theFFIEC 019 should be addressed toJennifer J. Johnson, Secretary, Board ofGovernors of the Federal ReserveSystem, 20th and C Streets, NW.,Washington, DC 20551, or mailedelectronically [email protected] addressed to Ms. Johnsonalso may be delivered to the Board’smail room between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15p.m., and to the security control roomoutside of those hours. Both the mailroom and the security control room areaccessible from the courtyard entranceon 20th Street between ConstitutionAvenue and C Street, NW. Commentsreceived may be inspected in room M–P–500 between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.,except as provided in section 261.14 ofthe Board’s Rules Regarding Availabilityof Information, 12 CFR 261.14(a).FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Acopy of the Paperwork Reduction ActSubmission (OMB 83–I), supportingstatement, and other documents thathave been submitted to OMB for reviewand approval may be requested from theagency clearance officer, whose nameappears below.

Board: Mary M. West, Federal ReserveBoard Clearance Officer (202–452–3829), Division of Research andStatistics, Board of Governors of theFederal Reserve System, Washington,DC 20551. Telecommunications Devicefor the Deaf (TDD) users may contactDiane Jenkins (202–452–3544), Board ofGovernors of the Federal ReserveSystem, Washington, DC 20551.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Proposal To Extend for Three YearsWith Minor Instructional Clarificationthe Following Currently ApprovedCollection of Information

Report title: Country Exposure Reportfor U.S. Branches and Agencies ofForeign Banks

Form number: FFIEC 019.OMB number: 7100–0213.Frequency of response: Quarterly.Affected Public: U.S. branches and

agencies of foreign banks.Number of respondents: 230.Estimated average hours per response:

10 hours.Estimated Annual reporting hours:

9,200 hours.

General Description of Report

This information collection ismandatory: 12 U.S.C. 3105 and 3108 forthe Board of Governors of the FederalReserve System; sections 7 and 10 of theFederal Deposit Insurance Act (12U.S.C. 1817, 1820) for the FederalDeposit Insurance Corporation; and theNational Bank Act (12 U.S.C. 161) forthe Office of the Comptroller of theCurrency). This information collectionis given confidential treatment. (5 U.S.C.552(b)(8)). Small businesses (that is,small U.S. branches and agencies offoreign banks) are affected.

Abstract

All individual U.S. branches andagencies of foreign banks that have morethan $30 million in direct claims onresidents of foreign countries must filethe FFIEC 019 report quarterly.Currently, all respondents reportadjusted exposure amounts to the fivelargest countries having at least $20million in total adjusted exposure. TheAgencies collect this data to monitor theextent to which such branches andagencies are pursuing prudent countryrisk diversification policies and limitingpotential liquidity pressures. Nochanges are proposed to the FFIEC 019reporting form, however, minorclarifications are proposed to theinstructions.

Current Actions: The agencies did notreceive any comments in response to thenotice published in the Federal Registeron May 22, 2000, (65 FR 32098)requesting public comment on theextension without revision of thisinformation collection. The agencies,however, are making a minorclarification to the FFIEC 019 generalinstructions regarding the treatment ofcredit derivatives as guarantees,effective September 30, 2000.

Request for Comment

Comments are invited on:



a. Whether the informationcollections are necessary for the properperformance of the agencies’ functions,including whether the information haspractical utility;

b. The accuracy of the agencies’estimates of the burden of theinformation collections, including thevalidity of the methodology andassumptions used;

c. Ways to enhance the quality,utility, and clarity of the information tobe collected;

d. Ways to minimize the burden ofinformation collections on respondents,including through the use of automatedcollection techniques or other forms ofinformation technology; and

e. Estimates of capital or start up costsand costs of operation, maintenance,and purchase of services to provideinformation.

Comments submitted in response tothis notice will be shared among theagencies and will be summarized orincluded in the agencies’ requests forOMB approval. All comments willbecome a matter of public record.Written comments should address theaccuracy of the burden estimates andways to minimize burden including theuse of automated collection techniquesor the use of other forms of informationtechnology as well as other relevantaspects of the information collectionrequest.




TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Monday,August 7, 2000.PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles FederalReserve Board Building, 20th and CStreets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.STATUS: Closed.MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. Personnel actions (appointments,promotions, assignments,reassignments, and salary actions)involving individual Federal ReserveSystem employees.

2. Any items carried forward from apreviously announced meeting.CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board;202–452–3204.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You maycall 202–452–3206 beginning atapproximately 5 p.m. two business daysbefore the meeting for a recordedannouncement of bank and bankholding company applicationsscheduled for the meeting; or you maycontact the Board’s Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for anelectronic announcement that not onlylists applications, but also indicatesprocedural and other information aboutthe meeting.

Dated: July 28, 2000.Jennifer J. Johnson,Secretary of the Board.[FR Doc. 00–19585 Filed 7–28–00; 3:36 pm]BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Granting of Request for EarlyTermination of the Waiting PeriodUnder the Premerger NotificationRules

Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of theHart-Scott-Rodino AntitrustImprovements Act of 1976, requirespersons contemplating certain mergersor acquisitions to give the Federal TradeCommission and the AssistanceAttorney General advance notice and towait designated periods beforeconsummation of such plans. Section7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies,in individual cases, to terminate thiswaiting period prior to its expirationand requires that notice of this action bepublished in the Federal Register.

The following transactions weregranted early termination of the waitingperiod provided by law and thepremerger notification rules. The grantswere made by the Federal TradeCommission and the Assistant AttorneyGeneral for the Antitrust Division of theDepartment of Justice. Neither agencyintends to take any action with respectto these proposed acquisitions duringthe applicable waiting period.

Trans No. Acquiring Acquired Entities

20002276 ................ Pfizer Inc. ............................................. Warner-Lambert Company ................... Warner-Lambert Company20003386 ................ Novell, Inc. ........................................... Redleaf Group, Inc. .............................. Redleaf Group, Inc.20003390 ................ Prime 66 Partners, L.P ........................ NTL Incorporated ................................. NTL Incorporated20003398 ................ Prime 66 Partners, L.P ........................ CoreComm Limited .............................. CoreComm Limited20003405 ................ Lincare Holdings Inc. ........................... United Medical, Inc. ............................. United Medical, Inc.20003429 ................ Vodafone AirTouch Plc ........................ James R. Leininger .............................. ATX Technologies, Inc.20003443 ................ Public Service Enterprise Group Incor-

porated.Panda Energy International, Inc. ......... Panda Oneta Power, L.P., Union

Power Partners, L.P........................................................... Trans-Union Interstate Pipeline, L.P.

20003450 ................ COMSYS Holding, Inc. ........................ Cotelligent, Inc. .................................... Cotelligent, Inc.20003452 ................ KELP—1987 Limited Partnership ........ Bay View Capital Corporation .............. Bankers Mutual Mortgage, Inc.20003457 ................ ShopKo Stores, Inc. ............................. P.M. Place Stores Company ................ P.M. Place Stores Company20003472 ................ The Walt Disney Company .................. Timothy P. Mayhew ............................. Hibernia Communications, LLC20003477 ................ Geoworks Corporation ......................... Science Applications International Cor-

poration.Telcordia Tecnologies, Inc.

20003483 ................ Hewlett-Packard Company .................. Redswitch, Inc. ..................................... Redswitch, Inc.20003494 ................ UnitedGlobalCom, Inc. ......................... Cignal Global Communications, Inc. .... Cignal Global Communications, Inc.20003497 ................ Norske Skogindustrier ASA ................. Fletcher Challenge Limited .................. Fletcher Challenge Paper Limited20003501 ................ MDU Resources Group, Inc. ................ Philip H. Wagner .................................. The Wagner-Smith Company, Wagner-

Smith Pump&Systems, Inc........................................................... Wagner-Smith Equipment Co., Frebco,

Inc., Newco, Inc.

TRANSACTIONS GRANTED EARLY TERMINATION—06/20/2000

20003382 ................ Berkshire Hathaway Inc. ...................... Edward Bridge ...................................... Ben Bridge Corporation20003383 ................ Edward Bridge ...................................... Berkshire Hathaway Inc. ...................... Berkshire Hathaway Inc.




20003474 ................ Lernout & Hauspie Speech ProductsN.V.

Rodeer Systems, Inc. ........................... Rodeer Systems, Inc.

20003478 ................ Science Applications International Cor-poration.

Geoworks Corporation ......................... Geoworks Corporation

20003486 ................ First Union Corporation ........................ First Albany Companies Inc. ................ First Albany Companies Inc.20003500 ................ The Progressive Corporation ............... PowerSports, Inc. ................................. PowerSports, Inc.20003502 ................ FairPoint Communications, Inc. ........... W.B.W. Trust Number One .................. Comerco, Inc.20003511 ................ 3Com Corporation ................................ AnyDay.com, Inc. ................................. AnyDay.com, Inc.20003536 ................ Michael B. Bates .................................. InfoSpace, Inc. ..................................... InfoSpace, Inc.20003548 ................ Avanex Corporation ............................. David F. Millet ...................................... Holographix, Inc.20003558 ................ Teligent, Inc. ......................................... Alan Widra ............................................ American Long Lines, Inc.20003572 ................ Chevron Corporation ............................ PG&E Corporation ............................... PG&E Energy Services Ventures, LLC20003576 ................ Bernard J. Ebbers ................................ KLLM Transport Services, Inc. ............ KLLM Transport Services, Inc.20003590 ................ Matthew Schoenberg ........................... Diageo plc ............................................ Burger King Corporation20003609 ................ New England Business Service, Inc. ... Premium Wear, Inc. ............................. Premium Wear, Inc.20003632 ................ Mohawk Corp ....................................... PSC Inc. ............................................... PSC Inc.


20000238 ................ Allied Waste Industries, Inc. ................ Republic Services, Inc. ........................ Green Valley Environmental Corp.,AAA Disposal of Tenn., Inc.

.......................................................... Republic Ser. of Tenn. I, LLC, SafetyLights, Inc.

.......................................................... York Waste Disposal, Inc., AAA Dis-posal Service, Inc.

20000239 ................ Republic Services, Inc. ........................ Allied Waste Industries, Inc. ................ American Disposal Services of Mis-souri, Inc.

.......................................................... BFI Waste Systems of New Jersey,Inc.

.......................................................... Tom Luciano’s Disposal Service, Inc.20003205 ................ CompDent Corporation ........................ OHS, Inc. .............................................. OHS, Inc.20003214 ................ Total Fina Elf S.A ................................. Applied Power Inc. ............................... Barry Wright Corporation20003527 ................ The BISYS Group, Inc. ........................ PRIMEDIA Inc. ..................................... Pictorial Holdings Inc.20003535 ................ Citadel Communications Corporation .. Dick Broadcasting Company, Inc. of

Tennessee.Dick Broadcasting Company, Inc. of

Tennessee20003540 ................ Calpine Corporation ............................. Edison International ............................. Auburndale Power Partners, Limited

Partnership20003542 ................ Scripps Health ...................................... SC Physicians Investment Company,

Inc..SC Physicians Organization, Inc.

20003545 ................ Clear Channel Communications, Inc. .. Eastern Radio Assets I, LLC ............... Eastern Radio Assets I, LLC20003547 ................ Pemstar, Inc. ........................................ John E. Miller ....................................... Turtle Mountain Corporation20003549 ................ Casella Waste Systems, Inc. ............... Louisiana-Pacific Corporation .............. Louisiana-Pacific Corporation20003550 ................ Louisiana-Pacific Corporation .............. Casella Waste Systems, Inc. ............... Casella Waste Systems, Inc.20003552 ................ Quanta Services, Inc. ........................... IRBY Corp ............................................ IRBY Corp.20003554 ................ General Electric Company ................... M.A. Hanna Company .......................... Cadillac Plastic (Canada), Inc.

.......................................................... Cadillac Plastic Group, Inc., R.A. Prod-ucts, Inc.

20003594 ................ MBNA Corporation ............................... Banknorth Group, Inc. .......................... The Howard Bank, N.A.


20003321 ................ Barry A. Ackerley ................................. Fisher Companies Inc. ......................... Fisher Broadcasting—Fresno, LLC20003348 ................ Yasumitsu Shigeta ............................... Pixo, Inc. .............................................. Pixo, Inc.20003426 ................ Fairey Group plc .................................. AGIV Aktiengesellschaft ....................... Spectris AG Sensoren und Systeme20003428 ................ Comtech Telecommunications Corp. ... Adaptive Broadband Corporation ......... Adaptive Broadband Corporation20003453 ................ Jamal Hamdani .................................... Adaptive Broadband Corporation ......... Adaptive Broadband Corporation20003482 ................ Terence H. Matthews ........................... IronBridge Networks Incorporated ....... IronBridge Networks Incorporated20003487 ................ L–3 Communications Holdings, Inc. .... MPRI, Inc. ............................................ MPRI, Inc.20003519 ................ Safeguard Scientifics, Inc. ................... LifeF/X, Inc. .......................................... LifeF/X, Inc.20003520 ................ Varian Medical Systems, Inc. .............. IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc. ............. IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc.20003525 ................ BBA Group PLC ................................... Lynton Group, Inc. ............................... Lynton Group, Inc.20003526 ................ iXL Enterprises, Inc. ............................. iBelong.com, Inc. .................................. iBelong.com, Inc.20003531 ................ CRH plc ................................................ CCI Manufacturing, Inc. ....................... CCI Manufacturing, Inc.20003556 ................ Alec E. Gores ....................................... Cabletron Systems, Inc. ....................... Cabletron Systems, Inc.20003559 ................ Julie A. Dobson .................................... Holding Company ................................. Holding Company20003560 ................ Gerald T. Vento .................................... Holding Company ................................. Holding Company20003561 ................ Thomas H. Sullivan .............................. Holding Company ................................. Holding Company20003562 ................ M Financial Incorporated ..................... Bank of America Corporation ............... Management Compensation Group,

Northwest, L.L.C.20003567 ................ IntraNet Solutions, Inc. ......................... Inso Corporation ................................... Inso Chicago Corporation, Inso Kan-

sas City Corporation20003571 ................ Mrs. Ginette Dalloz .............................. Mr. John R. Liautaud ........................... Fendall Co.20003581 ................ Centennial Communications Corp. ...... Raveesh Kumra ................................... Lake Charles Cellteico/Centennial

Lake Charles LLC




20003584 ................ Silver Lake Partners, L.P. .................... Girish Gaitonde .................................... Xoriant Corporation20003585 ................ Piedmont/Hawthorne Holdings, L.L.C. Lee Juan & Ethylene Lanford .............. Associated Hangar, Inc.20003586 ................ JAKKS Pacific, Inc. .............................. Pentech International Inc. .................... Pentech International Inc.20003608 ................ Advance Paradigm, Inc. ....................... First Florida International Holdings,

Inc..First Florida International Holdings,

Inc.20003615 ................ BellSouth Corporation .......................... DeVlieg-Bullard, Inc., (debtor-in-pos-

session).DeVlieg-Bullard, Inc., (debtor-in-pos-

session)20003630 ................ Southern States Cooperative, Incor-

porated.Agway, Inc. ........................................... Agway, Inc.

20003633 ................ Joseph Littlejohn & Levy Fund II, L.P. James D. Goldston, III ......................... Goldston’s Incorporated


20003323 ................ Danaher Corporation ............................ Warner Electric Group, Inc. ................. Warner Electric Group, Inc.20003417 ................ Sonepar, S.A. ....................................... Viking Electric Supply, Inc. .................. Badger Electric Supply, Inc.

.......................................................... Viking Electric Supply, Inc.20003516 ................ Edison International ............................. P&L Coal Fields Holding Corporation .. Citizens Power, LLC20003553 ................ General Electric Company ................... Morton R. French, Jr. ........................... Aluplastic do Brazil

.......................................................... .......................................................... Bodega de Plasticos

.......................................................... .......................................................... Chesapeake Plastics, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Comco Graphics, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Comco IL., Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Comco Plastics Ltd. (Ireland)

.......................................................... .......................................................... Comco Plastics, Ltd. (U.K.)

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Co.,Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp.(P.R)

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofCalifornia

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofConnecticut

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofFlorida

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofGeorgia

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofMN.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofNew Jersey

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofPennsylvania

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofTexas

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofTN

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics & Supply Corp. ofUtah

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics de Mexico S.A.de C.V.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Polymers Corp.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Commercial Plastics (C.P.), Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Day Plas S.A.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Dominicanos (Import) S.A.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Estok Plastics Company, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Flexlite Corp.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Hyaline Plastics Corporation

.......................................................... .......................................................... Insulgard Corp.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Plasticos Commercial20003587 ................ webMethods, Inc. ................................. Active Software, Inc. ............................ Active Software, Inc.20003592 ................ Sovereign Bankcorp, Inc. ..................... Diamond Lease Co. Ltd. ...................... New England Capital Corporation20003597 ................ GTE Corporation .................................. Southern Indiana RSA Limited Partner-

ship.Southern Indiana RSA Limited Partner-

ship20003598 ................ Citigroup Inc. ........................................ Marathon Fund Limited Partnership III Crescent Sleep Products Company20003600 ................ Hubbell Incorporated ............................ Salient 3 Communications, Inc. ........... Gia-Tronics Corporation, a Delaware

Corporation20003601 ................ Leucadia National Corporation ............ Reliance Group Holdings, Inc. ............. Reliance Group Holdings, Inc.20003602 ................ Odyssey Investment Partners Fund,

L.P..Gregory and Elizabeth Maday ............. Bristol Investments, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Conspec Marketing & ManufacturingCo., Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Conspec Performance Products, Inc.20003604 ................ The Chase Manhattan Corporation ..... Robert Fleming Holdings Limited ......... Robert Fleming Holdings Limited




20003605 ................ Niku Corporation .................................. ABT Corporation .................................. ABT Corporation20003641 ................ Vantage-Sheakley Trust ....................... HealthPlan Services Corporation ......... American Benefit Plan Administrators,

Inc........................................................... .......................................................... Centra HealthPlan LLC.......................................................... .......................................................... HealthPlan Services, Inc........................................................... .......................................................... National Preferred Provider Network,

Inc.20003664 ................ Hanover Compressor Company ........... Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc. .... Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc.20003730 ................ MBNA Corporation ............................... The Prudential Insurance Company of

America.PIC Realty Corporation

.......................................................... .......................................................... The Prudential Bank and Trust Com-pany

.......................................................... .......................................................... The Prudential Savings Bank


20003456 ................ Aurora Equity Partners II L.P. .............. Kennerly Plastics, L.P. ......................... Supreme Plastics, Inc.20003459 ................ GC Companies, Inc. ............................. VeloCom Inc. ........................................ VeloCom Inc.20003505 ................ ImageX.Com, Inc. ................................ Herbert R. Porter, Jr. ........................... Howard Press Limited Partnership20003530 ................ LSI Logic Corporation .......................... DataPath Systems, Inc. ....................... DataPath Systems, Inc.20003583 ................ Investor AB ........................................... Invesmart, Inc. ...................................... Invesmart, Inc.20003599 ................ Aventis S.A. .......................................... Serologicals Corporation ...................... Seramed, Inc.20003612 ................ Advanced Radio Telecom Corp. .......... Paul S. Bachow .................................... Bachow Communications, Inc.20003614 ................ Kellogg Company ................................. Kashi Company .................................... Kashi Company20003617 ................ Partek Oyj Abp ..................................... Timbco Hydraulics, Inc. ........................ Timbco Hyraulics, Inc.20003618 ................ Royal Dutch Petroleum Company ....... Cytec Industries Inc. ............................ Aviatrix Corporation, Mivida Corpora-

tion20003619 ................ Warburg, Pincus, Equity Partners, L.P. Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. .......... WebGain, Inc.20003620 ................ Gucci Group N.V. ................................. Schweizerhall Holding AG ................... Boucheron International AG20003621 ................ Vesta Insurance Group, Inc. ................ American Founders financial Corp. ..... American Founders Financial Corp.20003622 ................ Entravision Communications Corpora-

tion.Sunburst Media, L.P. ........................... Sunburst Media, L.P.

20003624 ................ Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe IX,L.P..

Slugger Acquisition Corp. (Newco) ...... Slugger Acquisition Corp. (Newco)

20003625 ................ Welsh, Carson, Anderson & StoweVIII, L.P..

Slugger Acquisition Corp. (Newco) ...... Slugger Acquisition Corp. (Newco)

20003628 ................ Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. ...................... Herzog, Heine, Geduld, Inc. ................ Herzog, Heine, Geduld, Inc.20003631 ................ BellSouth Corporation .......................... United Road Services, Inc. .................. United Road Services, Inc.20003635 ................ Hampshire Equity Partners II, L.P. ...... Hampshire Equity Partners II, L.P. ...... GlobalLearningSystem.com,Inc.20003636 ................ V. Prem Watsa ..................................... The Trident Partnership, L.P. ............... Sen-Tech International Holdings, Inc.20003638 ................ Guilford Pharmaceuticals Inc. .............. Gilatech Inc. ......................................... Gilatech Inc.20003642 ................ Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe

VIII, L.P..CFW Communications Company ......... CFW Communications Company

20003644 ................ John C. Hampton ................................. Industry Pacific, Inc. ............................. Industry Pacific, Inc.20003645 ................ QIAGEN N.V. ....................................... Operon Technologies, Inc. ................... Operon Technologies, Inc.20003650 ................ Emanuel E. Geduld .............................. Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. ...................... Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.20003651 ................ Quanta Services, Inc. ........................... Ronald A. Cindrich, Sr. ........................ General Industries, Inc.20003653 ................ BPB Industries plc ................................ Asbestos Settlement Trust ................... Capaul Corporation

.......................................................... .......................................................... Celotex Corporation

.......................................................... .......................................................... Celotex Metals Corporation20003655 ................ U.S. Bancorp ........................................ Pitney Bowes Inc. ................................ Pitney Bowes Bank20003657 ................ Caisse de depot et placement du Que-

bec.Windward Capital Associates, L.P. ...... Meridian Automotive Systems, Inc.

20003658 ................ United Auto Group, Inc. ....................... Fred D. Schneider ................................ Great Western Inports, Inc........................................................... .......................................................... Great Western Management Corp........................................................... .......................................................... Lester Goodson Pontiac

20003659 ................ PPG Industries, Inc. ............................. Apogee Enterprises, Inc. ...................... PPG Auto Glass, LLC20003660 ................ Robert C. Fanch ................................... Elantic Communications, Inc. ............... Elantic Communications, Inc., a Dela-

ware corporation20003661 ................ M/C Venture Partners IV, L.P. ............. Elantic Communications, Inc. ............... Elantic Communications, Inc., a Dela-

ware corporation20003662 ................ KDZ Holdings, LLC .............................. Elantic Communications, Inc. ............... Elantic Communications, Inc., a Dela-

ware corporation20003663 ................ PerkinElmer, Inc. .................................. Genstar Capital Partners II, L.P. .......... NEN Life Sciences, Inc.20003665 ................ Media/Communications Partners III

Limited Partnership.Elantic Communications, Inc. ............... Elantic Communications, Inc., a Dela-

ware corporation20003667 ................ Brentwood Associates Private Equity

III, L.P..Timothy J. Battles ................................ KCS industries, Inc.

20003668 ................ Quantum Industrial Holdings, Ltd. ....... Jamcracker, Inc. ................................... Jamcracker, Inc.20003669 ................ SIGH Schweizerische Industrie-Gesell-

schaft Holding AG.Thyssen Krupp AG ............................... Krupp Plastics & Rubber Machinery

(USA), Inc.20003670 ................ 3dfx Interactive, Inc. ............................. GigaPixel Corporation .......................... GigaPixel Corporation20003671 ................ George T. Haber .................................. 3dfx Interactive, Inc. ............................. 3dfx Interactive, Inc.20003691 ................ Summit Bankcorp. ................................ National Bank of Canada ..................... National Canada Business Corp.




20003696 ................ United Parcel Services, Inc. ................. James Nodine ...................................... Technical Service Corporation Inter-national, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... TSCI Holdings, Inc.20003697 ................ United Parcel Services, Inc. ................. Stephen McIIvain ................................. Technical Service Corporation Inter-

national, Inc........................................................... .......................................................... TSCI Holdings, Inc.

20003699 ................ Windward Capital Associates, L.P. ...... Richard S. Crawford ............................. Cambridge Ind., Inc., CE AutomotiveTrim Systems, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Cambridge Industries Holdings, Inc.20003704 ................ Cedar Creek Partners LLC .................. Schaefer Manufacturing, Inc. ............... Schaefer Manufacturing, Inc.20003713 ................ Code Hennessy & Simmons IV, L.P. ... John Mansfield Group PLC .................. WNA Holding Company20003714 ................ Greenwich Street Capital Partners II,

LP..WNA Holding Company ....................... WNA Holding Company

20003716 ................ John E. Feltl ......................................... Stockwalk.com Group, Inc. .................. Stockwalk.com Group, Inc.20003717 ................ Stockwalk.com Group, Inc. .................. John E Feltl .......................................... R.J. Steichen & Company20003719 ................ NACCO Industries, Inc. ........................ Phillipp Holzmann AG .......................... Dolet Hills Mining Venture20003725 ................ Huhtamaki Van Leer Oyi ...................... Huhtamaki Van Leer Oyi ...................... Sirco Systems, LLC20003726 ................ Castle Harlan Partners II, L.P. ............. Castle Harlan partners III, L.P. ............ Taylor Senior Holding Corp.20003733 ................ eBay Inc. .............................................. Half.com, Inc. ....................................... Half.com, Inc.20003744 ................ V.F. Corporation ................................... Fruit of the Loom, Ltd. ......................... Fruit of the Loom, Ltd.20003764 ................ Tyco International Ltd. ......................... Thomas & Betts Corporation ............... Augat, Inc.


20003470 ................ Buckeye Partners, L.P. ........................ Agway, Inc. ........................................... Agway Energy Products LLC20003473 ................ RailWorks Corporation ......................... HSQ Technology .................................. HSQ Technology20003475 ................ Safeguard Scientifics, Inc. ................... Redleaf Group, Inc. .............................. Redleaf Group, Inc.20003529 ................ Natural Wonders, Inc. .......................... World of Science, Inc. .......................... World of Science, Inc.20003555 ................ Signet Group plc .................................. Marks & Morgan Jewelers, Inc. ........... Marks & Morgan Jewelers, Inc.20003564 ................ Oneida Ltd. ........................................... Glenn Simon ........................................ Sakura, Inc.20003569 ................ TechTronic Industries Co., Ltd. ............ Ryobi Limited ....................................... Ryobi America Corporation

.......................................................... .......................................................... Ryobi North America, Inc., RyobiMotor Products Corp.

20003626 ................ Interfoods of America, Inc. ................... Household International, Inc. ............... RMS Family Restaurants, Inc.20003678 ................ Tyco International Ltd. ......................... K2 Inc. .................................................. K2 Inc.20003708 ................ General Electric Company ................... Lunar Corporation ................................ Lunar Corporation20003715 ................ GTCR Fund VI, LP. .............................. Coram Healthcare Corporation ............ Curaflex Health Services, Inc.


20003391 ................ DLJ Merchant Banking Partners II, LP. E R D A, Inc. ........................................ E R D A, Inc.20003541 ................ Northern States Power Company (a

Minnesota corporation).Koch Industries, Inc. ............................ Koch Power Louisiana, LLC

20003588 ................ Sama Polymer Holding, Inc. ................ Blue Water Plastics, Inc. ...................... Blue Water Plastics, Inc.20003728 ................ KKR 1996 Fund L.P. ............................ NewSouth Holdings, Inc. ...................... NewSouth Holdings, Inc.20003729 ................ First Union Corporation ........................ NewSouth Holdings, Inc. ...................... NewSouth Holdings, Inc.


20003372 ................ Advance Voting Trust ........................... MediaNews Group, Inc. ....................... MediaNews Group, Inc.20003438 ................ Lafarge S.A. ......................................... The LTV Corporation ........................... Presque Isle Corporation20003732 ................ Swiss Reinsurance Company .............. National Capital Financial Corporation National Capital Financial Corporation20003812 ................ China Aviation Development Founda-

tion.Sino Swearingen Aircraft Corporation .. Sino Swearingen Aircraft Corporation


20003515 ................ Dean Foods Company ......................... Land O’Lakes, Inc. ............................... Land O’Lakes, Inc.20003521 ................ Cablevision systems Corporation ........ AT&T Corp. .......................................... MediaOne of Greater New York, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... MediaOne of New York, Inc.20003522 ................ AT&T Corp. .......................................... Cablevision Systems Corporation ........ Cablevision of Boston, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Cablevision of Brookline, L.P.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Cablevision of Massachusetts, Inc.20003568 ................ Quanta Services, Inc. ........................... William G. Schroeder ........................... Flowers Holding Company, Inc.20003579 ................ Compart S.p.A. ..................................... Kay Akey & Randolph S. Creech ........ Trust of Kay Akey Creech Dated April

2, 199720003613 ................ Carlisle Companies Incoprorated ......... UniTrek Corporation ............................. UniTrek Corporation20003623 ................ Carl C. Icahn ........................................ CSX Corporation .................................. CSX Corporation20003627 ................ Eramet SA ............................................ Special Metals Corporation .................. Special Metals Corporation20003637 ................ Cablevision Systems Corporation ........ AT&T Corp. .......................................... AT Home Corporation20003649 ................ Ronald S. Lauder ................................. CFW Communications Company ......... CFW Information Services, Inc.20003654 ................ Marc Ladreit de Lacharriere ................. Celanese AG ........................................ Celanese Ltd.20003673 ................ Bollinger Shipyards, Inc. ...................... Friede Goldman Halter, Inc. ................. Bludworth Bond Holding, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Bludworth Bond LP

.......................................................... .......................................................... Gretna Cleaning LLC




.......................................................... .......................................................... Halter Calcasieu, LLC

.......................................................... .......................................................... Halter Gulf Repair, Inc.

.......................................................... .......................................................... Marine Cleaning LLC20003692 ................ Datatec Limited .................................... InaCom Corp. ....................................... InaCom Communications, Inc.20003700 ................ The Northwestern Mutual Life Insur-

ance Company.Windward Capital Associates, L.P. ...... Meridian Automotive Systems, Inc.

20003701 ................ Hibernia Corporation ............................ Leslie R. Jacobs ................................... Rosenthal Agency, Inc.20003702 ................ Hibernia Corporation ............................ Stephen R. Rosenthal .......................... Rosenthal Agency, Inc.20003703 ................ GTCR Fund VII L.P. ............................. Affiliated Computer Services, Inc. ........ Affiliated Computer Services, Inc.20003705 ................ Dimension Data Holdings Limited ........ Daily Business Products, Inc. .............. Daily Business Products, Inc.20003706 ................ Pinnacle Systems, Inc. ......................... Avid Sports, Inc. ................................... Avid Sports, Inc.20003731 ................ Ossama Hassanein .............................. Corvis Corporation ............................... Corvis Corporation20003738 ................ Greenwich Street Capital Partners, II,

L.P..American Financial Group, Inc. ........... Stonewall Insurance Company

20003742 ................ The 1818 Fund III, L.P. ........................ World Access, Inc. ............................... World Access, Inc.20003743 ................ Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A. Grupo Financiero Bancomer, S.A. de

C. V..Grupo Financiero Bancomer, S.A. de

C. V.20003745 ................ Credit Suisse First Boston Equity Part-

ners L.P..Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ............. Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

20003750 ................ New Enterprise Stone & Lime Co., Inc. Richard E. Garman .............................. 2544 Clinton, Inc.; ABC Paving Co.,Inc.

20003754 ................ Compass Group PLC ........................... Granada Group PLC ............................ Granada Group PLC20003755 ................ Granada Group PLC ............................ Compass Group PLC ........................... Compass Group PLC20003758 ................ Sycamore Networks, Inc. ..................... Sirocco Systems, Inc. .......................... Sirocco Systems, Inc.20003759 ................ United Auto Group, Inc. ....................... General Motors Corporation ................ Cerritos Pontiac-GMC Truck, Inc.20003760 ................ XServe, Inc. .......................................... Anco Insulations, Inc. ........................... Anco Industries, Inc.20003761 ................ General Motors Corporation ................ Reynolds & Reynolds Co. .................... Reynolds & Reynolds Co.20003762 ................ Atlantic Equity Partners III, L.P. ........... J Herbert Ogden, Jr. ............................ Unique Fabricating, Inc.20003816 ................ SCP Pool Corporation .......................... Arch Chemicals, Inc. ............................ Superior Pool Products, Inc.20003825 ................ Mediaplex, Inc. ..................................... The Interpublic Group of Companies,

Inc..Adware Systems, Inc.

20003833 ................ Holding di Partecipazioni IndustrialiS.p.A..

Joseph Abboud .................................... Houndstooth Corporation

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Sandra M. Peay, or, Parcellena P.Fielding, Contact Representatives,Federal Trade Commission, PremergerNotification Office, Bureau ofCompetition, Room 303, Washington,DC 20580, (202) 326–3100.

By Direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19351 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]



Granting of Request for EarlyTermination of the Waiting PeriodUnder the Premerger NotificationRules

Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of theHart-Scott-Rodino AntitrustImprovements Act of 1976, requirespersons contemplating certain mergersor acquisitions to give the Federal TradeCommission and the Assistant AttorneyGeneral advance notice and to waitdesignated periods beforeconsummation of such plans. Section

7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies,in individual cases, to terminate thiswaiting period prior to its expirationand requires that notice of this action bepublished in the Federal Register.

The following transactions weregranted early termination of the waitingperiod provided by law and thepremerger notification rules. The grantswere made by the Federal TradeCommission and the Assistant AttorneyGeneral for the Antitrust Division of theDepartment of Justice. Neither agencyintends to take any action with respectto these proposed acquisitions duringthe applicable waiting period.



20003349 ................ Conexant Systems, Inc. ....................... Pixo, Inc. .............................................. Pixo, Inc.20003533 ................ Sync Research, Inc. ............................. Osicom Technologies, Inc. ................... Osicom Technologies, Inc.20003575 ................ Stichting Administratiekantoor VSH ..... Royal Nedlloyd N.V. ............................. Davenport Mammoet Heavy Transport

Inc.Mamoet Transport B.V..

Mamoet Transport USA Inc.Mamoet Western Inc.

20003674 ................ Tyco International, Ltd ......................... Kaiser Group International, Inc. ........... Kaiser Engineers Corporation.Kaiser Group International, Inc.

20003680 ................ Craig O. McCaw ................................... Teledesic Corporation .......................... Teledesic Corporation.20003736 ................ Avista Corp. .......................................... Enron Corp. .......................................... Coyote Springs 2, L.L.C.20003749 ................ Station Casinos, Inc. ............................ Paul W. Lowden ................................... Santa Fe Hotel Inc.20003756 ................ Campbell Bewley Group Limited ......... Cucina Holdings, Inc. ........................... Cucina Holdings, Inc.20003765 ................ American States Water Company ....... Charles E. Hurwitz ............................... Chaparral City Water Company.20003766 ................ American Securities Partners, II, L.P. .. Morgenthaler Venture Partners IV, L.P Cambridge International, Inc.




20003776 ................ AXA ...................................................... Dominion Resources, Inc. .................... First Dominion Capital, L.L.C.20003780 ................ Quanta Services, Inc. ........................... Christine Fluharty ................................. MearsGroup, Inc.20003782 ................ North Castle Partners II, L.P ................ Kathleen McCarty-Carey ...................... Travel Corporation of America, Inc.20003783 ................ North Castle Partners II, L.P ................ Betty Phillips ......................................... Travel Corporation of America, Inc.20003784 ................ Media General, Inc. .............................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... Thomson Newspapers Inc.20003785 ................ Wit Capital Group, Inc. ......................... E*Offering Corp. ................................... E*Offering Corp.20003787 ................ Inktomi Corporation .............................. Walt Disney Company (The) ................ Ultraseek Corporation.20003790 ................ Stone & Webster, Incorporated (debt-

or-in-possession).Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. ........... Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

20003792 ................ Triump Partners III, L.P ........................ Certus Corporation ............................... Certus Corporation.20003793 ................ Giovanni Agnelli e C.S.a.p.az .............. Arjo Wiggins Appleton p.l.c .................. Arjo Wiggins Appleton p.l.c.20003796 ................ Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. ....... MB Acquisitions, Inc. ............................ MB Acquisitions, Inc.20003802 ................ Warburg, Pincus Equity Partners, L.P Coventry Health Care, Inc. .................. Coventry Health Care, Inc.20003804 ................ Bayer AG .............................................. Zambon S.p.A ...................................... Inpharzam International.20003806 ................ Bayer AG .............................................. Forest Laboratories, Inc. ...................... Inpharzam International20003808 ................ Paul J. Dujardin .................................... AT&T Corp. .......................................... Liberty Livewire Corporation.20003810 ................ Microchip Technology Incorporated ..... Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd Matsushita Semiconductor Corporation

of America.20003813 ................ Invensys plc ......................................... Baan Company N.V ............................. Baan Company N.V.20003814 ................ Pegasus Related Partners, L.P ........... Code-Alarm, Inc. .................................. Code-Alarm, Inc.20003818 ................ Clayton, Dubilier & Rice Fund VI Lim-

ited Partnership.Guidance Solutions, Inc. ...................... Guidance Solutions, Inc.

20003820 ................ Ditech Communications Corporation ... Atmosphere Networks, Inc. .................. Atmosphere Networks, Inc.20003821 ................ Cedar Creek Partners, LLC ................. Denis Siemer ........................................ V-Tek, Inc.20003829 ................ U.S. Propane, L.P ................................ Heritage Holdings, Inc. ......................... Heritage Holdings, Inc.20003830 ................ Heritage Propane Partners, L.P ........... U.S. Propane, L.P ................................ U.S. Propane, L.P.20003835 ................ The Shaw Group Inc. ........................... Stone & Webster, Incorporated (debt-

or-in-possession).Stone & Webster, Incorporated (debt-

or-in-possession).20003836 ................ Stone & Webster, Incorporated (debt-

or-in-possession).The Shaw Group Inc. ........................... The Shaw Group Inc.

20003858 ................ Oak Hill Capital Partners, L.P .............. General Motors Corporation ................ TravelCenters of America, Inc.


20003689 ................ Alloy Online, Inc. .................................. Swander Pace Capital Fund, L.P ........ Kubic Marketing, Inc.


20003595 ................ A. Jerrold Perenchio ............................ Entravision Communications Corpora-tion.

Entravision Communications Corpora-tion.

20003770 ................ ADC Telecommunications, Inc. ............ Centigam Communications Corpora-tion.

Centigram Communications Corpora-tion.

20003786 ................ Ralcorp Holdings, Inc. .......................... Tomkins PLC ........................................ RHM Holdings (USA) Inc.


20003648 ................ Oak Investment Partners IX, LimitedPartnership.

Cogent Communications, Inc. .............. Cognet Communications, Inc.

20003675 ................ J.R. Simplot Company ......................... ECO Soil Systems, Inc. ....................... ECO Soil Systems, Inc.20003688 ................ Gabriel Communications, Inc. .............. State Communications, Inc. ................. State Communications, Inc.20003693 ................ Reed International P.L.C ...................... Data West Corporation (d.b.a.

CourtLink).Data West Corporation (d.b.a.

CourtLink)20003694 ................ Elsevier NV .......................................... Data West Corporation (d.b.a.

CourtLink).Data West Corporation (d.b.a.

CourtLink)20003695 ................ Counsel Corporation ............................ Star Telecommunications, Inc. ............. PT–1 Communications Inc.20003707 ................ Cox Enterprises, Inc. ............................ Lewis W. Dickey, Sr ............................. Midwestern Broadcasting Company,

Inc.20003711 ................ Cox Enterprises, Inc. ............................ Salem Communications Corporation ... CXR Holdings, Inc.20003712 ................ Salem Communications Corporation ... Cox Enterprises, Inc. ............................ Cox Enterprises, Inc.20003739 ................ Choice One Communications Inc. ....... Ronald Vander Pol ............................... US Xchange, Inc.20003740 ................ Ronald Vander Pol ............................... Choice One Communications Inc. ....... Choice One Communications Inc.


20003741 ................ Adelphia Communications Corporation Allegheny Energy, Inc. ......................... Allegheny Hyperion Telecommuni-cations, LLC

20003763 ................ Bershire Hathaway Inc. ........................ Credit Suisse Group ............................. Republic Insurance Company20003795 ................ Jonathan Reeves ................................. Sycamore Networks, Inc. ..................... Sycamore Networks, Inc.20003807 ................ Advance Voting Trust ........................... WeddingChannel.com, Inc. .................. WeddingChannel.com, Inc.20003823 ................ Compass Group PLC ........................... Viad Corp. ............................................ ProDine, Inc.

.......................................................... Viad Corp.20003824 ................ Berkshire Hathaway Inc. ...................... Assicurazioni Generali, A.p.A. ............. Unione Italiana Reinsurance Company

of America20003826 ................ Green Equity Investors III, L.P. ............ Veterinary Centers of America ............. Veterinary Centers of America20003828 ................ General Atlantic Partners 61, L.P. ....... Wit Capital Group, Inc. ......................... Wit Capital Group, Inc.




20003834 ................ General Atlantic Partners 68, L.P. ....... Wit Capital Group, Inc. ......................... Wit Capital Group, Inc.20003839 ................ GAP Coinvestment Partners II, L.P. .... Wit Capital Group, Inc. ......................... Wit Capital Group, Inc.20003846 ................ Cisco Systems, Inc. ............................. Hewlett-Packard Company .................. Hewlett-Packard Company20003855 ................ ING Groep N.V. .................................... Iowa Network Services, Inc. ................ Iowa Telecommunications Services,

Inc.20003866 ................ Oak Hill Capital Partners, L.P. ............. TCA Acquisition Corporation ................ TCA Acquisition Corporation20003872 ................ B III Capital Partners, L.P. ................... The Penn Traffic Company .................. The Penn Traffic Company20003873 ................ WPS Resources Corporation ............... Cinergy Corp. ....................................... CinCapVI, LLC20003881 ................ UBS AG ................................................ IFX Corporation .................................... IFX Corporation

.......................................................... Tutopia.com, Inc.20003884 ................ General Motors Corporation ................ Conseco, Inc. ....................................... Consumer Acceptance Corporation20003885 ................ CMGI, Inc. ............................................ MediaBridge Technologies, Inc. ........... MediaBridge Technologies, Inc.20003886 ................ John Kent Cooke ................................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... Kenneth R. Thomson20003888 ................ Popular, Inc. ......................................... Oriental Financial Group, Inc. .............. Oriental Bank & Trust20003895 ................ Irwin Geduld ......................................... Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. ...................... Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.20003896 ................ John E. Herzog .................................... Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. ...................... Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.20003901 ................ Hamphire Group, Limited ..................... Martin Axman ....................................... Item-Eyes, Inc.20003902 ................ Accor S.A. (a French company) ........... WorldRes.com, Inc. .............................. WorldRes.com, Inc.20003906 ................ Levine Leichtman Capital Partners,

L.P..Carole Little .......................................... California Fashion Industries, Inc.

20003907 ................ Levine Leichtman Capital Partners,L.P..

Leonard Rabinowitz ............................. California Fashion Industries, Inc.

20003908 ................ Prosofttraining.com .............................. R. William Pollock ................................ ComputerPrep, Inc.20003909 ................ Fendi S.r.l. ............................................ Irwin Tauber ......................................... Condotti Shops of Houstons, Inc.

.......................................................... Condotti Shops, Inc.20003910 ................ Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Buyers IX–

A, L.P..MyCFO, Inc. ......................................... MyCFO, Inc.

20003912 ................ Erikem Luxembourg S.A. ..................... Huron Tech Corp. ................................ Huron Tech Corp.20003913 ................ Waste Corporation of America, Inc. ..... Waste Management, Inc. ..................... Waste Management of Arkansas, Inc.

.......................................................... Waste Management of Louisiana,L.L.C.

20003915 ................ Coming Incorporated ............................ NextPath Technologies, Inc. ................ Willow Systems, Inc.20003919 ................ Associates First Capital Corporation .... Zale Corp. ............................................ Zale Funding Trust20003920 ................ Code Hennessy & Simmons IV, L.P. ... John Mansfield Group PLC .................. Waddington North America, Inc.20003932 ................ Robert D. Phillips, Jr. ........................... William Harkrider Trust ........................ H&W Petroleum Company, Inc.20003933 ................ Code, Hennessy & Simmons III, L.P. .. Best Distributing Co. ............................ Best Distributing Co.20003936 ................ Robert D. Phillips, Jr. ........................... Michael G. Barcum .............................. Commercial Distributing, Inc.20003937 ................ Global Crossing Ltd. ............................ American Communications Network,

Inc..American Communications Network,

Inc.20003940 ................ Stephen Rosenberg ............................. Extendicare Health Services, Inc. ........ Colonial Care Center

.......................................................... Lexington Terrance20003942 ................ Thomas H. Lee Equity Fund III, L.P. ... The New York Times Company ........... Lakeland Ledger Publishing Corpora-

tion.......................................................... NYT Florida Holdings, Inc........................................................... NYT Management Services.......................................................... The Houma Courier Newspaper Cor-

poration20003945 ................ Berkshire Fund V, Limited Partnership Casella Waste Systems, Inc. ............... Casella Waste Systems, Inc.20003946 ................ Koninlijke Ahold nv ............................... James and Jayne Kennelly .................. GFG Foodservice, Inc. GFG Real Es-

tate, LLC20003954 ................ Pearson plc .......................................... The Forum Corporation of North Amer-

ica.The Forum Corporation of North Amer-

ica20003955 ................ E*TRADE Group, Inc. .......................... Wit Capital Group, Inc. ......................... Wit Capital Group, Inc.20003957 ................ Yahoo! Inc. ........................................... eGroups, Inc. ........................................ eGroups, Inc.20003958 ................ Stonebridge Partners Equity Fund II,

L.P..Louis A. deAntonio and Linda J.

deAntonio.Hitech Corporation

20003961 ................ Jones Apparel Group, Inc. ................... Recovery Equity Investors II, L.P. ....... Victoria+Co. Ltd.20003962 ................ The PNC Financial Services Group,

Inc..The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ltd. ..... BTM Capital Corporation

20003969 ................ UBS Capital Americas II, LLC ............. EYak, Inc. ............................................. EYak, Inc.20003971 ................ The Interpublic Group of Companies,

Inc..James E. San Filippo ........................... Daytona Productions, Inc.

.......................................................... Waylon Promotions, Inc.20003978 ................ America Online, Inc. ............................. America Online Latin America, Inc. ..... America Online Latin America, Inc.20003984 ................ Vivendi, S.A. ......................................... Novartis AG .......................................... Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation,

Novartis Corporation20003992 ................ MyPoints, Inc. ....................................... Cybergold, Inc. ..................................... Cybergold, Inc.20003993 ................ Baker Communications Fund II (QP),

LP.MimEcom Corporation ......................... MimEcom Corporation

20003998 ................ Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe IX,L.P..

CFW Communications Company ......... CFW Communications Company

20004001 ................ Technip ................................................. Stone & Webster, Incorporated (debt-or-in-possession).

Stone & Webster, Incorporated (debt-or-in-possession





20003362 ................ Public Service Company of New Mex-ico.

Tri-State Generation and TransmissionAssociation, Inc.

Tri-State Generation and TransmissionAssociation, Inc .

20003734 ................ W.W. Grainger, Inc .............................. Works.com Holding, Inc ....................... Works.com Holding, Inc.20003735 ................ Hummer Winblad Venture Partners, III,

L.P.Works.com Holding, Inc. ...................... Works.com Holding, Inc.

20003773 ................ Jeffrey H. Smulyan ............................... The Hearst Trust .................................. Hearst-Argyle Properties, Inc.20003778 ................ Atlantic Equity Partners III, L.P ............ Morris Rochlin ...................................... Foamade Industries, Inc.20003781 ................ Christine Fluharty ................................. Quanta Services, Inc ............................ Quanta Services, Inc.20003791 ................ Francisco Partners, L.P ....................... Advanced Micro Devices, Inc .............. BoldCo, Inc.20003815 ................ Adelphia Communications Corporation Great Southern Printing and Manufac-

turing Company.GS Communications, Inc.

20003831 ................ VERITAS Software Corporation ........... Seagate Technology, Inc ..................... Seagate Technology, Inc.20003832 ................ Paul G. Allen ........................................ FVC.COM, Inc ...................................... FVC.COM, Inc.20003843 ................ Rural LEC Acquisition, LLC ................. Sidney L. McDonald ............................. Brindlee Mountain Telephone Com-

pany20003847 ................ Churchill Downs Incorporated .............. Richard L. Duchossois ......................... Arlington International Racecourse,

Inc.Arlington Management Services, Inc.

20003848 ................ Richard L. Duchossois ......................... Churchill Downs Incorporated .............. Turf Club of Illinois, Inc.20003850 ................ Charterhouse Equity Partners III, L.P .. Alliance One Incorporated ................... Alliance One Incorporated20003851 ................ Triumph Group, Inc. ............................. Loren L. Furnas .................................... Airborne Nacelle Services, Inc.

Airborne Supply, Inc.Chem-Fab CorporationFRS Partners d/b/a Master Tool Fab-

ricators20003852 ................ Triumph Group, Inc. ............................. Estate of Ronald E. Reagan ................ Airborne Nacelle Services, Inc.

Airborne Supply, Inc.Chem-Fab CorporationFRS Partners d/b/a Master Tool Fab-

ricators20003854 ................ AMEC PLC ........................................... Ogden Corporation ............................... Ogden Environmental and Energy

Services Co., Inc.20003856 ................ Rio Tinto Limited .................................. North Limited ........................................ North Limited20003857 ................ Carlyle Bottling, L.L.C .......................... Grant-Lydick Beverage Company ........ Grant-Lydick Beverage Company20003859 ................ Microsoft Corporation ........................... Paul E. Tuttle, Jr .................................. Tuttle Decision Systems, Inc.20003860 ................ Adelphia Communications Corporation Benchmark Media, Inc ......................... Benchmark Media, Inc.20003863 ................ GTCR Fund VII, L.P ............................. Thomas M. Rouse ................................ ACS Merchant Services, Inc.20003864 ................ Carlyle Partners III, L.P ........................ The Reynolds and Reynolds Company Dataforms, Inc.

Information Solutions Group20003865 ................ Dimeling, Schreiber and Park Reorga-

nization Fund, II.Martin Color-Fi, Inc .............................. Martin Color-Fi, Inc .

20003868 ................ JSB Software Technologies pic ........... Mattel, Inc ............................................. CP Assets, Inc.20003869 ................ Advanced Radio Telecom Corp ........... Forest Communications, LLC .............. Forest Communications, LLC20003871 ................ EarthLink, Inc ....................................... OneMain. com, Inc ............................... OneMain. com, Inc.20003875 ................ William H. Gates III .............................. Craig O. McCaw ................................... ICO-Teledesic Global Limited20003880 ................ Coolbrands International, Inc ............... Eskimo Pie Corporation ....................... Eskimo Pie Corporation20003883 ................ EMSlcon Investments, LLC .................. Pensar Corporation .............................. Pensar Corporation20003900 ................ New York-Presbyterian Healthcare

System, Inc.Westchester Square Medical Center,

Inc.Westchester Square Medical Center,

Inc20003911 ................ James Clark ......................................... MyCFO, Inc. ......................................... MyCFO, Inc.20003914 ................ Berkshire Hathaway, Inc ...................... Justin Industries, Inc ............................ Justin Industries, Inc.20003917 ................ Pon Holdings B. V ................................ Donald G. Moes ................................... Bailey Forklift and Service Company,

Ltd.Equipment Depot, Ltd., Equipment

Depot of Dallas, Ltd.20003923 ................ Homestake Mining Company ............... Hadley Case and Elizabeth M. Case ... Bargold Corporation20003924 ................ Hadley Case and Elizabeth M. Case ... Homestake Mining Company ............... Homestake Mining Company20003974 ................ Respond Communicatins, Inc .............. iPCS, Inc .............................................. iPCS, Inc.20003975 ................ Geneseo Communications, Inc ............ iPCS, Inc .............................................. iPCS, Inc.20003979 ................ Riverview Media Corp .......................... America Online Latin America, Inc ...... America Online Latin America, Inc.


20002161 ................ Southern Union Company .................... Providence Energy Corporation ........... Providence Energy Corporation20002164 ................ Southern Union Company .................... Valley Resources, Inc .......................... Valley Resources, Inc.20002172 ................ Southern Union Company .................... Fall River Gas Company ...................... Fall River Gas Company20003589 ................ CP&L Energy, Inc ................................ Florida Progress Corporation ............... Florida Progress Corporation20003652 ................ CSR Limited ......................................... F. Browne Gregg .................................. FCS Holdings, Inc.20003676 ................ Impala S.A ............................................ Solvay S.A ............................................ Solvay, S.A.20003677 ................ Solvay, S.A ........................................... Impala S.A ............................................ Impala S.A.20003737 ................ Calpine Corporation ............................. Panada Energy International, Inc ........ PLC II, LLC




20003746 ................ James O. Hayles, Jr. and Myna C.Hayles, (husband & wife).

Paul E. Brown ...................................... DigiPH Communication, Inc.

DigiPH Holding Company, Inc........................................................... DiGiPH PCS, Inc.

20003747 ................ James O. Hayles, Jr. and Myna C.Hayles, (husband & wife).

Mr. and Mrs. Darrell R. Brown, (hus-band & wife).

DigiPH Communication, Inc.

.......................................................... DigiPH Holding Company, Inc.

.......................................................... DiGiPH PCS, Inc.20003771 ................ Calpine Corporation ............................. Michael P. Polsky ................................. Polsky Energy Corporation20003772 ................ Michael P. Polsky ................................. Calpine Corporation ............................. Calpine Corporation20003797 ................ Gannett Co., Inc. .................................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... The Thomson Company, Inc.20003798 ................ Gannett Co., Inc. .................................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... The Thomson Corporation

.......................................................... Thomson Newspapers Licensing Cor-poration

.......................................................... Thomson Newspapers, Inc.

.......................................................... TN Customer Holding Inc.

.......................................................... TN Customer Holding LLC20003799 ................ Gannett Co., Inc. .................................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... Thomson Newspapers Inc.20003800 ................ Gannett Co., Inc. .................................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... Thomson Newspapers Inc.20003801 ................ Gannett Co., Inc. .................................. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... The Thomson Company, Inc.20003891 ................ Cardinal Health, Inc. ............................ Advanced Polymer Systems, Inc. ........ Advanced Polymer Systems, Inc.20003931 ................ Whitehall Associates, L.P. ................... Borden Chemicals and Plastics Limited

Partnership.Borden Chemicals and Plastics Limited

Partnership20003950 ................ Noranda Inc. ......................................... Falconbridge Limited ............................ Falconbridge Limited


20003925 ................ Fremont Partners, L.P. ......................... Triumph-California Limited Partnership Precision Components Group, LLC20003965 ................ The James S. Copley Marital Trust ..... Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... Thomson Holdings, Inc.


19994334 ................ Joseph M. & Marie H. Field ................. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. ............. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc.20003640 ................ Carlyle Partners III, L.P. ....................... Northrop Grumman Corporation .......... Northrop Grumman Corporation20003723 ................ Phillips-Van Heusen Corporation ......... Vestar Capital Partners III, L.P. ........... Arrow Factory Stores Inc.

.......................................................... Cluett Designer Group, Inc.

.......................................................... Cluett, Peabody & Co., Inc.

.......................................................... Consumer Direct Corporation20003768 ................ ABN AMRO Holding N.V. .................... Resource America, Inc. ........................ Fidelity Leasing, Inc.20003982 ................ Itausa-Investimentos Itau, S.A. ............ America Online Latin America, Inc. ..... America Online Latin America, Inc.20003994 ................ Safeguard Scientifics, Inc. ................... Atlas Commerce, Inc. ........................... Atlas Commerce, Inc.20003999 ................ Corus Group, plc .................................. Kienle + Spiess Holding GmbH ........... Kienle + Spiess Stanz and

Druckgiesswerk GmbH20004002 ................ Charterhouse Equity Partners III, L.P. Cap Gemini, S.A. ................................. Cap Gemini, S.A.20004010 ................ The BISYS Group, Inc. ........................ Leonard L. Reynolds ............................ Ascensus Insurance Services, Inc.20004016 ................ Jonathan Burgstone ............................. Ariba, Inc. ............................................. Ariba, Inc.20004017 ................ Asif Satchu ........................................... Ariba, Inc. ............................................. Ariba, Inc.20004019 ................ Ariba, Inc. ............................................. SupplierMarket.com, Inc. ..................... SupplierMarket.com, Inc.


20003934 ................ Ferro Corporation ................................. Solutia Inc. ........................................... Solutia Inc.20003987 ................ Harvest Partners III, L.P. ..................... GEEG Acquisition Holdings Corp. ....... GEEG Acquisition Holdings Corp.20004034 ................ SSCI Investors LP ................................ Croda International Plc ........................ Croda International Plc20004037 ................ TTL Information Technology AG .......... Jay L. Wertheimer ................................ BDI Distributors, Inc.


20001136 ................ Citadel Communications Corporation .. Robert G. Liggett, Jr. ........................... Liggett Broadcast, Inc........................................................... LLJ Realty, LLC.......................................................... New Tower, Inc........................................................... Rainbow Radio, LLC

20003803 ................ Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... The Thomson Company, Inc.20003887 ................ MKS Instruments, Inc. .......................... Michael J. Dent .................................... Spectra International, LLC20003904 ................ Microsoft Corporation ........................... CAIS Internet, Inc. ................................ CAIS Internet, Inc.20003921 ................ Lottomatica S.p.A. ................................ Autotote Corporation ............................ Autotote Corporation20003929 ................ Innoveda, Inc. ....................................... Hiroshi Hashimoto ................................ PADS Software, Inc.20003952 ................ Hiroshi Hashimoto ................................ Innoveda, Inc. ....................................... Innoveda, Inc.20003991 ................ Brokat AG ............................................. Putera Sampoerna ............................... Gemstone Systems, Inc.20004004 ................ George G. Beasley .............................. Gordon Gray 1956 Living Trust ........... Centennial Broadcasting, LLC20004005 ................ George G. Beasley .............................. Gordon Gray, Jr. .................................. Centennial Broadcasting LLC

.......................................................... Centennial Broadcasting Nevada, Inc.20004007 ................ Wolseley Plc ......................................... Fairfax Lumber & Millwork Company,

Incorporated.Fairfax Lumber & Millwork Company,

Incorporated




20004013 ................ Mobex Communications, Inc. ............... American Commercial Lines HoldingsLLC.

Waterway Communications SystemLLC

20004023 ................ Brokat AG ............................................. Blaze Software, Inc. ............................. Blaze Software, Inc.


20003985 ................ Partners Health Care Systems, Inc. .... BWH Anesthesia Foundation, Inc. ....... BWH Anesthesia Foundation, Inc.20003986 ................ Partners Health Care System, Inc. ...... Brigham Medical Group Foundation,

Inc..Brigham Medical Group Foundation,

Inc.20004025 ................ PA Holdings Limited ............................. Hagler Bailly, Inc. ................................. Hagler Bailly, Inc.20004041 ................ Grove Hill Medical Center, P.C. ........... PhyCor, Inc. ......................................... PhyCor of New Britain, Inc.


20003960 ................ Enron Corp. .......................................... Columbia Energy Group ...................... Columbia Energy Power Meeting Cor-poration

.......................................................... Columbia Energy Retail Corporation

.......................................................... Columbia Energy Services Corporation


20003842 ................ Maverick Tube Corporation .................. Prudential Steel Ltd. ............................. Prudential Steel Ltd.20003916 ................ Bell Atlantic Corporation ...................... Kevin Douglas ...................................... Blackwater Cellular Corporation20003930 ................ Jeffrey H. Smulyan ............................... Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. ............. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc.20003943 ................ Fortmann-Druhe-Mertens GmbH Co.

Betteliligungs KG.Armstrong Holdings, Inc. ...................... Armstrong World Indistries, Inc.

.......................................................... The W.W. Henry Company20003956 ................ Galen Holdings PLC ............................ Warner Chilcott Public Limited Com-

pany.Warner Chilcott Public Limited Com-

pany20003967 ................ Media/Communications Partners II

Limited Partnership.CoreComm Limited .............................. CoreComm Limited

20004003 ................ Covad Communications Group, Inc. .... BlueStar Communications Group, Inc. BlueStar Communications Group, Inc.20004015 ................ Gannett Co., Inc. .................................. BrassRing, Inc. ..................................... BrassRing, Inc.20004020 ................ Kenny Industrial Services, L.L.C. ......... Canisco Resources, Inc. ...................... Canisco Resources, Inc.20004028 ................ Macrovision Corporation ...................... Matthew Christiano, Sallie J. Calhoun

(husband & wife).GLOBEtrotter Software, Inc.

20004029 ................ Matthew Christiano, Sallie J. Calhoun(husband & wife).

Macrovision Corporation ...................... Macrovision Corporation

20004030 ................ Aventis S.A. .......................................... Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ........ Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.20004031 ................ Millenium Pharmaceuticals Inc. ........... Aventis S.A. .......................................... Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc.20004032 ................ HMTF Equity Fund IV (1999), L.P. ...... ICG Communications, Inc. ................... ICG Communications, Inc.20004035 ................ Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. .......... SkillSoft Corporation ............................ SkillSoft Corporation20004040 ................ The May Department Stores Company David’s Bridal, Inc. ............................... David’s Bridal, Inc.20004044 ................ Weaverman SA .................................... Robert E. Norman ................................ Southwestern Wire Cloth, Inc.20004048 ................ Citizens Communications Company .... Bell Atlantic Corporation ...................... Contel of Minnesota, Inc., GTE West

Coast Inc........................................................... GTE California Inc., GTE North Inc.,

GTE South Inc.20004054 ................ IFCO Systems N.V. .............................. William Haines ..................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers of Alabama

LLC.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers of Ft. Meyers

LLC.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers of Illinois

LLC.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers of Indiana

LLC.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers of Ohio LLC.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers of Ten-

nessee LLC.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers, Inc.......................................................... Bromley Pallet Recyclers, LLC

20004058 ................ Freedom Communications, Inc. ........... Kenneth R. Thomson ........................... The Thomson Company, Inc.20004059 ................ Huhtamaki Van Leer Oyi ...................... Graphic Packaging International Cor-

poration.Graphic Packaging Corporation

20004066 ................ Raymond F. Kennedy .......................... Masco Corporation ............................... Masco Corporation20004068 ................ Invemed Catalyst Fund, L.P. ............... Softbank Corp. ..................................... Key3Media Group, Inc.20004069 ................ Bank of Montreal .................................. Roger L. Freeman ................................ Freeman Wellwood & Co., Inc.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Sandra M. Peay or Parcellena P.Fielding, Contact Representatives,

Federal Trade Commission, PremergerNotification Office, Bureau of

Competition, Room 303, Washington,DC 20580, (202) 326–3100.



By Direction of the Commission.Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19352 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M


[File No. 991 0308]

Establissements Delhaize Freres et Cie‘‘Le Lion’’ S.A., et al.; Analysis to AidPublic Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement.

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in thismatter settles alleged violations offederal law prohibiting unfair ordeceptive acts or practices or unfairmethods of competition. The attachedAnalysis to Aid Public Commentdescribes both the allegations in thedraft complaint that accompanies theconsent agreement and the terms of theconsent order—embodied in the consentagreement—that would settle theseallegations.DATES: Comments must be received onor before August 24, 2000.ADDRESSES: Comments should bedirected to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,Washington, DC 20580.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Richard Parker, FTC/H–374, 600Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington,DC 20580. (202) 326–2574.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuantto Section 6(f) of the Federal TradeCommission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.46 and Section 2.34 of the Commission’sRules of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), noticeis hereby given that the above-captionedconsent agreement containing a consentorder to cease and desist, having beenfiled with and accepted, subject to finalapproval, by the Commission, has beenplaced on the public record for a periodof thirty (30) days. The followingAnalysis to Aid Public Commentdescribes the terms of the consentagreement, and the allegations in thecomplaint. An electronic copy of thefull text of the consent agreementpackage can be obtained from the FTCHome Page (for July 25, 2000), on theWorld Wide Web, at ‘‘http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/formal.htm.’’ A papercopy can be obtained from the FTCPublic Reference Room, Room H–130,600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Washington, DC 20580, either in personor by calling (202) 326–3627.

Public comment is invited. Commentsshould be directed to: FTC/Office of theSecretary, Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania

Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20580. Twopaper copies of each comment shouldbe filed, and should be accompanied, ifpossible by a 31⁄2-inch diskettecontaining an electronic copy of thecomment. Such comments or views willbe considered by the Commission andwill be available for inspection andcopying at its principal office inaccordance with Section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) ofthe Commission’s Rules of Practice (16CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Analysis of the Complaint andProposed Consent Order to Aid PublicComment

I. Introduction

The Federal Trade Commission(‘‘Commission’’) has accepted for publiccomment from Establissments DelhaizeFreres et Cie ‘‘Le Lion’’ S.A.(‘‘Delhaize’’), Delhaize America, Inc.(‘‘Delhaize America’’), and HannafordBros. Co. (‘‘Hannaford’’) (collectively‘‘the Proposed Respondents’’), anAgreement Containing Consent Order(‘‘the proposed consent order’’). TheProposed Respondents have alsoreviewed a draft complaint that theCommission contemplates issuing. Theproposed consent order is designed toremedy likely anticompetitive effectsarising from the proposed Agreementand Plan of Merger between Delhaize,Delhaize America, and Hannaford toacquire all of the outstanding votingstock of Hannaford.

II. Description of the Parties and theProposed Acquisition

Delhaize America, a North Carolinacorporation, which operates most of itsstores under the names of ‘‘Food Lion’’and ‘‘Kash N’ Karry,’’ has over 1,200supermarkets in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic regions of the United States.Food Lion stores are situated inVirginia, North Carolina, SouthCarolina, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee,Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania,Delaware, and Maryland. DelhaizeAmerica’s total sales for fiscal year 1999were $11 billion, with most generatedby Food Lion stores’ operations.

Hannaford, a publicly traded firm, isa Maine corporation with executiveoffices located in Scarborough, Maine.Approximately one-fourth of itscommon stock is owned by the Sobeyfamily of Stellarton, Nova Scotia,Canada, and its various affiliated trustsand companies. Hannaford’s total salesfor fiscal year 1999 were $3.46 billion.Hannaford operates about 100 storesunder the ‘‘Hannaford’’ or ‘‘Shop ‘NSave’’ banner in metropolitan NewEngland and New York markets, plusabout 50 stores under the ‘‘Hannford’’

banner in Virginia and North Carolinamarkets. Hannaford entered theSoutheast in the mid-1900’s. Thecompany’s supermarkets are located inMaine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,Vermont, New York, North Carolina,Virginia, and South Carolina.

Under the terms of the mergeragreement, dated August 17, 1999,Delhaize America will acquire all ofHannaford’s outstanding voting stockfor approximately $3.6 billion.

III. The Draft ComplaintThe draft complaint alleges that the

relevant line of commerce (i.e., theproduct market) is the retail sale of foodand grocery items in supermarkets.Supermarkets provide a distinct set ofproducts and services for consumerswho desire to one-stop shop for foodand grocery products. Supermarketscarry a full line and wide selection ofboth food and nonfood products(typically more than 10,000 differentstock-keeping units (‘‘SKUs’’)), as wellas a deep inventory of those SKUs in avariety of brand names and sizes. Inorder to accommodate the large numberof food and nonfood products necessaryfor one-stop shopping, supermarkets arelarge stores that typically have at least10,000 square feet of selling space.Supermarkets in North Carolina andVirginia, where the parties propose todivest supermarkets, tend to be at least20,000 square feet, selling some 25,000–35,000 SKUs. So called ‘‘supercenters’’operated by mass merchants such asWalMart, which have full-linesupermarkets attached to generalmerchandise stores, are included in theproduct market.

Supermarkets compete primarily withother supermarkets that provide one-stop shopping for food and groceryproducts. Supermarkets base their foodand grocery prices on the pricesprimarily of food and grocery productssold at nearby supermarkets.Supermarkets do not regularly price-check food and grocery products sold atother types of stores such as club storesor limited assortment stores, and do notsignificantly change their food andgrocery prices in response to prices atother types of stores. Most consumersshopping for food and grocery productsat supermarkets are not likely to shopelsewhere in response to a small priceincrease by supermarkets.

Retail stores other than supermarketsthat sell food and grocery products,such as neighborhood ‘‘mom & pop’’grocery stores, limited assortmentstores, convenience stores, specialtyfood stores (e.g., seafood markets,bakeries, etc.), club stores, militarycommissaries, and mass merchants, do



1 The HHI is a measurement of marketconcentration calculated by summing the squares ofthe individual market shares of all the participants.

2 Acceptance of the proposed consent order forpublic comment terminates the Hart-Scott-Rodinowaiting period and enables Delhaize America toimmediately acquire the Hannaford voting stock.

not effectively constrain most prices atsupermarkets. These other storesoperate significantly different retailformats and sell far more limitedassortments of items or in the case ofmilitary commissaries are only open toa limited population base. None of theseformats would constrain a price increasetaken by supermarkets in the geographicmarkets.

The draft complaint alleges that therelevant sections of the country (i.e., thegeographic markets) in which to analyzethe acquisition are the county orcounties that include the followingincorporated cities and towns. InVirginia the relevant geographic marketsare: (a) a market consisting of theRichmond MSA; and (b) two marketsthat are part of the Norfolk-VirginiaBeach-Newport News MSA (also knownas the Tidewater area)—the TidewaterPeninsula (Newport News, Hamptonand other portions of the peninsulanorth of the James River), and SouthernTidewater (including Norfolk, VirginiaBeach, Portsmouth, and other parts ofthe MSA south of the James River). InNorth Carolina the relevant geographicmarkets are: (a) the Wilmington MSA;(b) Columbus County; (c) DuplinCounty; (d) Pender County; and (e)‘‘greater Raleigh,’’ which includes WakeCounty, excluding the towns of WakeForest, Rolesville, Zebulon, andWendell.

Food Lion and Hannaford are actualand direct competitors in all of theabove listed markets. The acquisitionwill eliminate that competition. Thedraft complaint alleges that each of thepost merger markets would be highlyconcentrated, whether measured by theHerfindahl-Hirschman Index(commonly referred to as ‘‘HHI’’) or bytwo-firm and four-firm concentrationratios.1 The acquisition wouldsubstantially increase concentration ineach market. Delhaize America andHannaford would have a combinedmarket share that ranges from 35percent to 94 percent in each geographicmarket. The post-acquisition HHIs inthe geographic markets range from 2562points to 8817 points.

Concentration levels in the geographicmarkets alleged in the draft complaintwould not be materially different evenif club stores and limited assortmentstores were included in the productmarket. The draft complaint furtheralleges that entry is difficult and wouldnot be timely, likely, or sufficient toprevent anticompetitive effects in therelevant geographic markets.

The draft complaint alleges thatDelhaize America’s proposedacquisition of all of the outstandingvoting stock of Hannaford, ifconsummated, may substantially lessencompetition in the relevant markets inviolation of Section 7 of the ClaytonAct, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, andSection 5 of the Federal TradeCommission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C.45, by eliminating direct competitionbetween supermarkets owned orcontrolled by Delhaize andsupermarkets owned or controlled byHannaford; by increasing the likelihoodthat Delhaize will unilaterally exercisemarket power; and by increasing thelikelihood of, or facilitating, collusion orcoordinated interaction among theremaining supermarket firms. Each ofthese effects raises the likelihood thatthe prices of food, groceries or serviceswill increase, and the quality andselection of food, groceries or serviceswill decrease, in the geographic marketsalleged in the proposed complaint.

IV. Terms of the Agreement ContainingConsent Order (‘‘the proposed consentorder’’)

The proposed consent order willremedy the Commission’s competitiveconcerns about the proposedacquisition.2 Under the terms of theproposed consent order, the ProposedRespondents must divest 37 identifiedHannaford supermarkets and oneidentified Hannaford supermarket sitein the relevant markets to three differentup-front buyers. These buyers wereselected by the parties and presented tothe Commission for its review.

The Commission’s goal is evaluatingpossible purchasers of divested assets isto maintain the competitiveenvironment that existed prior to theacquisition. When divestiture is anappropriate remedy for a supermarketmerger, the Commission requires themerging parties to find a buyer for thedivested stores. A proposed buyer mustnot itself present competitive problems.For example, the Commission is lesslikely to approve a buyer that alreadyhas a large retail presence in therelevant geographic area than a buyerwithout such a presence. TheCommission is preliminarily satisfiedthat the purchasers presented by theparties are well qualified to run thedivested stores and that divestiture tothese purchasers poses no separatecompetitive issues. Public commentsmay address the suitability of the

designated acquirers to acquire thesupermarkets at issue.

The three up-front buyers and thenumber of stores each is acquiring areas follows: Kroger Co. (20 stores inVirginia), Lowe’s Food Stores, Inc. (12stores and one site in North Carolina),and the Sylvester Group (five stores inNorth Carolina). Kroger, headquarteredin Ohio, operates 2,300 supermarkets in31 states. Kroger is buying the stores inthe Richmond and Tidewater areaswhere it does not currently operatesupermarkets. Lowe’s, a North Carolinacorporation, operates 86 supermarketsthroughout North Carolina and Virginia.Lowe’s is buying supermarkets inWilmington and Raleigh. Lowe’s has asmall presence in Raleigh, operating twosupermarkets in that market, butoperates no supermarkets inWilmington. The Sylvester Group, afamily-owned firm, operates 26 ‘‘PigglyWiggly’’ supermarkets in rural NorthCarolina and will acquire five stores.The Sylvester Group operates one storein Duplin County, but the Hannaford itis acquiring is 20 miles from that store.A list of the specific supermarkets thatDelhaize America and Hannaford mustdivest to each of the up-front buyers isattached at the end of this Analysis ofthe Draft Complaint and ProposedConsent Order to Aid Public Comment.

The proposed consent order requiresthat, no later than 10 days after the dateon which the consent order becomesfinal, the Proposed Respondents shalldivest these assets pursuant to and inaccordance with their agreements withthe buyers. The amount of time requiredfor the divestitures varies with each ofthe buyers, based on the buyer’s need toconvert large numbers of new stores intoits operations.

The proposed consent order alsorequires the Proposed Respondents toinclude rescission provisions in its up-front buyer agreements that allow it torescind the transaction(s) if theCommission, after the comment period,decides to reject any of the up-frontbuyers. If, at the time the Commissiondecides to make the proposed consentorder final, the Commission notifies theProposed Respondents that any of theup-front buyers to which they havedivested a supermarket or site is not anacceptable acquirer, or that any up-frontbuyer agreement is not an acceptablemanner of divestiture, then theProposed Respondents mustimmediately rescind the transaction inquestion and divest those assets withinthree months after the proposed consentorder becomes final. At that time, theProposed Respondents must divestthose assets only to an acquirer thatreceives the prior approval of the



Commission and only in a manner thatreceives the prior approval of theCommission. In the event that anyCommission-approved buyer is unableto take or keep possession of any of thesupermarkets identified for divestiture,a trustee that the Commission mayappoint has the power to divest anyadditional ancillary assets and effectsuch arrangements as are necessary tosatisfy the requirements of the proposedconsent order.

The proposed consent orderspecifically requires the ProposedRespondents to: (1) maintain theviability, competitiveness andmarketability of the assets to bedivested; (2) not cause the wasting ordeterioration of the assets to bedivested; (3) not sell, transfer,encumber, or otherwise impair theirmarketability or viability; (4) maintainthe supermarkets consistent with pastpractices; (5) use best efforts to preserveexisting relationships with suppliers,customers and employees; and (6) keepthe supermarkets open for business andmaintain the inventory of products ineach store consistent with past practice.The proposed consent order alsocontains more specific details relating tomaintaining store operations.

The proposed consent order alsoenables the Commission to appoint atrustee to divest any supermarkets orsite identified in the order that DelhaizeAmerica and Hannaford have notdivested to satisfy the requirements ofthe proposed consent order. Theproposed consent order also enables theCommission to seek civil penaltiesagainst Delhaize or Delhaize Americafor non-compliance with the proposedconsent order.

For a period of 10 years from the datethe proposed consent order becomesfinal, the Proposed Respondents arerequired to provide written notice to theCommission prior to acquiringsupermarket assets located in, or anyinterest (such as stock) in any entity thatowns or operates a supermarket locatedin the county or counties that includethe relevant geographic areas. ProposedRespondents may not complete such anacquisition until they have providedinformation requested by theCommission. This provision does notrestrict the Proposed Respondents fromconstructing new supermarket facilitieson their own; nor does it restrict theProposed Respondents from leasingfacilities not operated as supermarketswithin the previous six months.

For a period of 10 years, the proposedconsent order also prohibits theProposed Respondents from enteringinto or enforcing any agreement thatrestricts the ability of any person that

acquires any supermarket, any leaseholdinterest in any supermarket, or anyinterest in any retail location used as asupermarket on or after January 1, 1998,to operate a supermarket at that site ifsuch supermarket was formerly ownedor operated by the ProposedRespondents in the county or countiesthat include the relevant geographicareas. In addition, the ProposedRespondents may not remove fixtures orequipment from a store or propertyowned or leased in these counties thatis no longer in operation as asupermarket, except (1) prior to a sale,sublease, assignment, or change inoccupancy, or (2) to relocate suchfixtures or equipment in the ordinarycourse of business to any othersupermarket owned or operated byProposed Respondents.

The Proposed Respondents arerequired to provide to the Commissiona report of compliance with theproposed consent order within 30 daysfollowing the date on which they signedthe proposed consent, every 30 daysthereafter until the divestitures arecompleted, and annually for a period of10 years.

V. Opportunity for Public CommentThe proposed consent order has been

placed on the public record for 30 daysfor receipt of comments by interestedpersons. Comments received during thisperiod will become part of the publicrecord. After 30 days, the Commissionwill again review the proposed consentorder and the comments received andwill decide whether it should withdrawfrom the agreement or make theproposed consent order final.

By accepting the proposed consentorder subject to final approval, theCommission anticipates that thecompetitive problems alleged in thecomplaint will be resolved. The purposeof this analysis is to invite publiccomment on the proposed consentorder, including the proposed sale ofsupermarkets to the variousindependent buyers listed below, inorder to aid the Commission in itsdetermination of whether to make theproposed consent order final. Thisanalysis is not intended to constitute anofficial interpretation of the proposedconsent order nor is it intended tomodify the terms of the proposedconsent order in any way.

Attachment—To Analysis of the Complaintand Proposed Consent Order to Aid PublicComment

Supermarkets Divested to KrogerHannaford Store No. 427, located at 9480 W.

Broad St., Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 474, located at 2738

Hannaford Plaza, Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 477, located at 4816 S.

Laburnum, Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 478, located at 1356

Gaskins Rd., Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 479, located at 3507 W.

Cary St., Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 480, located at 11400

Huguenot Rd., Midlothian, VAHannaford Store No. 481, located at 10921

Hull St., Midlothian, VAHannaford Store No. 484, located at 7951

Brook Rd., Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 486, located at 12201

So. Chalkley, Chester, VAHannaford Store No. 490, located at 1601

Willow Lawn Dr., Richmond, VAHannaford Store No. 430, located at 14246

Warwick Blvd., Newport News, VAHannaford Store No. 432, located at 4692

Columbus St., Virginia Beach, VAHannaford Store No. 483, located at 4625

Shore Dr., Virginia Beach, VAHannaford Store No. 487, located at 1800

Republic Dr., Virginia Beach, VAHannaford Store No. 488, located at 101

Village Ave., York Co., VAHannaford Store No. 491, located at 2029

Lynnhaven Pkwy., Virginia Beach, VAHannaford Store No. 492, located at 205 East

Little Creek Rd., Norfolk, VAHannaford Store No. 493, located at 5237

Providence Rd., Virginia Beach, VAHannaford Store No. 494, located at 5601

High St., Portsmouth, VAHannaford Store No. 496, located at King

Richard Dr., Virginia Beach, VA

Supermarkets and Unbuilt Site Divested toLowe’s

Hannaford Store No. 410, located at 341South College Rd., Wilmington, NC

Hannaford Store No. 415, located at 2316North College Rd., Wilmington, NC

Hannaford Store No. 424, located at 930 HighHouse Rd., Cary, NC

Hannaford Store No. 425, located at 9600Strickland Rd., Raleigh, NC

Hannaford Store No. 426, located at 5309Carolina Beach Rd., Wilmington, NC

Hannaford Store No. 428, located at 2900Millbrook Rd., Raleigh, NC

Hannaford Store No. 436, located at 2900Wake Forest Rd., Raleigh, NC

Hannaford Store No. 439, located at 1741Walnut St., Cary, NC

Hannaford Store No. 441, located at 5051–3Main St., Shallotte, NC

Hannaford Store No. 442, located at 4821Long Beach Rd., S.E., Southport, NC

Hannaford Store No. 444, located at 3804Oleander Dr., Wilmington, NC

Hannaford Store No. 455, located at 1405 W.Williams St., Suite A, Apex, NC UnbuiltSite, located at Ten Ten Road, Cary, NC

Supermarkets Divested to Ward Sylvester

Hannaford Store No. 402, located at 103South Dudley Street, Burgaw, NC

Hannaford Store No. 408, located at 112AVillage Road, Leland, NC

Hannaford Store No. 403, located at 107South Pine Street, Warsaw, NC

Hannaford Store No. 420, located at 701BWhite’s Crossing Shopping Center,Whiteville, NC

Hannaford Store No. 414, located at 604



Jefferson Street, Whiteville, NC

By direction of the Commission.Donald S. Clark,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19350 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6750–01–M


Office of the Secretary

Notice of Interest Rate on OverdueDebts

Section 30.13 of the Department ofHealth and Human Services claimscollection regulations (45 CFR Part 30)provides that the Secretary shall chargean annual rate of interest as fixed by theSecretary of the Treasury after takinginto consideration private consumerrates of interest prevailing on the datethat HHS becomes entitled to recovery.The rate generally cannot be lower thanthe Department of Treasury’s currentvalue of funds rate or the applicable ratedetermined from the ‘‘Schedule ofCertified Interest Rates with Range ofMaturities.’’ This rate may be revisedquarterly by the Secretary of theTreasury and shall be publishedquarterly by the Department of Healthand Human Services in the FederalRegister.

The Secretary of the Treasury hascertified a rate of 137⁄8% for the quarterended June 30, 2000. This interest ratewill remain in effect until such time asthe Secretary of the Treasury notifiesHHS of any change.

Dated: July 25, 2000.George Strader,Deputy Assistant Secretary, Finance.[FR Doc. 00–19295 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4150–04–M


Centers for Disease Control andPrevention

[30DAY–54–00]

Agency Forms Undergoing PaperworkReduction Act Review

The Centers for Disease Control andPrevention (CDC) publishes a list ofinformation collection requests underreview by the Office of Management andBudget (OMB) in compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.Chapter 35). To request a copy of theserequests, call the CDC Reports ClearanceOfficer at (404) 639–7090. Send writtencomments to CDC, Desk Officer; HumanResources and Housing Branch, NewExecutive Office Building, Room 10235;Washington, DC 20503. Writtencomments should be received within 30days of this notice.

Proposed ProjectsInterstate Control of Communicable

Diseases—New—The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) and Centers forDisease Control and Prevention (CDC)are planning to consolidate regulationsrelated to controlling the spread ofcommunicable diseases, therebyincreasing their efficiency andeffectiveness. Currently, the regulationscontained in Part 1240 of Title 21, Codeof Federal Regulations, which pertain tointerstate control of communicablediseases, are administered by FDA.Regulations to prevent the introduction,transmission, or spread ofcommunicable diseases from foreigncountries into the United States areseparately promulgated in Part 71 ofTitle 42, Code of Federal Regulationsand are administered by the CDC. FDAis transferring to CDC certain sections of21 CFR Part 1240 that relate torestrictions on interstate travel of anyperson who is in the communicableperiod of cholera, plague, smallpox,typhus, or yellow fever, or who, havingbeen exposed to any such disease, is inthe incubation period thereof.

Of the regulations being transferred,21 CFR 1240.50 (Certain communicablediseases; special requirements), containsa requirement for reporting certaininformation to the Federal government.Specifically, this regulation requires anyperson who is in the communicableperiod of cholera, plague, smallpox,typhus or yellow fever, or who, havingbeen exposed to any such disease, is inthe incubation period thereof, to applyfor and receive a permit from theSurgeon General or his authorizedrepresentative in order to travel fromone State or possession to another.

Control of disease transmissionwithin the States is considered to be theprovince of State and Local healthauthorities, with Federal assistancebeing sought by those authorities on acooperative basis, without applicationof Federal regulations. The regulationsformerly administered by FDA andbeing assumed by CDC were developedto facilitate Federal action in the event

of large outbreaks of disease requiring acoordinated effort involving severalStates, or in the event of inadequatelocal control. While it is not knownwhether, or to what extent, situationsmay arise in which these regulationswould be invoked, contingencyplanning for domestic emergencypreparedness is not uncommon. Shouldthis occur, the reporting and recordkeeping requirements contained in theregulations will be used by CDC to carryout quarantine responsibilities asrequired by law.

Because of the uncertainty aboutwhether a situation will ever ariseprecipitating CDC’s enforcement of thisrule, the following data collectionburden estimate was prepared using thearticle Smallpox: An Attack Scenario,Tara O’Toole; Emerging InfectiousDiseases, Vol. 5, No. 4, Jul-Aug 1999.This article describes the aftermath of ahypothetical domestic public healthemergency situation involving smallpoxvirus. Of the potentially 15,000 personsinfected with smallpox, the datacollection assumes that one-fourth ofthese would apply for a permit to movefrom one state to another while in thecommunicable period of or having beenexposed to smallpox, under therequirements set forth in 42 CFR 70.5.During such an event, it is assumed thatan additional 2,000 persons not infectedwith smallpox may, as a precautionarymeasure, be required to obtain a Statepermit in order to move from one Stateto another, and that 8 States would beinvolved, under the requirements setforth in 42 CFR 70.3.

Further, it is assumed that duringsuch an event, the master of a vessel orperson in charge of a conveyance maybe required to notify a local healthauthority of as many as 1,500 suspectedcases of communicable diseasedeveloped and/or observed duringtransit, involving as many as 20 State orlocal jurisdictions, under therequirements set forth in 42 CFR 70.4.

In such a scenario, it would be likelythat CDC would obtain for followup andanalysis any information it requires tobe delivered to a State or local healthauthority. Accordingly, an additionalburden may be imposed upon saidauthority to copy and transmit thatinformation. We assume that the burdenwould apply to 100% of the informationsubmitted under both 42 CFR 70.3 and42 CFR 70.4

The annualized burden is estimated tobe 3,600 hours.



Regulation Respondent Number ofapplicants

Number ofresponses per

applicant

AverageBurden per

Response (inminutes)

42 CFR 70.3 ................................................... Traveler .......................................................... 2,000 1 15/60Attending physician ........................................ 2,000 1 15/60

42 CFR 70.3 ................................................... State Health Authority .................................... 8 250 6/6042 CFR 70.4 ................................................... The Master of a vessel or person in charge

of a conveyance engaged in interstate traf-fic.

1,500 1 15/60

42 CFR 70.4 ................................................... State or local Health authority ....................... 20 75 6/6041 CFR 70.5 ................................................... Traveler .......................................................... 3,750 1 15/60

Attending physician ........................................ 3,750 1 15/60

Dated: July 26, 2000.Nancy Cheal,Acting Associate Director for Policy,Planning, and Evaluation, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC).[FR Doc. 00–19324 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4163–18–P


Centers for Disease Control andPrevention

Disease, Disability, and InjuryPrevention and Control SpecialEmphasis Panel (SEP): CooperativeAgreements for Prevention ResearchCenters, Supplemental Awards underProgram Announcement 98047

In accordance with section 10(a)(2) ofthe Federal Advisory Committee Act(Public Law 92–463), the Centers forDisease Control and Prevention (CDC)announces the following meeting. Thisnotice is published less than 15 days inadvance of the meeting due toadministrative delays.NAME: Disease, Disability, and InjuryPrevention and Control SpecialEmphasis Panel (SEP): CooperativeAgreements for Prevention ResearchCenters, Supplemental Awards underProgram Announcement 98047,meeting.TIMES AND DATES: 1 p.m.–1:30 p.m.,August 9, 2000 (Open). 1:30 p.m.–4p.m., August 9, 2000 (Closed).PLACE: The teleconference call willoriginate in the National Center forChronic Disease Prevention and HealthPromotion, Prevention Research CentersProgram, Koger Center, RhodesBuilding, 3005 Chamblee Tucker Rd.,Atlanta, Ga 30341. Open access to thecall will be available from 1–1:30 p.m.EDT, only. Interested parties may accessthe teleconference at 877/331–6867. Theparticipant code is 949464.STATUS: Portions of the meeting will beclosed to the public in accordance withprovisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4)

and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and theDetermination of the Associate Directorfor Management and Operations, CDC,pursuant to Public Law 92–463.MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED: The meetingwill include the review, discussion, andevaluation of supplemental awardapplications received in response toProgram Announcement ι98047.CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:David Elswick, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, National Centerfor Chronic Disease Prevention andHealth Promotion, 4770 BufordHighway m/s K30, Atlanta, GA., 30341.Telephone 770/488–5395, [email protected].

The Director, Management Analysisand Services office has been delegatedthe authority to sign Federal Registernotices pertaining to announcements ofmeetings and other committeemanagement activities, for both theCenters for Disease Control andPrevention and the Agency for ToxicSubstances and Disease Registry.

Dated: July 25, 2000.Carolyn J. Russell,Director, Management Analysis and ServicesOffice, Centers for Disease Control andPrevention.[FR Doc. 00–19462 Filed 7–28–00; 10:36 am]BILLING CODE 4163–18–P



[Docket No. 00D–1418]

International Conference onHarmonisation; Draft Guidance onGood Manufacturing Practice forActive Pharmaceutical Ingredients;Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,HHS.ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) is announcing the

availability of a draft guidance entitled‘‘Q7A ICH Good Manufacturing PracticeGuide for Active PharmaceuticalIngredients.’’ The draft guidance wasprepared under the auspices of theInternational Conference onHarmonisation of TechnicalRequirements for Registration ofPharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH).The document is intended to provideguidance regarding current goodmanufacturing practice (CGMP) formanufacturing of active pharmaceuticalingredients (API’s). Therecommendations in the draft guidanceare intended to assist in themanufacture of API’s that meet thestandards for quality and purity theypurport or are represented to possess.

DATES: Submit written comments byOctober 2, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the draft guidanceare available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/index.htm.Submit written requests for singlecopies of the draft guidance to the DrugInformation Branch (HFD–210), Centerfor Drug Evaluation and Research, Foodand Drug Administration, 5600 FishersLane, Rockville, MD 20857, or the Officeof Communication, Training, andManufacturers Assistance (HFM–40),Center for Biologics Evaluation andResearch (CBER), 1401 Rockville Pike,Rockville, MD 20852–1448, 301–827–3844, FAX 888–CBERFAX. Send twoself-addressed adhesive labels to assistthe office in processing your requests.

To facilitate the submission andreview of comments on this draftguidance, the agency has developed twomethods for submitting electroniccomments. Interested persons maysubmit comments to the DocketsManagement Branch (HFA–305) onlineor offline by downloading a commentstemplate. Both methods are accessibleon the FDA web site at http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets. Theagency encourages the submission ofelectronic comments and anticipatesthat widespread use of these methods



will increase the effectiveness of theguidance development process.

Interested parties may also submitwritten comments on the draft guidanceto the Dockets Management Branch(HFA–305), Food and DrugAdministration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Requestsand comments should be identified withthe docket number found in brackets inthe heading of this document.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Regarding the guidance:

Joseph X. Phillips, Central RegionalOffice, U.S. Customhouse, 2d andChestnut Sts., rm. 900, Philadelphia, PA19106, 215–597–0492,[email protected], or

Edwin Rivera, Center for DrugEvaluation and Research (HFD–320),Food and Drug Administration, 7520Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301–594–0095, [email protected], or

John A. Eltermann, Center forBiologics Evaluation and Research(HFM–670), Food and DrugAdministration, 1401 Rockville Pike,Rockville, MD 20852, 301–827–3031,[email protected].

Regarding the ICH: Janet J. Showalter,Office of International Programs (HFY–20), Food and Drug Administration,5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD20857, 301–827–0864.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In recentyears, many important initiatives havebeen undertaken by regulatoryauthorities and industry associations topromote international harmonization ofregulatory requirements. FDA hasparticipated in many meetings designedto enhance harmonization and iscommitted to seeking scientificallybased harmonized technical proceduresfor pharmaceutical development. One ofthe goals of harmonization is to identifyand then reduce differences in technicalrequirements for drug developmentamong regulatory agencies.

ICH was organized to provide anopportunity for tripartite harmonizationinitiatives to be developed with inputfrom both regulatory and industryrepresentatives. FDA also seeks inputfrom consumer representatives andothers. ICH is concerned withharmonization of technicalrequirements for the registration ofpharmaceutical products among threeregions: The European Union, Japan,and the United States. The six ICHsponsors are the European Commission,the European Federation ofPharmaceutical Industries Associations,the Japanese Ministry of Health andWelfare, the Japanese PharmaceuticalManufacturers Association, the Centersfor Drug Evaluation and Research and

Biologics Evaluation and Research,FDA, and the Pharmaceutical Researchand Manufacturers of America. The ICHSecretariat, which coordinates thepreparation of documentation, isprovided by the InternationalFederation of PharmaceuticalManufacturers Associations (IFPMA).

The ICH Steering Committee includesrepresentatives from each of the ICHsponsors and the IFPMA, as well asobservers from the World HealthOrganization, the Canadian HealthProtection Branch, and the EuropeanFree Trade Area.

In July 2000, the ICH SteeringCommittee agreed that a draft guidanceentitled ‘‘Q7A ICH Good ManufacturingPractice Guide for ActivePharmaceutical Ingredients’’ should bemade available for public comment. Thedraft guidance is the product of theQuality Expert Working Group of theICH. Comments about this draft will beconsidered by FDA and the QualityExpert Working Group.

In accordance with FDA’s goodguidance practices (GGP’s) (62 FR 8961,February 27, 1997), this document isbeing called a guidance, rather than aguideline.

To facilitate the process of makingICH guidances available to the public,the agency is changing its procedure forpublishing ICH guidances. BeginningApril 2000, we will no longer includethe text of ICH guidances in the FederalRegister. Instead, we will publish anotice in the Federal Registerannouncing the availability of an ICHguidance. The ICH guidance will beplaced in the docket and can beobtained through regular agency sources(see the ADDRESSES section). The draftguidance will be left in the original ICHformat. The final guidance will bereformatted to conform to the GGP stylebefore publication.

The draft guidance describes CGMPfor the manufacturing of API’s. Therecommendations in the draft guidanceare intended to assist in themanufacture of API’s that meet thestandards for quality and purity theypurport or are represented to possess.The draft guidance is not intended todefine registration or filing requirementsor modify pharmacopeial requirements.

In the draft guidance,‘‘manufacturing’’ includes alloperations, and related controls, ofreceipt of materials, production,packaging, repackaging, labeling,relabeling, quality control, release,storage, and distribution of API’s. Thedraft guidance applies to themanufacture of API’s for use in humandrug products, including sterile API’sup to the point immediately before the

API is rendered sterile. The sterilizationand aseptic processing of sterile API’sare not covered by this draft guidance.CGMP’s described in the draft guidanceshould be applied to the APImanufacturing process beginning withthe use of starting materials.

The draft guidance applies to API’sthat are manufactured by chemicalsynthesis, extraction, cell culture/fermentation, recovery from naturalsources, or any combination of theseprocesses. Intermediates and API’sproduced by recombinant DNAtechnology are covered provided theyare proteinacious materials.

The draft guidance does not apply tovaccines, whole cells, whole blood andplasma, and API’s derived from plasmafractionation, but does apply to API’sproduced using blood or plasma as rawmaterials. The draft guidance does notapply to cell substrates, medical gases,bulk-packaged drug products, andmanufacturing/control aspects specificto radiopharmaceuticals.

This draft guidance represents theagency’s current thinking on CGMP’s formanufacturing of API’s. It does notcreate or confer any rights for or on anyperson and does not operate to bindFDA or the public. An alternativeapproach may be used if such approachsatisfies the requirements of theapplicable statutes, regulations, or both.

Interested persons may submitelectronic comments to the DocketsManagement Branch (http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets) byOctober 2, 2000. Written comments alsocan be submitted on the draft guidance(address above). Two copies of anycomments are to be submitted, exceptthat individuals may submit one copy.Comments are to be identified with thedocket number found in brackets in theheading of this document. The draftguidance and received comments maybe seen in the office above between 9a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday throughFriday.


Margaret M. Dotzel,Associate Commissioner for Policy.[FR Doc. 00–19332 Filed 7–27–00; 1:45 pm]






[Docket No. 00D–1385]

Draft Guidance for Industry onRefractive Implants: InvestigationalDevice Exemptions (IDE’s) andPremarket Approval Applications(PMA’s); Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,HHS.ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) is announcing theavailability of the draft guidanceentitled ‘‘Refractive Implants:Investigational Device Exemptions(IDE’s) and Premarket ApprovalApplications (PMA’s).’’ This guidance isneither final nor in effect at this time.This draft guidance describespreclinical and clinical information thatmay be used in support of IDE’s andPMA’s.

DATES: Submit written commentsconcerning this guidance by October 30,2000.ADDRESSES: Submit written requests forsingle copies on a 3.5″ diskette of thedraft guidance entitled ‘‘RefractiveImplants: Investigational DeviceExemptions (IDE’s) and PremarketApproval Applications (PMA’s)’’ to theDivision of Small ManufacturersAssistance (HFZ–220), Center forDevices and Radiological Health(CDRH), Food and Drug Administration,5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,MD 20852. Send two self-addressedadhesive labels to assist that office inprocessing your request, or fax yourrequest to 301–443–8818. Submitwritten comments concerning thisguidance to the Dockets ManagementBranch (HFA–305), Food and DrugAdministration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Commentsshould be identified with the docketnumber found in brackets in theheading of this document. See theSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section forinformation on electronic access to thedraft guidance.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Ashley A. Boulware, Center for Devicesand Radiological Health (HFZ–460),Food and Drug Administration, 9200Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850,301–594–2053.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

FDA is announcing the availability ofa draft guidance entitled ‘‘Refractive

Implants: Investigational DeviceExemptions (IDE’s) and PremarketApproval Applications (PMA’s).’’ Thisdraft guidance is intended to providedetailed information about the type ofpreclinical testing that can support bothclinical investigations and marketingapplications for new refractive implants.This draft guidance also is intended toprovide the basic principles that shouldbe applied in the conduct of a clinicalstudy for refractive implants. Parts ofthis guidance document were discussedat an Ophthalmic Devices Panel meetingin October 1998.

II. Significance of GuidanceThis guidance document represents

the agency’s current thinking onsubmissions for refractive implants. Itdoes not create or confer any rights foror on any person and does not operateto bind FDA or the public. Analternative approach may be used ifsuch approach satisfies the applicablestatute, regulations, or both.

The agency has adopted goodguidance practices (GGP’s), which setforth the agency’s policies andprocedures for the development,issuance, and use of guidancedocuments (62 FR 8961, February 27,1997). This guidance document isissued as a Level 1 guidance consistentwith GGP’s.

III. Electronic AccessIn order to receive ‘‘Refractive

Implants: Investigational DeviceExemptions (IDE’s) and PremarketApproval Applications (PMA’s)’’ viayour fax machine, call the CDRH Facts-On-Demand (FOD) system at 800–899–0381 or 301–827–0111 from a touch-tone telephone. At the first voiceprompt press 1 to access DSMA Facts,at second voice prompt press 2, andthen enter the document number (1145)followed by the pound sign (#). Thenfollow the remaining voice prompts tocomplete your request.

Persons interested in obtaining a copyof the draft guidance may also do sousing the Internet. CDRH maintains anentry on the Internet for easy access toinformation including text, graphics,and files that may be downloaded to apersonal computer with access to theInternet. Updated on a regular basis, theCDRH home page includes ‘‘RefractiveImplants: Investigational DeviceExemptions (IDE’s) and PremarketApproval Applications (PMA’s),’’ devicesafety alerts, Federal Register reprints,information on premarket submissions(including lists of approved applicationsand manufacturers’ addresses), smallmanufacturers’ assistance, informationon video conferencing and electronic

submissions, mammography matters,and other device-oriented information.The CDRH home page may be accessedat http://www.fda.gov/cdrh. ‘‘RefractiveImplants: Investigational DeviceExemptions (IDE’s) and PremarketApproval Applications (PMA’s)’’ isavailable at http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ode/guidance/1145.pdf.

IV. CommentsInterested persons may submit to the

Dockets Management Branch (addressabove) written comments regarding thisdraft guidance by October 30, 2000. Twocopies of any comments are to besubmitted, except that individuals maysubmit one copy. Comments are to beidentified with the docket numberfound in brackets in the heading of thisdocument. The draft guidance andreceived comments are available forpublic examination in the DocketsManagement Branch between 9 a.m. and4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Dated: July 17, 2000.Linda S. Kahan,Deputy Director for Regulations Policy, Centerfor Devices and Radiological Health.[FR Doc. 00–19337 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160–01–F


Substance Abuse and Mental HealthServices Administration

Current List of Laboratories WhichMeet Minimum Standards To Engage inUrine Drug Testing for FederalAgencies, and Laboratories That HaveWithdrawn From the Program

AGENCY: Substance Abuse and MentalHealth Services Administration, HHS.ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Health andHuman Services notifies Federalagencies of the laboratories currentlycertified to meet standards of Subpart Cof Mandatory Guidelines for FederalWorkplace Drug Testing Programs (59FR 29916, 29925). A similar noticelisting all currently certified laboratorieswill be published during the first weekof each month, and updated to includelaboratories which subsequently applyfor and complete the certificationprocess. If any listed laboratory’scertification is totally suspended orrevoked, the laboratory will be omittedfrom updated lists until such time as itis restored to full certification under theGuidelines.

If any laboratory has withdrawn fromthe National Laboratory Certification



Program during the past month, it willbe listed at the end, and will be omittedfrom the monthly listing thereafter.

This Notice is available on theinternet at the following website: http://www.health.org/workpl.htmFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs.Giselle Hersh or Dr. Walter Vogl,Division of Workplace Programs, 5600Fishers Lane, Rockwall 2 Building,Room 815, Rockville, Maryland 20857;Tel.: (301) 443–6014, Fax: (301) 443–3031.

Special Note: Please use the above addressfor all surface mail and correspondence. Forall overnight mail service use the followingaddress: Division of Workplace Programs,5515 Security Lane, Room 815, Rockville,Maryland 20852.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:Mandatory Guidelines for FederalWorkplace Drug Testing were developedin accordance with Executive Order12564 and section 503 of Pub. L. 100–71, Subpart C of the Guidelines,‘‘Certification of Laboratories Engagedin Urine Drug Testing for FederalAgencies,’’ sets strict standards whichlaboratories must meet in order toconduct urine drug testing for Federalagencies. To become certified anapplicant laboratory must undergo threerounds of performance testing plus anon-site inspection. To maintain thatcertification a laboratory mustparticipate in a quarterly performancetesting program plus periodic, on-siteinspections.

Laboratories which claim to be in theapplicant stage of certification are not tobe considered as meeting the minimumrequirements expressed in the HHSGuidelines. A laboratory must have itsletter of certification from SAMHSA,HHS (formerly: HHS/NIDA) whichattests that it has met minimumstandards.

In accordance with Subpart C of theGuidelines, the following laboratoriesmeet the minimum standards set forthin the Guidelines:ACL Laboratories, 8901 W. Lincoln

Ave., West Allis, WI 53227. 414–328–7840/800–877–7016,(Formerly: Bayshore ClinicalLaboratory)

Advanced Toxicology Network, 3560Air Center Cove, Suite 101,Memphis, TN 38118, 901–794–5770/888–290–1150

Aegis Analytical Laboratories, Inc., 345Hill Ave., Nashville, TN 37210,615–255–2400

Alabama Reference Laboratories, Inc.,543 South Hull St., Montgomery,AL 36103, 800–541–4931/334–263–5745

Alliance Laboratory Services, 3200Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH 45229,

513–585–9000, (Formerly: JewishHospital of Cincinnati, Inc.)

American Medical Laboratories, Inc.,14225 Newbrook Dr., Chantilly, VA20151, 703–802–6900

Associated Pathologists Laboratories,Inc., 4230 South Burnham Ave.,Suite 250, Las Vegas, NV 89119–5412, 702–733–7866/800–433–2750

Baptist Medical Center—ToxicologyLaboratory, 9601 I–630, Exit 7,Little Rock, AR 72205–7299, 501–202–2783, (Formerly: ForensicToxicology Laboratory BaptistMedical Center)

Clinical Reference Lab, 8433 QuiviraRd., Lenexa, KS 66215–2802, 800–445–6917

Cox Health Systems, Department ofToxicology, 1423 North JeffersonAve., Springfield, MO 65802, 800–876–3652/417–269–3093,(Formerly: Cox Medical Centers)

Dept. of the Navy, Navy Drug ScreeningLaboratory, Great Lakes, IL,Building 38–H, P.O. Box 88–6819,Great Lakes, IL 60088–6819, 847–688–2045/847–688–4171

Diagnostic Services Inc., dba DSI, 12700Westlinks Drive, Fort Myers, FL33913, 941–561–8200/800–735–5416

Doctors Laboratory, Inc., P.O. Box 2658,2906 Julia Dr., Valdosta, GA 31602,912–244–4468

DrugProof, Division of Dynacare/Laboratory of Pathology, LLC, 1229Madison St., Suite 500, NordstromMedical Tower, Seattle, WA 98104,206–386–2672/800–898–0180,(Formerly: Laboratory of Pathologyof Seattle, Inc., DrugProof, Divisionof Laboratory of Pathology ofSeattle, Inc.)

DrugScan, Inc., P.O. Box 2969, 1119Mearns Rd., Warminster, PA 18974,215–674–9310

Dynacare Kasper Medical Laboratories,*14940–123 Ave., Edmonton,Alberta, Canada T5V 1B4, 780–451–3702/800–661–9876

ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., 5 IndustrialPark Dr., Oxford, MS 38655, 662–236–2609

Gamma-Dynacare MedicalLaboratories *, A Division of theGamma-Dynacare LaboratoryPartnership, 245 Pall Mall St.,London, ONT, Canada N6A 1P4,519–679–1630

General Medical Laboratories, 36 SouthBrooks St., Madison, WI 53715,608–267–6267

Hartford Hospital ToxicologyLaboratory, 80 Seymour St.,Hartford, CT 06102–5037, 860–545–6023

Integrated Regional Laboratories, 5361NW 33rd Avenue, Fort Lauderdale,

FL 33309, 954–777–0018, 800–522–0232, (Formerly: Cedars MedicalCenter, Department of Pathology)

Kroll Laboratory Specialists, Inc., 1111Newton St., Gretna, LA 70053, 504–361–8989/800–433–3823,(Formerly: Laboratory Specialists,Inc.)

LabOne, Inc., 10101 Renner Blvd.,Lenexa, KS 66219, 913–888–3927/800–728–4064, (Formerly: Centerfor Laboratory Services, a Divisionof LabOne, Inc.)

Laboratory Corporation of AmericaHoldings, 1904 Alexander Drive,Research Triangle Park, NC 27709,919–572–6900/800–833–3984,(Formerly: LabCorp OccupationalTesting Services, Inc., CompuChemLaboratories, Inc.; CompuChemLaboratories, Inc., A Subsidiary ofRoche Biomedical Laboratory;Roche CompuChem Laboratories,Inc., A Member of the Roche Group)

Laboratory Corporation of AmericaHoldings, 4022 Willow Lake Blvd.,Memphis, TN 38118, 901–795–1515/800–233–6339, (Formerly:LabCorp Occupational TestingServices, Inc., MedExpress/NationalLaboratory Center)

Laboratory Corporation of AmericaHoldings, 69 First Ave., Raritan, NJ08869, 908–526–2400/800–437–4986, (Formerly: Roche BiomedicalLaboratories, Inc.)

Marshfield Laboratories, ForensicToxicology Laboratory, 1000 NorthOak Ave., Marshfield, WI 54449,715–389–3734/800–331–3734

MAXXAM Analytics Inc.*, 5540McAdam Rd., Mississauga, ON,Canada L4Z 1P1, 905–890–2555,(Formerly: NOVAMANN (Ontario)Inc.)

Medical College Hospitals ToxicologyLaboratory, Department ofPathology, 3000 Arlington Ave.,Toledo, OH 43699, 419–383–5213

MedTox Laboratories, Inc., 402 W.County Rd. D, St. Paul, MN 55112,651–636–7466/800–832–3244

MetroLab-Legacy Laboratory Services,1225 NE 2nd Ave., Portland, OR97232, 503–413–5295/800–950–5295

Minneapolis Veterans Affairs MedicalCenter, Forensic ToxicologyLaboratory, 1 Veterans Drive,Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417,612–725–2088

National Toxicology Laboratories, Inc.,1100 California Ave., Bakersfield,CA 93304, 661–322–4250/800–350–3515

NWT Drug Testing, 1141 E. 3900 South,Salt Lake City, UT 84124, 801–293–2300/800–322–3361, (Formerly:NorthWest Toxicology, Inc.)



* The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) votedto end its Laboratory Accreditation Program forSubstance Abuse (LAPSA) effective May 12, 1998.Laboratories certified through that program wereaccredited to conduct forensic urine drug testing asrequired by U.S. Department of Transportation(DOT) regulations. As of that date, the certificationof those accredited Canadian laboratories willcontinue under DOT authority. The responsibilityfor conducting quarterly performance testing plusperiodic on-site inspections of those LAPSA-accredited Laboratories was transferred to the U.S.DHHS, with the DHHS’ National LaboratoryCertification Program (NLCP) contractor continuingto have an active role in the performance testingand laboratory inspection processes. OtherCanadian laboratories wishing to be considered forthe NLCP may apply direclty to the NLCPcontractor just as U.S. Laboratories do.

One Source Toxicology Laboratory, Inc.,1705 Center Street, Deer Park, TX77536, 713–920–2559, (Formerly:University of Texas MedicalBranch, Clinical ChemistryDivision; (UTMB Pathology-Toxicology Laboratory)

Oregon Medical Laboratories, P.O. Box972, 722 East 11th Ave., Eugene, OR97440–0972, 541–687–2134

Pacific Toxicology Laboratories, 6160Variel Ave., Woodland Hills, CA91367, 818–598–3110/800–328–6942, (Formerly: Centinela HospitalAirport Toxicology Laboratory)

Pathology Associates MedicalLaboratories, 11604 E. Indiana Ave.,Spokane, WA 99206, 509–926–2400/800–541–7891

PharmChem Laboratories, Inc., 1505–AO’Brien Dr., Menlo Park, CA 94025,650–328–6200/800–446–5177

PharmChem Laboratories, Inc., TexasDivision, 7606 Pebble Dr., ForthWorth, TX 76118, 817–215–8800,(Formerly: Harris MedicalLaboratory)

Physicians Reference Laboratory, 7800West 110th St., Overland Park, KS66210, 913–339–0372/800–821–3627

Poisonlab, Inc., 7272 Clairemont MesaBlvd., San Diego, CA 92111, 858–279–2600/800–882–7272

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 3175Presidential Dr., Atlanta, GA 30340,770–452–1590, (Formerly:SmithKline Beecham ClinicalLaboratories, SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 4444Giddings Road, Auburn Hills, MI48326, 248–373–9120/800–444–0106, (Formerly: HealthCare/Preferred Laboratories, HealthCare/MetPath, CORNING ClinicalLaboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 8000Sovereign Row, Dallas, TX 75247,214–638–1301, (Formerly:SmithKline Beecham ClinicalLaboratories, SmithKline Bio-Science Laboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 4770Regent Blvd., Irving, TX 75063,972–916–3376/800–526–0947,(Formerly: Damon ClinicalLaboratories, Damon/MethPath,CORNING Clinical Laboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 801East Dixie Ave., Leesburg, FL34748, 352–787–9006, (Formerly:SmithKline Beecham ClinicalLaboratories, Doctors & PhysiciansLaboratory)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 400Egypt Rd., Norristown, PA 19403,610–631–4600/800–877–7484,(Formerly: SmithKline Beecham

Clinical Laboratories, Bio-ScienceLaboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 506 E.State Pkwy., Schaumburg, IL 60173,800–669–6995/847–885–2010,(Formerly: SmithKline BeechamClinical Laboratories, InternationalToxicology Laboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 7470Mission Valley Rd., San Diego, CA92108–4406, 619–686–3200/800–446–4728, (Formerly: NicholsInstitute, Nichols InstituteSubstance Abuse Testing (NISAT),CORNING Nichols Institute,CORNING Clinical Laboratories)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, OneMalcolm Ave., Teterboro, NJ 07608,201–393–5590, (Formerly: MetPath,Inc., CORNING MetPath ClinicalLaboratories, CORNING ClinicalLaboratory)

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, 7600Tyrone Ave., Van Nuys, CA 91405,818–989–2520/800–877–2520,(Formerly: SmithKline BeechamClinical Laboratories)

San Diego Reference Laboratory, 6122Nancy Ridge Dr., San Diego, CA92121, 800–677–7995/858–677–7970

Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc., 463Southlake Blvd., Richmond, VA23236, 804–378–9130

Scott & White Drug Testing Laboratory,600 S. 25th St., Temple, TX 76504,254–771–8379/800–749–3788

S.E.D. Medical Laboratories, 5601 OfficeBlvd., Albuquerque, NM 87108,505–727–6300/800–999–5227

South Bend Medical Foundation, Inc.,530 N. Lafayette Blvd., South Bend,IN 46601, 219–234–4176

Southwest Laboratories, 2727 W.Baseline Rd., Tempe, AZ 85283,602–438–8507/800–279–0027

Sparrow Health System, ToxicologyTesting Center, St. LawrenceCampus, 1210 W. Saginaw, Lansing,MI 48915, 517–377–0520,(Formerly: St. Lawrence Hospital &Healthcare System)

St. Anthony Hospital ToxicologyLaboratory, 1000 N. Lee St.,Oklahoma City, OK 73101, 405–272–7052

Toxicology & Drug MonitoringLaboratory, University of MissouriHospital & Clinics, 2703 Clark Lane,Suite B, Lower Level, Columbia,MO 65202, 573–882–1273

Toxicology Testing Service, Inc., 5426N.W. 79th Ave., Miami, FL 33166,305–593–2260

UNILAB, 18408 Oxnard St., Tarzana,CA 91356, 818–996–7300/800–339–4299, (Formerly: Met–West-BPLToxicology Laboratory)

Universal Toxicology Laboratories, LLC,10210 W. Highway 80, Midland,

Texas 79706, 915–561–8851/888–953–8851

The following laboratory will bevoluntarily withdrawing from theNational Laboratory CertificationProgram on August 12, 2000:Quest Diagnostics Incorporated,

National Center for ForensicScience, 1901 Sulphur Spring Rd.,Baltimore, MD 21227, 410–536–13485, (Formerly: MarylandMedical Laboratroy, Inc., NationalCenter for Forensic Science,CORNING National Center forForensic Science) *

Upon finding a Canadian laboratory tobe qualified, the DHHS will recommendthat DOT certify the laboratory (FederalRegister, 16 July 1996) as meeting theminimum standards of the ‘‘MandatoryGuidelines for Workplace Durg Testing’’(59 Federal Register, 9 June 1994, Pages29908–29931). After receiving the DOTcertification, the laboratory will beincluded in the monthly list of DHHScertified laboratories and participate inthe NLCP certification maintenanceprogram.

Richard Kopanda,Executive Officer, Substance Abuse andMental Health Services Administration.[FR Doc. 00–19213 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160–20–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife

Notice of Availability of DraftComprehensive Conservation Plan andEnvironmental Assessment forNecedah National Wildlife Refuge,Wood and Juneau Counties,Wisconsin

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,Interior.ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the RefugeImprovement Act of 1997, the U.S. Fish



and Wildlife Service (Service) haspublished the Necedah NationalWildlife Refuge (Refuge) DraftComprehensive Conservation Plan andassociated Environmental Assessment.The Draft Plan describes how theService intends to manage the Refugefor the next 10–15 years.DATES: Submit written comments byAugust 25, 2000. All comments shouldbe addressed to: Tom Magnuson, U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, 1 FederalDrive, Room 530, Fort Snelling,Minnesota 55111. Comments may alsobe submitted through the Service’sregional Web site at: http://midwest.fws.gov/planning.ADDRESSES: A copy of the DraftComprehensive Conservation Plan andEnvironmental Assessment, or asummary of the combined document,may be obtained by writing to TomMagnuson at the address above or byplacing a request through the Web site.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Foradditional information contact LarryWargowsky, Necedah National WildlifeRefuge, W7996 20th Street West,Necedah, Wisconsin 54646–7531.Phone: 608–565–2551; E-Mail:[email protected] INFORMATION: TheRefuge was established in 1939 as arefuge and breeding ground formigratory birds and for use as aninviolate sanctuary for migratory birds.It is located in central Wisconsin, about180 miles southeast of Minneapolis,Minnesota, 150 miles northwest ofMilwaukee, Wisconsin, and about fourmiles west of Necedah, Wisconsin.

The history of the Refuge dates backto the early 1930s when the U.S.Government acquired 114,964 acres ofland in Juneau, Wood, Monroe, andJackson counties, Wisconsin, to assistfarmers living within the area and todevelop the area for wildlife.

Situated on the bed of former GlacialLake Wisconsin and the Great CentralWisconsin Swamp, land in and aroundthe Refuge was once a vast peat bogwith some low wooded islands andsavannas; the higher sand ridges wereoccupied by mature stands of pines andother species. Today, the Refugeconsists of 43,696 acres of wetlands andopen water areas; pine, oak, and aspenforests; grasslands and rare savannas, allof which support a rich diversity of fish,wildlife, and plant populations. Over230 different species of birds have beenobserved on the Refuge since itsinception. The Refuge also supportsseveral threatened, endangered, and rarespecies like the Karner blue butterfly,Blanding’s turtle, and the easternmassasauga rattlesnake, as well as

resident game species including thewhite-tailed deer, wild turkey, andruffed grouse. In addition, nearly150,000 people visit the Refugeannually to hunt, fish, hike, observe andphotograph wildlife, pick berries, orrelax among the trees, wetlands, andwildlife.

Management of the Refuge is carriedout by a multi-disciplined team ofbiologists, technicians, and support staffwho are recognized leaders in theirfields. Protecting, restoring, andmaintaining biologically diverse andproductive wetlands, forest land,grasslands, and savannas for fish andwildlife resources are key indicators ofmanagement success. Management toolsinvolve water level manipulation,prescribed burning, timber harvest, landacquisition, and public outreach andenvironmental education. Scientificallyrigorous monitoring and researchactivities create the foundation fromwhich quality management decisionsare made. Cooperative workingrelationships with universities, otherFederal agencies, the State ofWisconsin, elementary and secondaryeducational institutions, and non-governmental organizations are keyassets to management success.

Dated: July 26, 2000.Marvin E. Moriarty,Acting Regional Director.[FR Doc. 00–19325 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–55–M


Bureau of Land Management

[AK–962–1410–HY–P; AA–8103–4]

Alaska Native Claims Selection; Noticefor Publication

In accordance with Departmentalregulation 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice ishereby given that the decision to issueconveyance (DIC) to Doyon, Limited,notice of which was published in theFederal Register, 44 Fed. Reg. 28110,28111 (May 14, 1979), is modified toremove EIN 4 C3, D1, D9, within Sec.4, T. 29 S., R. 13 E., Kateel RiverMeridian, Alaska.

Notice of the modified DIC will bepublished once a week, for four (4)consecutive weeks, in the FairbanksDaily News-Miner. Copies of thedecision may be obtained by contactingthe Alaska State Office of the Bureau ofLand Management, 222 West SeventhAvenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513–7599 ((907) 271–5960).

Any party claiming a property interestwhich is adversely affected by the

decision, an agency of the Federalgovernment or regional corporation,shall have until August 31, 2000 to filean appeal. However, parties receivingservice by certified mail shall have 30days from the date of receipt to file anappeal. Appeals must be filed with theBureau of Land Management at theaddress identified above, where therequirements for filing an appeal may beobtained. Parties who do not file anappeal in accordance with therequirements of 43 CFR Part 4, SubpartE, shall be deemed to have waived theirrights.

Nora A. Benson,Land Law Examiner, Branch of ANCSAAdjudication.[FR Doc. 00–19327 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–$$–P



[CA–610–00–1220–HQ]

Notice of Availability of the Record ofDecision for the Soledad Canyon Sandand Gravel Mining Project

SUMMARY: In accordance with theNational Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) of 1969 , Title 40 Code ofFederal Regulations Parts 1505 and1506, and BLM Handbook H–1790–1,notice is hereby given that the U.S.Department of the Interior’s Bureau ofLand Management (BLM) has preparedthe Record of Decision for the SoledadCanyon Sand and Gravel mining Project.It is the BLM’s decision to approve theReduced North Fines StorageAlternative with additionalenvironmental modifications asdescribed in the Final EnvironmentalImpact Statement published by BLM onJune 2, 2000.

This decision directs the manner inwhich the Transit Mixed ConcreteCompany (TMC) is authorized to extracta total of 78 million tons of material toproduce and sell approximately 56.1million tons of sand and gravel in theSoledad Canyon area of northeasternLos Angeles County, California over a20-year period in conformance withFederal contracts issued by BLM toTMC in 1990.

This decision may be appealed to theInterior Board of Land Appeals, Officeof the Secretary within 30 days from thedate of this notice, in accordance withthe regulations at Title 43 of the Codeof Federal Regulations Part 4. For moreinformation, contact BLM’s PalmSprings-South Coast Field Office at theaddress and phone number listed below.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TheRecord of Decision is online atwww.ca.blm.gov. Printed copies can alsobe obtained from the BLM in PalmSprings by calling (760) 251–4810 or bywriting to the Bureau of LandManagement, Palm Springs-South CoastField Office, 690 W. Garnet, North PalmSprings, CA 92258, Attn: ElenaMisquez.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Doran Sanchez at (909) 697–5220, BLMCalifornia Desert District ExternalAffairs.

Dated: July 25, 2000.Tim Salt,District Manager.[FR Doc. 00–19216 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–40–P



[ID–933–1430–ET; IDI–15630 et al.]

Public Land Order No. 7437;Modification and Partial Revocation ofExecutive Orders; Idaho

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,Interior.ACTION: Correction.

SUMMARY: This action corrects PublicLand Order No. 7437, 65 FR 15917–15918, published March 24, 2000.

On page 15917, second column underT. 9 S., R. 16 E., which read ‘‘Sec. 16,lots 7 to 16 inclusive.’’ is herebycorrected to read ‘‘Sec. 16, lots 7 to 10,and 12’’ and under T. 10 S., R. 18 E.,which reads ‘‘Sec. 3, lot 9, andSW1⁄4NW1⁄4.’’ is hereby corrected toread ‘‘Sec. 3, lot 9, and SW1⁄4SW1⁄4.’’

Jimmie Buxton,Branch Chief, Lands and Minerals.[FR Doc. 00–19326 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P


Minerals Management Service

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Proposed Collection,Comment Request

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service(MMS), Interior.ACTION: Notice of an extension of aninformation collection (OMB ControlNumber 1010–0110).

SUMMARY: To comply with thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995, weare soliciting comments on an

information collection titled, TrainingEvaluation and Outreach Forms. Wewill submit an information collectionrequest (ICR) to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) forreview and approval after this commentperiod closes.DATES: Submit written comments on orbefore October 2, 2000.ADDRESSES: Submit written commentsto David S. Guzy, Chief, Rules andPublications Staff, MineralsManagement Service, RoyaltyManagement Program, P.O. Box 25165,MS 3021, Denver, Colorado 80225. Ifyou use an overnight courier service,our courier address is Building 85,Room A–613, Denver Federal Center,Denver, Colorado 80225.PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURE: Submityour comments to the offices listed inthe ADDRESSES section, or email yourcomments to us [email protected]. Include thetitle of the information collection andthe OMB Control Number in the‘‘Attention’’ line of your comment; also,include your name and return address.Submit electronic comments as anASCII file avoiding the use of specialcharacters and any form of encryption.If you do not receive a confirmation thatwe have received your email, contactMr. Guzy at (303) 231–3432, FAX (303)231–3385. We will post all comments athttp://www.rmp.mms.gov for publicreview.

Also, contact Mr. Guzy to reviewpaper copies of the comments. Thecomments, including names andaddresses of respondents, are availablefor public review during regularbusiness hours at our offices inLakewood, Colorado. Individualrespondents may request that wewithhold their home address from thepublic record, which we will honor tothe extent allowable by law. There alsomay be circumstances in which wewould withhold from the public recorda respondent’s identity, as allowable bylaw. If you request that we withholdyour name and/or address, state thisprominently at the beginning of yourcomment. However, we will notconsider anonymous comments. Wewill make all submissions fromorganizations or businesses, and fromindividuals identifying themselves asrepresentatives or officials oforganizations or businesses, availablefor public inspection in their entirety.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Dennis C. Jones, Rules and PublicationsStaff, phone (303) 231–3046, FAX (303)231–3385, [email protected]. A copy of the

ICR will be available to you withoutcharge upon request.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Training Evaluation andOutreach Forms.

OMB Control Number: 1010–0110.Bureau Form Number: n/a.Abstract: The Department of the

Interior (DOI) is responsible for mattersrelevant to mineral resourcedevelopment on Federal and IndianLands and the Outer Continental Shelf(OCS). The Secretary of the Interior(Secretary) is responsible for managingthe production of minerals from Federaland Indian Lands and the OCS; forcollecting royalties from lessees whoproduce minerals; and for distributingthe funds collected in accordance withapplicable laws. The Secretary also hasan Indian trust responsibility to manageIndian lands and seek advice andinformation from Indian beneficiaries.We perform the royalty managementfunctions and assist the Secretary incarrying out DOI’s Indian trustresponsibility.

We provide training and outreach toour constituents to facilitate theircompliance with laws and regulationsand to ensure that constituents are wellinformed. We use training and outreachevaluation questionnaires to improve onour training and outreach efforts and toassure its continued relevance. Wepresent training sessions to the oil andgas and solid minerals reporters onvarious aspects of royalty reporting,production reporting, and valuation. Wealso provide outreach sessions toindividual Indian minerals owners,Indian Tribes, and the Bureau of IndianAffairs on Indian royalty managementissues. Additionally, we providetraining sessions to our financial andsystems contractors and State and Tribalauditors.

During the last few minutes of eachtraining or outreach session, RMP asksparticipants to complete and returnevaluation questionnaires. Participantresponse is voluntary. Some questionsare uniform across all of the evaluationquestionnaires; however, we also askquestions specific to each type oftraining or outreach or specific to ouraudiences. Proprietary information isnot requested, and there are noquestions of a sensitive nature includedin this information collection.

Frequency: On occasion.Estimated Number and Description of

Respondents: 1800 industryrepresentatives, State auditors, Indianauditors, Indian Tribes, and Indianallottees, MMS contractors, and MMSemployees.



Estimated Annual Reporting andRecordkeeping ‘‘Hour’’ Burden: 126hours.

Estimated Annual Reporting andRecordkeeping ‘‘Non-hour Cost’’Burden: n/a.

Comments: The Paperwork ReductionAct, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requireseach agency ‘‘to provide notice * * *and otherwise consult with members ofthe public and affected agenciesconcerning each proposed collection ofinformation * * *’’ Agencies mustspecifically solicit comments to: (a)Evaluate whether the proposedcollection of information is necessaryfor the agency to perform its duties,including whether the information isuseful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of theagency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection of information; (c)enhance the quality, usefulness, andclarity of the information to becollected; and (d) minimize the burdenon the respondents, including the use ofautomated collection techniques orother forms of information technology.

The PRA also requires agencies toestimate the total annual reporting‘‘non-hour cost’’ burden to respondentsor recordkeepers resulting from thecollection of information. We have notidentified non-hour cost burdens andneed to know if there are other costsassociated with the collection of thisinformation for either total capital andstartup cost components or annualoperation, maintenance, and purchaseof service components. Your estimatesshould consider the costs to generate,maintain, and disclose or provide theinformation. You should describe themethods you use to estimate major costfactors, including system andtechnology acquisition, expected usefullife of capital equipment, discountrate(s), and the period over which youincur costs. Capital and startup costsinclude, among other items, computersand software you purchase to preparefor collecting information; monitoring,sampling, drilling, and testingequipment; and record storage facilities.

Your estimates should not includeequipment or services purchased: (i)Before October 1, 1995; (ii) to complywith requirements not associated withthe information collection; (iii) forreasons other than to provideinformation or keep records for theGovernment; or (iv) as part of customaryand usual business or private practices.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995provides that an agency shall notconduct or sponsor, and a person is notrequired to respond to, a collection ofinformation unless it displays acurrently valid OMB Control Number.

Dated: July 25, 2000.R. Dale Fazio,Acting Associate Director for RoyaltyManagement.[FR Doc. 00–19340 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–MR–W


Minerals Management Service

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Proposed Collection,Comment Request.

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service(MMS), Interior.ACTION: Notice of an extension of aninformation collection (OMB ControlNumber 1010–0042).

SUMMARY: To comply with thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995, weare soliciting comments on aninformation collection titled,Application for the Purchase of RoyaltyOil. We will submit an informationcollection request (ICR) to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) forreview and approval after this commentperiod closes.DATES: Submit written comments on orbefore October 2, 2000.ADDRESSES: Submit written commentsto David S. Guzy, Chief, Rules andPublications Staff, MineralsManagement Service, RoyaltyManagement Program, P.O. Box 25165,MS 3021, Denver, Colorado 80225. Ifyou use an overnight courier service,our courier address is Building 85,Room A–613, Denver Federal Center,Denver, Colorado 80225.PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURE: Submityour comments to the offices listed inthe ADDRESSES section, or email yourcomments to us [email protected]. Include thetitle of the information collection andthe OMB Control Number in the‘‘Attention’’ line of your comment; also,include your name and return address.Submit electronic comments as anASCII file avoiding the use of specialcharacters and any form of encryption.If you do not receive a confirmation thatwe have received your email, contactMr. Guzy at (303) 231–3432, FAX (303)231–3385. We will post all comments athttp://www.rmp.mms.gov for publicreview.

Also, contact Mr. Guzy to reviewpaper copies of the comments. Thecomments, including names andaddresses of respondents, are availablefor public review during regularbusiness hours at our offices inLakewood, Colorado. Individual

respondents may request that wewithhold their home address from thepublic record, which we will honor tothe extent allowable by law. There alsomay be circumstances in which wewould withhold from the public recorda respondent’s identity, as allowable bylaw. If you request that we withholdyour name and/or address, state thisprominently at the beginning of yourcomment. However, we will notconsider anonymous comments. Wewill make all submissions fromorganizations or businesses, and fromindividuals identifying themselves asrepresentatives or officials oforganizations or businesses, availablefor public inspection in their entirety.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Dennis C. Jones, Rules and PublicationsStaff, phone (303) 231–3046, FAX (303)231–3385, [email protected]. A copy of theICR will be available to you withoutcharge upon request.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Application for the Purchase ofRoyalty Oil.

OMB Control Number: 1010–0042Bureau Form Number: n/a.Abstract: The Department of the

Interior (DOI) is responsible for mattersrelevant to mineral resourcedevelopment on Federal and IndianLands and the Outer Continental Shelf(OCS). The Secretary of the Interior(Secretary) is responsible for managingthe production of minerals from Federaland Indian Lands and the OCS; forcollecting royalties from lessees whoproduce minerals; and for distributingthe funds collected in accordance withapplicable laws. The Secretary also hasan Indian trust responsibility to manageIndian lands and seek advice andinformation from Indian beneficiaries.We perform the royalty managementfunctions and assist the Secretary incarrying out DOI’s Indian trustresponsibility.

‘‘Royalty oil’’ is crude oil producedfrom leased Federal lands, both onshoreand offshore, in instances in which theGovernment exercises the option toaccept a lessee’s royalty payment in oilrather than in money. Title to the oil istransferred to the Government and thensold to an eligible refiner. When theSecretary determines that small refinersdo not have access to adequate suppliesof oil, the Secretary may dispose of anyoil taken as royalty by conducting a saleof such oil, or by allocating it to eligiblerefiners.

When the Secretary decides to offerroyalty oil taken in kind for sale toeligible refiners, MMS will publish aNotice of Availability of Royalty Oil in



the Federal Register, and other printedmedia, when appropriate. The Noticeincludes administrative detailsconcerning the application, allocation,and contract award process for theroyalty oil. The Application for thePurchase of Royalty Oil, Form MMS–4070, is submitted by refiners interestedin purchasing royalty oil in accordancewith instructions in the Notice, andwith instructions issued by MMS forcompletion of the form. The informationcollected is used by MMS to determineif the applicant meets eligibilityrequirements to contract to purchaseroyalty oil. Information collected alsoprovides a basis for the allocation ofavailable royalty oil among qualifiedrefiners.

Responses to this information arenecessary for refiners to participate inroyalty oil sales. Proprietary informationthat is submitted is protected, and thereare no questions of a sensitive natureincluded in this information collection.

Frequency: On occasion.Estimated Number and Description of

Respondents: 25 small oil refiners.Estimated Annual Reporting and

Recordkeeping ‘‘Hour’’ Burden: 25hours.

Estimated Annual Reporting andRecordkeeping ‘‘Non-hour Cost’’Burden: n/a.

Comments: The Paperwork ReductionAct, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requireseach agency ‘‘to provide notice * * *and otherwise consult with members ofthe public and affected agenciesconcerning each proposed collection ofinformation * * *.’’ Agencies mustspecifically solicit comments to: (a)Evaluate whether the proposedcollection of information is necessaryfor the agency to perform its duties,including whether the information isuseful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of theagency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection of information; (c)enhance the quality, usefulness, andclarity of the information to becollected; and (d) minimize the burdenon the respondents, including the use ofautomated collection techniques orother forms of information technology.

The PRA also requires agencies toestimate the total annual reporting‘‘non-hour cost’’ burden to respondentsor recordkeepers resulting from thecollection of information. We have notidentified non-hour cost burdens andneed to know if there are other costsassociated with the collection of thisinformation for either total capital andstartup cost components or annualoperation, maintenance, and purchaseof service components. Your estimatesshould consider the costs to generate,maintain, and disclose or provide the

information. You should describe themethods you use to estimate major costfactors, including system andtechnology acquisition, expected usefullife of capital equipment, discountrate(s), and the period over which youincur costs. Capital and startup costsinclude, among other items, computersand software you purchase to preparefor collecting information; monitoring,sampling, drilling, and testingequipment; and record storage facilities.

Your estimates should not includeequipment or services purchased: (i)Before October 1, 1995; (ii) to complywith requirements not associated withthe information collection; (iii) forreasons other than to provideinformation or keep records for theGovernment; or (iv) as part of customaryand usual business or private practices.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995provides that an agency shall notconduct or sponsor, and a person is notrequired to respond to, a collection ofinformation unless it displays acurrently valid OMB Control Number.

Dated: July 25, 2000.R. Dale Fazio,Acting Associate Director for RoyaltyManagement.[FR Doc. 00–19341 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P


National Park Service

Notice of Intent to Repatriate CulturalItems in the Possession of CasaGrande Ruins National Monument,National Park Service, Coolidge, AZ

AGENCY: National Park Service.

ACTION: Notice.

Notice is hereby given in accordancewith provisions of the Native AmericanGraves Protection and Repatriation Act(NAGPRA), 43 CFR 10.10 (a)(3), of theintent to repatriate cultural items in thepossession of Casa Grande RuinsNational Monument, National ParkService, Coolidge, AZ, that meet thedefinition of ‘‘sacred object’’ underSection 2 of the Act. This notice ispublished as part of the National ParkService’s administrative responsibilitiesunder NAGPRA, 43 CFR 10.2 (c). Thedeterminations within this notice arethe sole responsibility of the NationalPark unit that has control or possessionof these Native American cultural items.The Assistant Director, CulturalResources Stewardship andPartnerships, is not responsible for thedeterminations within this notice.

The approximately 203 cultural itemscomprise an ethnographic collectionutilized by the Tohono O’odham Nationof Arizona for the Vikita ceremony.These cultural items are mostlyfashioned from wood, many are painted,and include: 5 staffs, 14 spears, 12bows, 59 sticks, 11 bullroarers, 50prayersticks, 1 feather, 32 arrows, 1mask, 1 kilt, 1 garter, 1 jar, 1 hide, 1bundle, 3 unidentified ceremonialobjects, 7 pieces of wood, 2 effigies, and1 bundle with a feather. This collectionof cultural items has been recorded inseveral anthropological documents asoriginating from the Tohono O’odhamvillage of Santa Rosa and as having beenused in the Vikita ceremony.

During the summer of 1922 or 1923,a trader told Frank Pinkley and GeorgeBoundey that a large amount of oldTohono O’odham ceremonial materialswere cached northeast of the village ofSanta Rosa (Gu Achi). About a mile anda half from this village, Pinkley andBoundey located a brush enclosure.Within the immediate vicinity of thisenclosure, Pinkley and Boundey founda number of cultural items. Some ofthese items were found under scrubmesquite bushes, while others weredeposited in the branches of trees. LocalTohono O’odham individuals indicatedthat these cultural items were used aspart of a Vikita ceremony.

According to a 1937 article by CharlesR. Steen, the dance at this enclosure wasprobably held in 1911. Several factssuggest that the Tohono O’odhamintended that the ceremonial equipmentcollected by Pinkley and Boundey at theenclosure should only be used once,and that when the time for anotherceremony arrived that a new enclosureand new ceremonial accoutrements forthe ceremonies were to be prepared. Theenclosure had not been kept in repairand had apparently seen no further use,the costumes and cultural items carriedby the ceremony’s participants had beendiscarded, and at least two Vikitaceremonies had been held since the1911 Vikita event. Steen’s article alsonoted that Tohono O’odham individualsexpressed their satisfaction with thecare the above-described cultural itemsreceived while in the possession ofPinkley.

In 1940, Pinkley donated thepreviously described cultural items toCasa Grande Ruins National Monument.The cultural items were subsequentlyaccessioned into the Monument’scollection and are now stored at theWestern Archeological andConservation Center in Tucson,Arizona.

On August 13, 1998, the National ParkService convened a consultation



meeting with approximately 45members of the Tohono O’odhamNation of Arizona, which includedTohono O’odham elders, religiousleaders and the Cultural AffairsManager. National Park Servicerepresentatives attending this meetingincluded the Superintendent of CasaGrande Ruins National Monument andthe Repository Chief of the WesternArcheological Conservation Center.After the consultants viewed the entireVikita-related collection, the TohonoO’odham representatives indicated thatthe above described cultural items wereimportant ceremonial objects needed bytraditional religious leaders for thepractice of traditional Native Americanreligions by their present-day adherents.

According to documents receivedfrom the Tohono O’odham Nation’sCultural Affairs Office in June 2000, theabove-described cultural items werenever intended to leave the land wherethey were left, and Tohono O’odhamreligious leaders will determine howthey will be used in the future.

Based on the above-mentionedinformation, the Casa Grande RuinsNational Monument Superintendentdetermined that, pursuant to 43 CFR10.2 (d)(3), the approximately 203cultural items are specific ceremonialobjects needed by traditional NativeAmerican religious leaders for thepractice of traditional Native Americanreligions by their present-day adherents.The Casa Grande Ruins NationalMonument Superintendent alsodetermined that, pursuant to 43 CFR10.2 (e), there is a relationship of sharedgroup identity that can be reasonablytraced between these cultural items andthe Tohono O’odham Nation of Arizona.

This notice has been sent to officialsof the Tohono O’odham Nation ofArizona. Representatives of any otherIndian tribe that believes itself to beculturally affiliated with these culturalitems should contact Don Spencer,Superintendent, Casa Grande RuinsNational Monument, 1100 Ruins Drive,Coolidge, AZ, 85228, telephone (520)723–3172, before August 31, 2000.Repatriation of these cultural items tothe Tohono O’odham Nation of Arizonamay begin after that date if noadditional claimants come forward.


John Robbins,Assistant Director, Cultural ResourcesStewardship and Partnerships.[FR Doc. 00–19293 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]




Notice of Inventory Completion forNative American Human Remains andAssociated Funerary Objects in thePossession of Salinas PuebloMissions National Monument, NationalPark Service, Mountainair, NM

AGENCY: National Park Service.ACTION: Notice.

Notice is hereby given in accordancewith provisions of the Native AmericanGraves Protection and Repatriation Act(NAGPRA), 43 CFR 10.9, of thecompletion of an inventory of humanremains and associated funerary objectsin the possession of the Salinas PuebloMissions National Monument, NationalPark Service, Mountainair, NM. Thisnotice is published as part of theNational Park Service’s administrativeresponsibilities under NAGPRA, 43 CFR10.2 (c). The determinations within thisnotice are the sole responsibility of theNational Park unit that has control orpossession of these Native Americanhuman remains and associated funeraryobjects. The Assistant Director, CulturalResources Stewardship andPartnerships, is not responsible for thedeterminations within this notice.

A detailed assessment and inventoryof the human remains and associatedfunerary objects was made by NationalPark Service professional staff inconsultation with representatives of thePueblo of Acoma, New Mexico; HopiTribe of Arizona; Pueblo of Isleta, NewMexico; Pueblo of Jemez, New Mexico;Pueblo of Santo Domingo, New Mexico;Pueblo of Taos, New Mexico; Ysleta delSur Pueblo of Texas; and the Zuni Tribeof the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico.Representatives of the Piro-Manso-Tiwa,a non-Federally recognized Indiangroup, were also present at one of theconsultation meetings.

In 1923, human remains representing43 individuals were recovered duringlegally authorized excavationsconducted by Dr. Edgar L. Hewett,School of American Research, at thePueblo de las Humanas complex, a sitelocated within Monument boundaries.No known individuals were identified.No associated funerary objects arepresent.

On the basis of architectural,osteological, archeological, andhistorical evidence, this site, which isassociated with Mound 7 of the Pueblode las Humanas complex, and thesehuman remains are dated to Pueblo IVand Pueblo V (A.D. 1300-1672).

In 1956, human remains representing99 individuals were recovered from 58

burials during a legally authorizedNational Park Service stabilizationproject conducted at the San IsidroMission Church’s Campo Santo CatholicCemetery. This site is located at thePueblo de las Humanas complex, a sitelocated within Monument boundaries.No known individuals were identified.No associated funerary objects arepresent.

An osteological analysis of the 99individuals recovered from this site(Campo Santo) identified 95 of them asJumano. Based upon architectural,archaeological, biological (cranialmorphology), historical, and Churchdocumentation evidence, San Isidro’scemetery (Campo Santo) wasdetermined to have been in use from1629-1672; therefore, this site and thesehuman remains are dated to the PuebloIV and Pueblo V (A.D. 1300-1672)periods.

In 1962, human remains representing31 individuals were recovered duringlegally authorized National Park Serviceexcavations conducted at SanBuenaventura church, which is alsosituated within the Pueblo de LasHumanas complex, a site located withinMonument boundaries. No knownindividuals were identified. Noassociated funerary objects are present.

Based upon osteological,archeological, and historical evidence,the 31 individuals recovered from SanBuenaventura were identified asJumano. On the basis of historicalevidence and Church documents, SanBuenaventura is known to have been thesecond and largest of the Spanishmission churches constructed at Pueblode las Humanas, Gran Quivira. Theconvento complex was in use, althoughthe mission church is believed to havenever fully been completed. Based onosteological, historical, and Churchdocumentation evidence, this site (SanBuenaventura) and these humanremains are dated to the Pueblo IV (A.D.1300-1600) and Pueblo V (A.D. 1600-1672) periods.

In 1951, human remains representingfive individuals were recovered duringlegally authorized National Park Serviceexcavations at the Pueblo de LasHumanas complex’s House A, a sitelocated within Monument boundaries.No known individuals were identified.No associated funerary objects arepresent.

Based on architectural, archeological,historical, and Church documentationevidence, this site, (House A) and thesehuman remains are dated to the PuebloIV (A.D. 1300-1600) and Pueblo V (A.D.1600-1672) periods.

Between 1965-67 and in 1973, humanremains representing 716 individuals



were recovered during legallyauthorized National Park Serviceexcavations at Mound 7 of the Pueblo deLas Humanas complex, a site locatedwithin Monument boundaries. Noknown individuals were identified. The587 associated funerary objects include146 beads, 1 scraper, 8 awls, 2 tinklers,3 bifaces, 17 pendants, 2 ornaments, 3jars, 26 tessera, 5 bowls, 1 pitcher, 1pipe, 5 pieces of shell, 4 bone artifacts,1 flute, 1 feather-wrapped blanket, 2rubbing stones, 2 hair samples, 12projectile points, 1 ground stone artifact,2 effigies, 2 crystals, 6 pieces ofpigment, 3 gizzard stones, 2 textiles, 1drill, 1 eggshell, 2 pieces of cordage, 1knife, 1 piece of basketry, 1 fiber knot,1 flake tool, 1 bean, 23 bags of faunalspecimens, 121 bags of corn cobs andcorn kernels, 173 ceramic sherds, 2pieces of metal, and 1 metal bar.

Based on osteological, architectural,and archeological evidence, as well asthe associated funerary objects, Mound7 has been identified as a Jumanoculture puebloan structure. Therefore,this site (Mound 7), these humanremains, and the associated funeraryobjects are dated to the Pueblo IV (A.D.1300-1600) and Pueblo V (A.D. 1600-1672) periods.

Between 1984-1986, human remainsrepresenting 35 individuals wererecovered during legally authorizedexcavations conducted by theUniversity of Iowa at a midden sitesouth of the Pueblo de Las Humanascomplex’s Mound 17, a site locatedwithin Monument boundaries. Noknown individuals were identified. Noassociated funerary objects are present.

On the basis of osteology, non-funerary cultural items (ceramics,projectile points, etc.), archeologicalevidence, historical information, andthe association with the Pueblo de LasHumanas complex, this site (middensite) and these human remains are datedto the Pueblo IV (A.D. 1300-1600) andPueblo V (A.D. 1600-1672) periods.

In 1960, human remains representingone individual were recovered duringlegally authorized National Park Serviceexcavation conducted in theMonument’s residential compound, asite located within Monumentboundaries. No known individual wasidentified. No associated funeraryobjects are present.

Based on osteological information,archeological evidence, and theproximity of the recovery location topreviously dated structures, this site(residential compound) and thesehuman remains have been determinedto be likely related to the Jumanoculture and are dated to Pueblo I-III(A.D. 900-1300).

In 1964, human remains representingone individual were recovered during alegally authorized National Park Serviceexcavation, at GRQU #2, a site locatedwithin Monument boundaries. Noknown individual was identified. Noassociated funerary objects are present.

Based on archeological evidence andarchitecture, this site (GRQU #2), apithouse, has been determined to berelated to the Jumano culture. Further,this site (GRQU #2) and these humanremains have been dated to Pueblo I-III(AD 900-1300).

In 1984, human remains representingone individual were recovered during alegally authorized drainage controlproject conducted at the mission of SanGregorio, a site within Monumentboundaries. No known individual wasidentified. No associated funeraryobjects are present.

On the basis of archeological contextand architectural evidence, this site(San Gregorio) and these humanremains are dated to Pueblo IV-V (A.D.1300-1673).

At an unknown date, human remainsrepresenting three individuals wererecovered from the general area ofPueblo de las Humanas, a site locatedwithin Monument boundaries. Noknown individuals were identified. Noassociated funerary objects are present.

Based upon archeological evidence,historical information, and theirassociation with the Pueblo de LasHumanas complex, these humanremains have been determined to berelated to the Jumano culture and aredated to the Pueblo IV (A.D. 1300-1600)and Pueblo V (A.D. 1600-1672) periods.

At an unknown date, human remainsrepresenting one individual wererecovered from the general area of AboPueblo, a site located within Monumentboundaries. No known individuals wereidentified. No associated funeraryobjects are present.

On the basis of archaeologicalevidence, historical information andtheir association with Abo Pueblo, thesehuman remains have been determinedto be related to the Tompiro culture andare dated to Pueblo IV-V (A.D. 1300-1673).

According to anthropologicalinformation, the Jumano culture isconsidered to be a blend of both Anasaziand Mogollon cultures, whicheventually shifted through time fromMogollon to Rio Grande Anasazicharacteristics. Relying uponarcheological, historical, architectural,geographical, oral tradition,ethnographic, biological, historical, andexpert opinion evidence, it has beendetermined that the above-describedhuman remains and associated funerary

objects are culturally affiliated with thePueblo of Acoma, Hopi Tribe, Pueblo ofIsleta, Pueblo of Jemez, Pueblo ofSandia, Pueblo of Santo Domingo,Pueblo of Taos, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo,and the Zuni Tribe of the ZuniReservation, and the non-Federallyrecognized Piro-Manso-Tiwa Indiangroup.

Based on the above-mentionedinformation, the Salinas PuebloMissions National MonumentSuperintendent determined that,pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (d)(1), thehuman remains listed above representthe physical remains of approximately932 individuals of Native Americanancestry. The Salinas Pueblo MissionsNational Monument Superintendentalso determined that, pursuant to 43CFR 10.2 (d)(2), the 587 objects listedabove are reasonably believed to havebeen placed with or near individualhuman remains at the time of death orlater as part of the death rite orceremony. Lastly, the Salinas PuebloMissions National MonumentSuperintendent determined that,pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (e), there is arelationship of shared group identitythat can be reasonably traced betweenthese Native American human remainsand associated funerary objects and thePueblo of Acoma, New Mexico; HopiTribe of Arizona; Pueblo of Isleta, NewMexico; Pueblo of Jemez, New Mexico;Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico; Puebloof Santo Domingo, New Mexico; Puebloof Taos, New Mexico; Ysleta del SurPueblo of Texas; and the Zuni Tribe ofthe Zuni Reservation, New Mexico. Inaddition, the National Park Service alsohas determined that a cultural affiliationexists between these human remainsand associated funerary objects and thePiro-Manso-Tiwa, a non-Federallyrecognized Indian group.

This notice has been sent to officialsof the Pueblo of Acoma, New Mexico;the Caddo Indian Tribe of Oklahoma;Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Pueblo of Isleta,New Mexico; Pueblo of Jemez, NewMexico; Kiowa Indian Tribe ofOklahoma; Mescalero Apache Tribe ofthe Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico;Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico; Puebloof Santo Domingo, New Mexico; Puebloof Taos, New Mexico; White MountainApache Tribe of the Fort ApacheReservation, Arizona; Wichita andAffiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco& Tawakonie), Oklahoma; Ysleta del SurPueblo of Texas; Zuni Tribe of the ZuniReservation, New Mexico; and Piro-Manso-Tiwa, a non-Federallyrecognized Indian group.Representatives of any other Indian tribethat believes itself to be culturallyaffiliated with these human remains and



associated funerary objects shouldcontact Glenn M. Fulfer,Superintendent, Salinas PuebloMissions National Monument, P.O. Box517, Mountainair, NM 87036, telephone(505) 847-2585 Extension 25, beforeAugust 31, 2000. Repatriation of thehuman remains will begin after that dateif no additional claimants comeforward.

Dated: July 21, 2000.John Robbins,Assistant Director, Cultural ResourcesStewardship and Partnerships.[FR Doc. 00–19291 Filed 7–31; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–70–F



Notice of Inventory Completion forNative American Human Remains inthe Possession of Salinas PuebloMissions National Monument,Mountainair, NM

AGENCY: National Park Service.ACTION: Notice.

Notice is hereby given in accordancewith provisions of the Native AmericanGraves Protection and Repatriation Act(NAGPRA), 43 CFR 10.9, of thecompletion of an inventory of humanremains in the possession of the SalinasPueblo Missions National Monument,National Park Service, Mountainair,NM. This notice is published as part ofthe National Park Service’sadministrative responsibilities underNAGPRA, 43 CFR 10.2 (c). Thedeterminations within this notice arethe sole responsibility of the NationalPark unit that has control or possessionof these Native American humanremains. The Assistant Director,Cultural Resources Stewardship andPartnerships, is not responsible for thedeterminations within this notice.

A detailed assessment and inventoryof the human remains was made byNational Park Service professional staffin consultation with representatives ofthe Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma;Mescalero Apache Tribe of theMescalero Reservation, New Mexico;and the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes(Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie),Oklahoma.

In 1956, human remains representing99 individuals were recovered from 58burial sites during a legally authorizedNational Park Service stabilizationproject conducted at the San IsidroMission Church’s Campo Santo CatholicCemetery (Campo Santo). This site islocated at the Pueblo de las Humanas

complex, a site located withinMonument boundaries. No knownindividuals were identified. Noassociated funerary objects are present.

On the basis of architectural,archeological, biological (cranialmorphology), historical, and Churchdocumentation evidence, San Isidro’scemetery (Campo Santo) wasdetermined to have been in use from1629–1672; therefore, this site and thesehuman remains are dated to the PuebloIV and Pueblo V (A.D. 1300–1672)periods.

Based upon an osteological analysis ofthe 99 individuals recovered from thissite (Campo Santo), 4 of these humanremains were identified as Athabascan/Apache. This analysis found that thefacial features of the four individualswere consistent with ‘‘Plains Indian’’and are reported to be of Athabascan orApachean ancestry. Archeologicalevidence obtained from the burials alsosuggests that these four individuals areof Athabascan/Apache origin.

Historical evidence records thatApache bands from the Apaches Perillosand Siete Rios raided the Salinas towns,which constitutes one of the reasons fortheir eventual abandonment. Additionaldocumentary evidence indicates thatsome of these Apaches were killedduring raids on the Salinas villages.Historical records also evidence that theApache maintained friendships andestablished trading relationships withsome of the Salinas towns on a band-to-town basis. Intermarriages between theApaches and members of the towns alsooccurred.

Utilizing archeological, historical,geographical, biological, ethnographic,oral tradition, and expert opinionevidence, it has been determined thatthe above-described human remains areculturally affiliated with the Caddo,Kiowa, Mescalero Apache, WhiteMountain Apache, and WichitaAffiliated (Wichita, Keechi, Waco &Tawakonie) Tribes.

Based on the above-mentionedinformation, the Salinas PuebloMissions National MonumentSuperintendent determined that,pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (d)(1), thehuman remains listed above representthe physical remains of four individualsof Native American ancestry. Lastly, theSalinas Pueblo Missions NationalMonument Superintendent alsodetermined that, pursuant to 43 CFR10.2 (e), there is a relationship of sharedgroup identity that can be reasonablytraced between these Native Americanhuman remains and the Caddo IndianTribe of Oklahoma; Kiowa Indian Tribeof Oklahoma; Mescalero Apache Tribeof the Mescalero Reservation, New

Mexico; White Mountain Apache Tribeof the Fort Apache Reservation,Arizona; and the Wichita and AffiliatedTribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco &Tawakonie), Oklahoma.

This notice has been sent to officialsof the Pueblo of Acoma, New Mexico;the Caddo Indian Tribe of Oklahoma;Hopi Tribe of Arizona; Pueblo of Isleta,New Mexico; Pueblo of Jemez, NewMexico; Kiowa Indian Tribe ofOklahoma; Mescalero Apache Tribe ofthe Mescalero Reservation, New Mexico;Pueblo of Sandia, New Mexico; Puebloof Santo Domingo, New Mexico; Puebloof Taos, New Mexico; White MountainApache Tribe of the Fort ApacheReservation, Arizona; Wichita andAffiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco& Tawakonie), Oklahoma; Ysleta del SurPueblo of Texas; Zuni Tribe of the ZuniReservation, New Mexico; and Piro-Manso-Tiwa, a non-Federallyrecognized Indian group.Representatives of any other Indian tribethat believes itself to be culturallyaffiliated with these human remainsshould contact Glenn M. Fulfer,Superintendent, Salinas PuebloMissions National Monument, P.O. Box517, Mountainair, NM 87036, telephone(505) 847–2585 Extension 25, beforeAugust 31, 2000. Repatriation of thehuman remains will begin after that dateif no additional claimants comeforward.

Dated: July 21, 2000.John Robbins,Assistant Director, Cultural ResourcesStewardship and Partnerships.[FR Doc. 00–19292 Filed 7–31; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4310–70–F

INTERNATIONAL TRADECOMMISSION


TIME AND DATE: August 11, 2000 at 11:00a.m.PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street S.W.,Washington, DC 20436, Telephone:(202) 205–2000.STATUS: Open to the public.MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. Agenda for future meeting: none.2. Minutes.3. Ratification List.4. Inv. Nos. 731–TA–413–415 and 419

(Review) (Industrial Belts fromGermany, Italy, Japan, andSingapore)—briefing and vote. (TheCommission is currently scheduled totransmit its determination to theSecretary of Commerce on August 18,2000.)



5. Inv. Nos. 731–TA–96 and 439–445(Review) (Industrial Nitrocellulosefrom Brazil, China, France, Germany,Japan, Korea, the United Kingdom,and Yugoslavia)—briefing and vote.(The Commission is currentlyscheduled to transmit itsdetermination to the Secretary ofCommerce on August 24, 2000.)

6. Outstanding action jackets: none.In accordance with Commission

policy, subject matter listed above, notdisposed of at the scheduled meeting,may be carried over to the agenda of thefollowing meeting.

Issued: July 25, 2000.By order of the Commission.

Donna R. Koehnke,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19497 Filed 7–28–00; 2:03 pm]BILLING CODE 7020–02–U


Notice of Lodging of Stipulation andSettlement Agreement Pursuant to theResource Conservation and RecoveryAct

In accordance with 28 CFR § 50.7, theDepartment of Justice gives notice thata proposed consent decree in UnitedStates and State of Indiana, et al. v.American Chemical Service, Inc. et al.,No. 2:00CV430JM (N.D. Ind.), waslodged with the United States DistrictCourt for the Northern District ofIndiana on July 12, 2000.

The United States and the State ofIndiana brought the action pursuant tovarious federal and state statues,including Section 107 of theComprehensive EnvironmentalResponse, Compensation and LiabilityAct, 42 U.S.C. 9607, to recover naturalresource damages resulting from therelease of hazardous substances at theAmerican Chemical Service SuperfundSite in Griffith, Lake County, Indiana(‘‘Site’’). The Complaint alleged that atrelevant times the Defendants (or theirsuccessors) owned or operated the Siteat the time of disposal of hazardoussubstances at the Site, or arranged fordisposal or treatment or arranged witha transporter for transport for disposalor treatment of hazardous substancesowned or possessed by that Defendant(or successor) at the Site. The Complaintalleges claims against 39 parties whoeither owned or operated the Site, orwho arranged for treatment of disposalof hazardous substances at the Site.

Under the proposed Consent Decree,the Settling Defendants will pay$250,000 for the acquisition of certainreal property proposed for restoration as

a replacement for the injured naturalresources at the Site, and $50,000 fornatural resource restoration activities atthe property to be acquired. In addition,the Settling Defendants will pay up to$30,000 toward the federal and statenatural resource damage assessmentcosts, with the federal and state naturalresource damage assessment costs, withthe federal and state governmentssplitting that amount on a pro rata basis.

The Department of Justice willreceive, for a period of thirty (30) daysfrom the date of this publication,comments relating to the proposedsettlement. Comments should beaddressed to the Assistant AttorneyGeneral, Environment and NaturalResources Division, U.S. Department ofJustice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC20044–7611, and should refer to DOJNo. 90–11–2–1094/4.

The proposed stipulation andsettlement agreement may be examinedat: (1) The U.S. Fish and WildlifeService, 620 S. Walker, Bloomington,Indiana, (812) 334–4261; and (2) theOffice of the United States Attorney forthe Northern District of Indiana, 1001Main St., Ste. A, Dyer, Indiana 46311–1234, (219) 322–8576.

A copy of the proposed consentdecree may also be obtained by mailfrom the Department of Justice ConsentDecree Library, P.O. Box 7611,Washington, DC 20044–7611. Inrequesting a copy, please refer to thereference case and DOJ ReferenceNumber 90–11–2–1094/4, and enclose acheck in the amount of $6.00 for theconsent decree (24 pages at 25 cents perpage reproduction costs), or $16.75 forthe consent decree and its appendices(67 pages at 25 cents per pagereproduction costs) made payable to theConsent Decree Library.

Joel M. Gross,Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,Environment and Natural Resources Division.[FR Doc. 00–19383 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–15–M


Notice of Lodging of the ConsentDecree Pursuant to the Clean WaterAct

Under 28 CFR 50.7, notice is herebygiven that on July 13, 2000, a proposedConsent Decree in United States v.Harris County Municipal Utility DistrictNo. 50 (‘‘Defendant’’), Civil Action No.H–00–1931, was lodged with the UnitedStates District Court for the SouthernDistrict of Texas, Houston Division.

In this action the United States, onbehalf of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency(‘‘EPA’’), and the State of Texas, soughtinjunctive relief and civil penaltiesarising from the operation of a publiclyowned sewage treatment works locatedin Barrett Station, Harris County, Texas.Pursuant to the proposed ConsentDecree, the Defendant will takemeasures to properly operate andmaintain the collection system, identifyproblems that lead to noncompliancewithin the collection system andfacility, and undertake the necessarycapital improvements to eliminateunauthorized discharges. The proposedConsent Decree also requires theDefendant to pay $10,000. The proposedConsent Decree resolves the Defendant’sliability under Section 309 of the CleanWater Act, 33 U.S.C. 1319 and TexasWater Code § 7.105.

The Department of Justice willreceive, for a period of thirty (30) daysfrom the date of this publication,comments relating to the ConsentDecree. Comments should be addressedto the Assistant Attorney General for theEnvironment and Natural ResourcesDivision, U.S. Department of Justice,P.O. Box 7611, N.W., Washington, D.C.20044–7611, and should refer to UnitedStates v. Harris County MunicipalUtility District No. 50, D.J. Ref. 90–5–1–1–4505. The Consent Decree may beexamined at U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas.A copy of the Consent Decree may alsobe obtained by mail from the ConsentDecree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S.Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.30044–7611. In requesting a copy,please enclose a check in the amount of$7.75 payable to the Consent DecreeLibrary.

Joel M. Gross,Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,Environment and Natural Resources Division.[FR Doc. 00–19385 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–15–M


Notice of Lodging of Consent DecreePursuant to the ComprehensiveEnvironmental Response,Compensation and Liability Act

In accordance with Department ofJustice policy codified at 28 CFR 50.7and Section 122 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.9622, notice is hereby given that May26, 2000, two proposed Consent Decreesin United States v. Elsa Morgan-Skinner, et al., Civ. Action No. C–1–00–424, were lodged with the United StatesDistrict Court for the Southern Districtof Ohio. The first Consent Decreerepresents a settlement of claims of the



United States for recovery of responsecosts incurred by the United States inconnection with the Skinner LandfillSuperfund Site (Site) in West Chester,Ohio, under Section 107(a) of theComprehensive EnvironmentalResponse, Compensation and LiabilityAct of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C.9607(a), against Elsa Morgan-Skinnerand seventy-two (72) other potentiallyresponsible parties (PRPs) thatcontributed hazardous substances to theSite. Under the terms of the ConsentDecree (the Remedial Action of ‘‘RAConsent Decree’’), the SettlingGenerator/Transporter Defendants,including approximately sixty-six (66)companies, (Work Parties) willimplement an EPA-approved remedialaction which includes, among otherthings, the construction of a cap over aformer dump and buried waste lagoonarea; and the interception, capture andtreatment of contaminated groundwaterlocated down-gradient from the cappedarea. The Settling Owner/OperatorDefendant Elsa Morgan-Skinner, thecurrent Site owner, agrees to grantaccess to and restrictive use covenantson the Site, and resolves her liability byselling an option to purchase the site for$5,000 to the Work Parties. A portion ofthe proceeds of any such sale will bedeposited into an account known as theSkinner Landfill Special Account. TwoSettling Federal Agencies, the GeneralServices Administration and theDefense Logistics Agency, will pay$602,599.12 into the Skinner LandfillSpecial Account. Finally, the SettlingDe Minimis Federal Agencies, includingthe United States Army, United StatesAir Force, United States InformationAgency and the United States PostalService, each of which contributed lessthan 1% of the total volume of waste atthe Site, will pay $87,804.29 into theSkinner Landfill Special Account.Eighty percent of the funds in theSpecial Account will be available fordisbursement to the Work Parties fortheir remediation work. In exchange forthese payments and performance of theremedial action, each of the SettlingDefendants under the RA ConsentDecree will receive covenants not to sueand contribution protection.

The second Consent Decree resolvesthe United States’ claims for recovery ofresponse costs incurred at the Siteagainst seven municipalities, includingthe Cities of Blue Ash, Deer Park,Madiera, Mason, Sharonville and theVillages of Lincoln Heights and Monroe,each of which contributed municipalsolid waste (MSW) to the Site. Underthe terms of this Consent Decree (knownas the ‘‘MSW Consent Decree’’) the

Settling Municipalities will pay a totalof $17,218 into the Skinner SpecialAccount. These funds will be madeavailable to the Work Parties for theirremediation work. In exchange for thispayment, each of the SettlingMunicipalities will receive a covenantnot to sue and contribution protection.

From June 9, 2000, through July 10,2000, the Department of Justiceaccepted comments on the proposedConsent Decrees. The Department ofJustice will receive for an additionalperiod of two weeks from the date ofthis publication comments relating tothe proposed Consent Decrees.Comments should be addressed to theAssistant Attorney General of theEnvironment and Natural ResourcesDivision, Department of Justice, 950Pennsylvania, NW, Washington, DC20530, and should refer to United Statesv. Elsa Morgan-Skinner et al. Civ.Action No. C–1–00–424; D.J. Ref. Nos.90–11–3–1620, 90–11–6–118, 90–11–6–128.

The Consent Decrees may beexamined at the Office of the UnitedStates Attorney, 220 United States PostOffice & Courthouse, 100 E. 5th Street,Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, and at theUnited States Environmental ProtectionAgency, Region 5, 77 West JacksonBoulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604–3590, or on the United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency’sinternet website at www.epa.gov/region5/sites. A copy of the ConsentDecrees may also be obtained by mailfrom the Consent Decree Library inamount of $65.50 for both ConsentDecrees; or $60.00 (240 pages at 25 centsper page reproduction cost) for the RAConsent Decree; or $5.50 (22 pages at 25cents per page reproduction cost) for theMSW Consent Decree.

Joel M. Gross,Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,Environment & Natural Resources Division.[FR Doc. 00–19832 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–15–M


Notice of Lodging of ProposedConsent Decree Under The Clean AirAct

Notice is hereby given that, on July20, 2000, a Consent Decree in UnitedStates, Plaintiff, and States of Arkansas,Louisiana, and south Carolina Dept. ofHealth and Environmental Control,Plaintiff-Intervenors v. WillametteIndustries, Inc. Civil Action No. CV–00–1001–HA, was lodged in the UnitedStates District Court for the District ofOregon.

In this action the United States andthe Plaintiff-Intervenors soughtinjunctive relief and civil penaltiesunder Section 113(b) of the Clean AirAct (‘‘CAA’’), 42 U.S.C. 7413(b) againstWillamette Industries, Inc.(‘‘Willamette’’). The alleged violationsinclude the failure to install pollutioncontrol devices and obtain permits,required by the CAA, at wood productmanufacturing facilities owned andoperated by Willamette in: Emerson andMalvern Arkansas; Dodson, Ruston,Zwolle, Lillie, Taylor and SimsboroLouisiana; Bend, Eugene, Foster,Springfield and Sweet Home Oregon,and Chester South Carolina. TheConsent Decree resolves all of theseclaims. The Consent Decree requiresWillamette to pay a civil penalty of justover $11.2 million, to performSupplemental Environmental Projectscosting at least $8 million, to installpollution control devices on itsfacilities, and to perform environmentalaudits of its facilities.

The Department of Justice will acceptwritten comments relating to theproposed Consent Decree for thirty (30)days from the date of publication of thisnotice. Please address comments to theAssistant Attorney General,Environment and Natural ResourcesDivision, Department of Justice, P.O.Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station,Washington, D.C. 20044 and refer toUnited States et al. v. WillametteIndustries, Inc., Civil Action No. CV–00–1001–HA (D. Oregon), DJ # 90–5–2–1–2186.

Copies of the Consent Decree may beexamined at the Office of the UnitedStates Attorney for the District ofOregon, 1000 S.W. Third Ave., Suite600, Portland OR 97204. An electroniccopy of the Consent Decree is availableonline at: http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/aed/willamette/index.html. A copy ofthe Consent Decree may also beobtained by mail at the Department ofJustice Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box7611, Washington, D.C. 20044. Whenrequesting a copy of the proposedmodification to the Consent Decree bymail, please enclose a check in theamount of $12.75 (twenty-five cents perpage reproduction costs) payable to the‘‘Consent Decree Library.’’

Joel Gross,Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,Environment and Natural Resources Division,U.S. Department of Justice.[FR Doc. 00–19384 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]





Antitrust Division

Notice Pursuant to the NationalCooperative Research and ProductionAct of 1993—Digital Imaging Group,Inc.

Notice is hereby given that, on May 4,2000, pursuant to Section 6(a) of theNational Cooperative Research andProduction Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Digital ImagingGroup, Inc. has filed writtennotifications simultaneously with theAttorney General and the Federal TradeCommission disclosing changes in itsmembership status. The notificationswere filed for the purpose of extendingthe Act’s provisions limiting therecovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actualdamages under specified circumstances.Specifically, Ofoto, Berkeley, CA;PhotoTablet, Inc., Sebastopol, CA; TheWorkbook, Los Angeles, CA;Amazingmail.com, Inc., Scottsdale, AZ;House of Images, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA;Kablink, Sand Diego, CA; Pixami, Inc.,San Ramon, CA; EZ Prints, Atlanta, GA;Zing, Inc., San Francisco, CA; andFileflow As, Oslo, Norway have beenadded as parties to this venture. Also,Intellectual Protocols, Nannet, NY;Norwegian University of Science andTechnology, Trundheim, Norway;Ditto.com (formerly Arribasoft),Emeryville, CA; and TowerSemiconducter Ltd., Migdal Haemek,Israel have been dropped as parties tothis venture.

No other changes have been made ineither the membership or plannedactivity of the group research project.Membership in this group researchproject remains open, and DigitalImaging Group, Inc. intends to fileadditional written notificationdisclosing all changes in membership.

On September 25, 1997, DigitalImaging Group, Inc. filed its originalnotification pursuant to Section 6(a) ofthe Act. The Department of Justicepublished a notice in the FederalRegister pursuant to Section 6(b) of theAct on November 10, 1997 (62 FR60530).

The last notification was filed withthe Department on February 11, 2000. A

notice was published in the FederalRegister pursuant to Section 6(b) of theAct on June 29, 2000 (64 FR 40129).

Constance K. Robinson,Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

JOINT VENTURE WORKSHEET

[Supplemental Filings Only]

A. Name of venture: Digital Imaging group, Inc.Nature of notification: supplementalConcise statement of purpose (if purpose has

changed): Same as before—no changes.B. For ventures involving research and develop-

ment only:Identity of parties added

to venture:Identity of parties

dropped from ven-ture:

1. Ofoto, Berkely,CA

1. Intellectual Pro-tocols, Nannet,NY.

2. PhotoTablet,Inc., Sebastopol,CA

2. Norwegian Uni-versity of Scienceand Technology,Trundheim, NOR-WAY.

3. The WorkbookLose Angeles, CA

3. Ditto.com (for-merly Arribasoft),Emeryville, CA.

4.Amazingmai-l.com, Inc.,Scottsdale, AZ

4. TowerSemiconducterLtd., MigdalHaemek, ISRAEL.

5. House of Im-ages, Inc., BeverlyHills, CA.

6. Kablink, SanDiego, CA.

7. Pixami, Inc.,San Ramon, CA.

8. EZ Prints, At-lanta, GA.

9. Zing, Inc., SanFrancisco, CA.

10. Fileflow As,Oslo, NORWAY.

[FR Doc. 00–19388 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–11–M


Antitrust Division

Notice Pursuant to the NationalCooperative Research and ProductionAct of 1993—J Consotrium, Inc.

Notice is hereby given that, on April20, 2000, pursuant to Section 6(a) of theNational Cooperative Research andProduction Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), J Consotrium, Inc.has filed written notificationssimiltaneously with the Attorney

General and the Federal TradeCommission disclosing changes in itsmembership status. The notificationswere filed for the purpose of extendingthe Act’s provisions limiting therecovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actualdamages under specified circumstances.Specifically, E–SIM, San Diego, CA;Bull Smart Cards and Terminals, FosterCity, CA; and UK Ministry of Defence,Weymouth, United Kingdom have beenadded as parties to this venture.

No other changes have been made ineither the membership or plannedactivity of the group research project.Membership in this group researchproject remains open, and J Consortium,Inc. intends to file additional writtennotification disclosing all changes inmembership.

On August 9, 1999, J Consortium, Inc.filed its original notification pursuant toSection 6(a) of the Act. The Departmentof Justice published a notice in theFederal Register pursuant to Section6(b) of the Act on March 21, 2000 (65FR 15175).

The last notification was filed withthe Department on January 20, 2000. Anotice was published in the FederalRegister pursuant to Section 6(b) of theAct on June 21, 2000 (65 FR 38596).

Constance K. Robinson,Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

Joint Venture Worksheet

(Supplemental Filings Only)

A. Name of venture: J. Consortium, Inc.Nature of notification: SupplementalConcise statement of purpose (if

purpose has changed): Same asbefore—no changes.

B. For ventures involving research anddevelopment only:

Identity of parties added to venture:1. E–SIM, San Diego, CA2. Bull Smart Cards and Terminals,

Foster City, CA3. UK Ministry of Defence,

Weymouth, UNITED KINGDOMIdentity of parties dropped from

venture:C. For ventures involving production:

Identity and nationality of parties tojoint production venture:

Identity Nationality Place of incorporation Location of principal executiveoffices





Antitrust Division

Notice Pursuant to the NationalCooperative Research and ProductionAct of 1993—OBI Consortium, Inc.

Notice is hereby given that, on June15, 2000, pursuant to Section 6(a) of theNational Cooperative Research andProduction Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), OBI Consortium, Inc.has filed written notificationssimultaneously with the AttorneyGeneral and the Federal TradeCommission disclosing changes in itsmembership status. The notificationswere filed for the purpose of extendingthe Act’s provisions limiting therecovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actualdamages under specified circumstances.Specifically, bCandid Corporation,Boulder, CO; BEA Systems, San Jose,CA; Catalyst Capital, Newport Beach,CA; Consolidated Commerce, DesPlains, IL; Ectone, Santa Clara, CA;ESSELTE Corporation, Greenwich, CT;Medium, Wayne, PA; and PassportInternational, Ltd., Mt. Pleasant, SChave been added as parties to thisventure.

No other changes have been made ineither the membership or plannedactivity of the group research project.Membership in this group researchproject remains open, and OBIConsortium, Inc. intends to fileadditional written notificationdisclosing all changes in membership.

On September 10, 1997, OBIConsortium, Inc. filed its originalnotification pursuant to Section 6(a) ofthe Act. The Department of Justicepublished a notice in the FederalRegister pursuant to Section 6(b) of theAct on November 10, 1997 (62 FR60531).

The last notification was filed withthe Department on March 3, 2000. Anotice was published in the FederalRegister pursuant to Section 6(b) of theAct on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40131).

Constance K. Robinson,Director of Operations Antitrust Division.

Joint Venture Worksheet

(Supplemental Filings Only)

A. Name of venture: OBI Consortium,Inc.

Nature of notification: SupplementalConcise statement of purpose (if

purpose has changed): Same asbefore—no changes.

B. For ventures involving research anddevelopment only:

Identity of parties added to venture:1. bCandid Corporation, Boulder, CO

2. BEA Systems, San Jose, CA3. Catalyst Capital, Newport Beach,

CA4. Consolidated Commerce, Des

Plaines, IL5. Ectone, Santa Clara, CA6. ESSELTE Corporation, Greenwich,

CT7. iMedium, Wayne, PA8. Passport International, Ltd., Mt.

Pleasant, SCIdentity of parties dropped from

venture:C. For ventures involving production:

Identity and nationality of parties tojoint production venture:



Drug Enforcement Administration

Importation of Controlled Substances;Notice of Application

Pursuant to Section 1008 of theControlled Substances Import andExport Act (21 U.S.C. 958(i)), theAttorney General shall, prior to issuinga registration under this Section to abulk manufacturer of a controlledsubstance in Schedule I or II and priorto issuing a regulation under Section1002(a) authorizing the importation ofsuch a substance, providemanufacturers holding registrations forthe bulk manufacture of the substancean opportunity for a hearing.

Therefore, in accordance with Section1301.34 of Title 21, Code of FederalRegulations (CFR), notice is herebygiven that on June 6, 2000, Chiragene,Inc., 7 Powder Horn Drive, Warren, NewJersey 07059, made application byrenewal to the Drug EnforcementAdministration to be registered as animporter of phyenylacetone (8501), abasic class of controlled substance listedin Schedule II.

The firm plans to import thephenylacetone to manufactureamphetamine.

Any manufacturer holding, orapplying for, registration as a bulkmanufacturer of this basic class ofcontrolled substance may file writtencomments on or objections to theapplication described above and may, atthe same time, file a written request fora hearing on such application inaccordance with 21 CFR 1301.43 insuch form as prescribed by 21 CFR1316.47.

Any such comments, objections, orrequests for a hearing may be addressed,in quintuplicate, to the DeputyAssistance Administrator, Office of

Diversion Control, Drug EnforcementAdministration, United StatesDepartment of Justice, Washington, D.C.20537, Attention: DEA Federal RegisterRepresentative (CCR), and must be filedno later than (30 days from publication).

This procedure is to be conductedsimultaneously with and independentof the procedures described in 21 CFR1301.34(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f). As notedin a previous notice at 40 FR 43745–46(September 23, 1975), all applicants forregistration to import basic class of anycontrolled substance in Schedule I or IIare and will continue to be required todemonstrate to the Deputy AssistantAdministrator, Office of DiversionControl, Drug EnforcementAdministration that the requirementsfor such registration pursuant to 21U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21CFR 1301.34(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)are satisfied.


John H. King,Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office ofDivision Control, Drug EnforcementAdministration.[FR Doc. 00–19290 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]



Federal Bureau of Investigation

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Proposed Collection;Comment Requested

ACTION: Notice of information collectionunder review; Extension of a currentlyapproved collection; Return A—Monthly Return of Offenses Known tothe Police and Supplement to ReturnA—Montly Offenses Known to thePolice.

Office of Management and Budget(OMB) approval is being sought for theinformation collection listed below.This proposed information collectionwas previously published in the FederalRegister on May 30, 2000, allowing fora 60-day public comment period.

The purpose of this notice is to allowan additional 30 days for publiccomment until August 31, 2000. Thisprocess is conducted in accordance with5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s)contained in this notice, especiallyregarding the estimated public burdenand associated response time, should bedirected to the Office of Management



and Budget, Office of Information andRegulatory Affairs, Attention:Department of Justice Desk Officer,Washington, DC 20503. Additionally,comments may be submitted to OMB viafacsimile to 202–395–7285. Commentsmay also be submitted to theDepartment of Justice (DOJ), JusticeManagement Division, InformationManagement and Security Staff,Attention: Department ClearanceOfficer, Suite 1220, National PlaceBuilding, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,Washington, DC 20530. Additionally,comments may be submitted to DOJ viafacsimile to (202) 514–1590.

Written comments and/or suggestionsfrom the public and affected agenciesconcerning the proposed collection ofinformation should address one or moreof the following four points:

1. Evaluate whether the proposedcollection of information is necessaryfor the proper performance of thefunction of the agency, includingwhether the information will havepractical utility;

2. Evaluate the accuracy of theagency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection of information,including the validity of themethodology and assumptions used;

3. Enhance the quality, utility, andclarity of the information to becollected; and

4. Minimize the burden of thecollection of information on those whoare to respond, including through theuse of appropriate automated,electronic, mechanical, or othertechnological collection techniques orother forms of information technology,e.g., permitting electronic submission ofresponses.

Overview of This InformationCollection

1. Type of information collection:Extension of Current Collection

2. The title of the form/collection:Return A—Monthly Return of OffensesKnown to the Police and Supplement toReturn A—Monthly Offenses Known tothe Police.

3. The agency form number, if any,and applicable component of theDepartment Sponsoring the collection.Form: 4–927A; 4–919. Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, Department of Justice.

4. Affected public who will be askedor required to respond, as well as briefabstract. Primary: Local and State LawEnforcement Agencies. This collectionis needed to collect data regardingcriminal offenses and their respectiveclearances throughout the United States.Data is tabulated and published in theannual Crime in the United States.

5. The FBI UCR Program is currentlyreviewing its race and ethnicity datacollection in compliance with the Officeof Management and Budget’s Revisionsfor the Standards for the Classificationof Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity.

6. An estimate of the total number ofrespondents and the amount of timeestimated for an average respondent torespond: 17,667 agencies with 212,004responses (including zero reports); andwith an average of 30 minutes a monthdevoted to compilation of data for thisinformation collection.

7. An estimate of the total publicburden (in hours) associated with bothcollections: 74,201 hours annually.

Public comments on this proposedinformation collection are stronglyencouraged.

If additional information is requiredcontact: Mr. Robert B. Briggs,Department Clearance Officer, U.S.Department of Justice, InformationManagement and Security Staff, JusticeManagement Division, Suite 1220,National Place Building, 1331Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington20530.

Dated: July 27, 2000.Robert B. Briggs,Department Clearance Officer, Department ofJustice.[FR Doc. 00–19357 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–02–M


Federal Bureau of Investigation

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Proposed Collection;Comment Requested

ACTION: Notice of information collectionunder review; Extension of a currentlyapproved collection; Hate CrimeIncident Report and Quarterly HateCrime Report.

Office of Management and Budget(OMB) approval is being sought for theinformation collection listed below.This proposed information collectionwas previously published in the FederalRegister on May 26, 2000, allowing fora 60-day public comment period.

The purpose of this notice is to allowan additional 30 days for publiccomment until August 31, 2000. Thisprocess is conducted in accordance with5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s)contained in this notice, especiallyregarding the estimated public burdenand associated response time, should bedirected to the Office of Managementand Budget, Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs, Attention:Department of Justice Desk Officer,Washington, DC 20503. Additionally,comments may be submitted to OMB viafacsimile to 202–395–7285. Commentsmay also be submitted to theDepartment of Justice (DOJ), JusticeManagement Division, InformationManagement and Security Staff,Attention: Department ClearanceOfficer, Suite 1221, National PlaceBuilding, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,Washington, DC 20530. Additionally,comments may be submitted to DOJ viafacsimile to (202) 514–1590.

Written comments and/or suggestionsfrom the public and affected agenciesconcerning the proposed collection ofinformation should address one or moreof the following four points:

1. Evaluate whether the proposedcollection of information is necessaryfor the proper performance of thefunction of the agency, includingwhether the information will havepractical utility;

2. Evaluate the accuracy of theagency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection of information,including the validity of themethodology and assumptions used;

3. Enhance the quality, utility, andclarity of the information to becollected; and

4. Minimize the burden of thecollection of information on those whoare to respond, including through theuse of appropriate automated,electronic, mechanical, or othertechnological collection techniques orother forms of information technology,e.g., permitting electronic submission ofresponses.

Overview of This InformationCollection

1. Type of information collection:Extension of Current Collection.

2. The title of the form/collection:Hate Crime Incident Report andQuarterly Hate Crime Report.

3. The agency form number, if any,and applicable component of theDepartment Sponsoring the collection.Form: 11–1; 11–2. Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, Department of Justice.

4. Affected public who will be askedor required to respond, as well as briefabstract. Primary: Local and State LawEnforcement Agencies. This collectionwill gather information necessary tomonitor the bias motivation of selectedcriminal offenses. The resultingstatistics are published annually.

5. The FBI UCR Program is currentlyreviewing its race and ethnicity datacollection in compliance with the Officeof Management and Budget’s Revisions



for the Standards for the Classificationof Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity.

6. An estimate of the total number ofrespondents and the amount of timeestimated for an average respondent torespond: 17,667 agencies with 106,002responses (including zero reports); andwith an average of 6 hours and 35minutes annually devoted tocompilation of data for this informationcollection.

7. An estimate of the total publicburden (in hours) associated with bothcollections: 15,900 annually.

Public comments on this proposedinformation collection are stronglyencouraged.

If additional information is requiredcontract: Mr. Robert B. Briggs,Department Clearance Officer, U.S.Department of Justice, InformationManagement and Security Staff, JusticeManagement Division, Suite 1221,National Place Building, 1331Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington,DC 20530.

Dated: July 27, 2000.Robert B. Briggs,Department Clearance Officer, Department ofJustice.[FR Doc. 00–19358 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4410–02–M


Immigration and Naturalization Service

[INS No. 2082–00]

Notice of Intent To Prepare a DraftEnvironmental Impact Statement forthe Implementation of Border Barriersfor Enforcement Initiatives in Arizona

AGENCY: Immigration and NaturalizationService (INS), Justice.ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare aDraft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS).

SUMMARY:

Proposed ActionIn furtherance of its mission to gain

and maintain control of the Arizonaborder, in 1994, the INS launchedOperation Safeguard, an aggressiveinitiative that brought new agents,equipment, and technology to theTucson Border Patrol Sector. The goal ofOperation Safeguard is to heightendeterrence and improve control alongthe nearly 300 miles of internationalborder in Arizona. The aim of INS’comprehensive border enforcementeffort, which includes OperationGatekeeper in California and OperationsHold the Line and Rio Grande in Texas,is to reduce the adverse effects of illegal

immigration and improve the quality oflife for residents along the immediateborder and throughout the nation. TheINS will now expand OperationSafeguard by utilizing new resourcesand technology within the followingArizona Border Patrol stations: Ajo/Why, Casa Grande, Douglas, Naco,Nogales, Sonoita, Tucson, Wellton,Wilcox, and Yuma. The enhancementswill bolster the efforts to ensure thesafety of migrants, ranchers, and localresidents, as well as provide increasedsafety of operations for agents.Enhancement will include, but not belimited to, additional Border Patrolpersonnel, support vehicles, air support,border barriers, lighting, border roadimprovements, and remote videosurveillance systems.

Alternatives

In developing the DEIS, the options ofno action and alternatives for OperationSafeguard will be fully and thoroughlyexamined.

Scoping Process

During the preparation of the DEIS,there will be numerous opportunitiesfor public involvement in order todetermine the environmental issues tobe examined. The meetings will be wellpublicized and held at a time whichwill make it possible for the public andinterested agencies or organizations toattend. Scoping meetings will be held inDouglas, Tucson, Yuma, and Nogales,Arizona. Notice of the Scoping meetingswill be published in local newspapersprior to the meetings indicating thedate, time, and location of each Scopingmeeting.

DEIS Preparation

Public notice will be published in theFederal Register concerning theavailability of the DEIS for publicreview and comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Manny Rodriguez, Chief Policy andPlanning, Immigration andNaturalization Service, Facilities andEngineering Branch, 425 I Street, NW.,Washington, D.C. 20536, Room 2060,Telephone: 202–353–0383.


Doris Meissner,Commissioner, Immigration andNaturalization Service.[FR Doc. 00–19335 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and TrainingAdministration

Notice of Determinations RegardingEligibility To Apply for WorkerAdjustment Assistance and NAFTATransitional Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with section 223 of theTrade Act of 1974, as amended, theDepartment of Labor herein presentssummaries of determinations regardingeligibility to apply for trade adjustmentassistance for workers (TA–W) issuedduring the period of July 2000.

In order for an affirmativedetermination to be made and acertification of eligibility to apply forworker adjustment assistance to beissued, each of the group eligibilityrequirements of section 222 of the Actmust be met:

(1) That a significant number orproportion of the workers in theworkers’ firm, or an appropriatesubdivision, thereof, have becometotally or partially separated;

That sales or production, or both, ofthe firm or subdivision have decreasedabsolutely; and

(3) That increases of imports ofarticles like or directly competitive witharticles produced by the firm orappropriate subdivision havecontributed importantly to theseparations, or threat thereof, and to theabsolute decline in sales or production.

Negative Determinations for WorkerAdjustment Assistance

In each of the following cases theinvestigation revealed that criterion (3)has not been met. A survey of customersindicated that increased imports did notcontribute importantly to workerseparations at the firm.TA–W–37,403; R. Daye Limited, New

York, NYTA–W–37,596; The Bethlehem Corp.,

Easton, PAIn the following cases, the

investigation revealed that the criteriafor eligibility have not been met for thereasons specified.TA–W–37,837; American General

Assurance Co., Reading, PATA–W–37,763; Destination Film

Distribution Co., Inc., WheelmanProducts, Santa Monica, CA

TA–W–37,762; Hearst Entertainment,King Telpro Productions, LosAngeles, CA

TA–W–37,623; Lear Corp., Mold and dieShop, El Paso, TX

TA–W–37,836; Shenandoah Rag Co.,Inc., Shenandoah, PA



The workers firm does not produce anarticle as required for certification underSection 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.TA–W–37,631; Celestica Corp.,

Campton, KYTA–W–37,522; INX International Ink

Co., Warminster, PATA–W–37,757; Cutler-Hammer, Crane

Transportation & Resistors,Milwaukee, WI

TA–W–37,868; American Meter Co.,Erie, PA

TA–W–37,560; Honeywell International,Speciality Chemicals, CommercialRoofing Systems, Ironton, OH

TA–W–37,706; Fruit of The Loom,Sports and Licensing Div., SalemSportswear, Inc., Frankfort, KY

TA–W–37,750; Acme Steel Co.,Riverdale, IL

TA–W–37,493; Levi Strauss and Co.,RMQ Lab, Pelicano Finishing Plant,El Paso, TX

Increased imports did not contributeimportantly to worker separations at thefirm.TA–W–37,802; Lydal-Westex,

Hamptonville, NCThe investigation revealed that

criteria (2) has not been met. Sales orproduction, or both, did not declineduring the relevant period as requiredfor certification.

Affirmative Determinations For WorkerAdjustment Assistance

The following certifications have beenissued; the date following the companyname and location of eachdetermination references the impactdate for all workers of suchdetermination.TA–W–37,852; Southwest Cupid Corp.,

Hominy, OK: June 15, 1999.TA–W–37,523 & A; Sangamon, Inc.,

Taylorville, IL and Moultrie, GA:March 17, 1999.

TA–W–37,669, Wheeling-Labelle NailCo., Wheeling, WV: May 2, 1999.

TA–W–37,433; Smithville Sportswear,including Workers of Skilstaf, Inc.,Smithsville, TN: February 24, 1999.

TA–W–37,822; Kalkstein Silk Mills, Inc.,Paterson, NJ: May 25, 1999.

TA–W–37,739; Applied SewingResources, Inc., Orland, CA: May20, 1999.

TA–W–37,791; Erie Controls,Milwaukee, WI: May 19, 1999.

TA–W–37,602; Wil-Gro Fertilizer, Inc.,Pryor, OK: April 3, 1999.

TA–W–37,667; AMF Reece, Inc.,Mechanicsville, VA: April 6, 1999.

TA–W–37,813; Seton Co., Leather Div,Saxton, PA: June 5, 1999.

TA–W–37,862; K & R Sportswear, SpringHope, NC: July 21, 1999.

TA–W–37,675; Hagale Industries, Inc.,Salem MO: April 26, 1999.

TA–W–37,711; Dana Epic TechnicalGroup, Fluid Systems Products,Kendallville, IN: May 5, 1999.

TA–W–37,771; A & B Dallco Industries,Inc., York, PA; Dalta, PA; andSpring Run, PA: May 31, 1999.

TA–W–37,641; Jo-B’s, Inc., Frisco City,AL: April 23, 1999.

TA–W–37,806; W.E. Bassett Co., Derby,CT: June 9, 1999.

TA–W–37,691 & A; Four SeasonsApparel Co., Murfreesboro, NC andSanford, NC: May 5, 1999.

TA–W–37,642; Zeller Corp., Defiance,OH: April 24, 1999.

TA–W–37,510; Cliftex Corp., NewBedford, MA: March 13, 1999.

TA–W–37,627; Bari Manufacturing Co.,Inc., Passaic, NJ: April 10, 1999.

TA–W–37,677; Wheaton USA, Inc.,Decora Operations, Pennsville, NJ:April 18, 1999.

TA–W–37,636; Voyager Emblems, Inc.,Sanborn, NY: April 19, 1999.

TA–W–37,655; Cassie Cotillion,Albemarle, NC: April 17, 1999.

TA–W–37,699; Invensys ApplianceControls, Independence, VA: May 4,1999.

TA–W–37,644; Ranco North America,Plain City, OH: May 1, 1999.

TA–W–37,814; Allied Signal, Honeywell,Inc., Torrance, CA: June 8, 1999.

TA–W–37,803; MNCO, LLC (FormerlyMcGuire-Nicholas Co. LLC),Commerce, CA: May 23, 1999.

TA–W–37,845; Sims Deltec, Inc., St.Paul, MN: June 15, 1999.

TA–W–37,770; H. H. Rosinsky Co., Inc.,Philadelphia, PA: May 30, 1999.

TA–W–37,865; ITT Industries, FluidHandling Systems, Tawas City, MI:June 24, 1999.

TA–W–37,838; Colorado Biomedical,Inc., Evergreen, CO: June 14, 1999.

Also, pursuant to Title V of the NorthAmerican Free Trade AgreementImplementation Act (P.L. 103–182)concerning transitional adjustmenthereinafter called (NAFTA–TAA) and inaccordance with section 250(a),Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of theTrade Act as amended, the Departmentof Labor presents summaries ofdeterminations regarding eligibility toapply for NAFTA–TAA issued duringthe month of July, 2000.

In order for an affirmativedetermination to be made and acertification of eligibility to apply forNAFTA–TAA the following groupeligibility requirements of section 250 ofthe Trade Act must be met:

(1) That a significant number orproportion of the workers in theworkers’ firm, or an appropriatesubdivision thereof, (including workersin any agricultural firm or appropriate

subdivision thereof) have become totallyor partially separated from employmentand either—

(2) That sales or production, or both,of such firm or subdivision havedecreased absolutely,

(3) That imports from Mexico orCanada of articles like or directlycompetitive with articles produced bysuch firm or subdivision have increased,and that the increases importscontributed importantly to suchworkers’ separations or threat ofseparation and to the decline in sales orproduction of such firm or subdivision;or

(4) That there has been a shift inproduction by such wokers’ firm orsubdivision to Mexico or Canada ofarticles like or directly competitive witharticles which are produced by the firmor subdivision.

Negative Determinations NAFTA–TAA

In each of the following cases theinvestigation revealed that criteria (3)and (4) were not met. Imports fromCanada or Mexico did not contributeimportantly to workers’ separations.There was no shift in production fromthe subject firm to Canada or Mexicoduring the relevant period.NAFTA–TAA–03977; Eagle River Knits,

Inc., Monroe, NCNAFTA–TAA–03925; Applied Sewing

Resources, Inc., Orland, CANAFTA–TAA–03721; Rockwell

Automation, Euclid Plant, Euclid,OH

NAFTA–TAA–03802; Levi Strauss & Co.,RMQ Lab, Pelicano Finishing Plant,El Paso, TX

NAFTA–TAA–03940; Fruit of the Loom,Sports and Licensing Div., SalemSportswear, Inc., Frankfort, KY

NAFTA–TAA–03996; Federal MogulCorp., Milan, MI

The investigation revealed that thecriteria for eligibility have not been metfor the reasons specified.NONE

Affirmative Determinations NAFTA–TAA

NAFTA–TAA–03990; Collins Pine Co.,Collins Products, LLC, KlamathFalls, OR: June 23, 2000.

NAFTA–TAA–03995; John ManvilleInternational, Inc., Roofing SystemsGroup, Saco, ME: June 29, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–04002; American MeterCo., Erie, PA: June 26, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03877; Erie Controls,Milwaukee, WI: April 26, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03976; The Raleigh Co.,Div. of I.C. Isaacs & Co., Inc.,Raleigh, MS: June 8, 1999.



NAFTA–TAA–03997; PL Industries, a/k/a PL Garment Finishers, McRae,GA: June 23, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03780; SmithvilleSportswear, including Workers ofSkilstaf, Inc., Smithville, TN: March6, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–3945; The Doe RunResources Co., The SoutheastMissouri Milling and Mining Div.,Viburnum, MO: May 17, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–04008; ITT Industries,Fluid Handling Systems, TawasCity, MI: June 24, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03890; Wheaton USA,Inc., Decora Operations, Pennsville,NJ: April 18, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03956; H. H. RosinskyCompany, Inc., Philadelphia, PA:May 30, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03991; Sims Deltec, Inc.,St. Paul, MN: May 1, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03981; ThermadyneHoldings Corp., Tweco Products,Inc., Wichita, KS: May 31, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03859; ICI ExplosivesUSA, Inc., Ammonium Nitrate Div.,Joplin, MO: April 14, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03845; HoneywellInternational, Specialty Chemicals,Commercial Roofing Systems,Ironton, OH: April 12, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03912; The Kym Co.,Jackson, GA: May 15, 1999.

NAFTA–TAA–03984; LaCrosseFootwear, Inc., Clintonville, WI:June 20, 1999.

I hereby certify that theaforementioned determinations wereissued during the month of July, 2000.Copies of these determinations areavailable for inspection in Room C–4318, U.S. Department of Labor, 200Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,DC. 20210 during normal businesshours or will be mailed to persons whowrite to the above address.

Dated: July 25, 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19402 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[TA–W–37,710]

A.T. Cross Company, Lincoln, RhodeIsland; Notice of Termination ofInvestigation

Pursuant to Section 221 of the TradeAct of 1974, an investigation wasinitiated on May 22, 2000, in response

to a petition filed on the same date onbehalf of workers at A.T. CrossCompany, Lincoln, Rhode Island.

The company official submitting thepetition has requested that the petitionbe withdrawn. Consequently, furtherinvestigation in this case would serveno purpose, and the investigation hasbeen terminated.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 11th dayof July, 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19407 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[TA–W–37,825]

Georgia Pacific Corporation, CNS/Softwood Lumber Division, Baileyville,Maine; Notice of Termination ofInvestigation

Pursuant to Section 221 of the TradeAct of 1974, an investigation wasinitiated on June 26, 2000, in responseto a petition filed by a PACEInternational Union, Local #1–1867representative on behalf of workers atGeorgia Pacific Corporation, Baileyville,Maine. Workers are engaged inemployment related to the production oflumber studs.

An active certification covering thepetitioning group of workers remains ineffect through January 19, 2001 (TA–W–35,257). Consequently, furtherinvestigation in this case would serveno purpose, and the investigation hasbeen terminated.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 12th day ofJuly, 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19408 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[TA–W–37,570]

Lilly Industries, Inc., Indianapolis,Indiana; Notice of Termination ofInvestigation

Pursuant to Section 221 of the TradeAct of 1974, an investigation wasinitiated on April 17, 2000, in response

to a petition filed on the same date onbehalf of workers at Lilly Industries,Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana.

The company official submitting thepetition has requested that the petitionbe withdrawn. Consequently, furtherinvestigation in this case would serveno purpose, and the investigation hasbeen terminated.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 10th dayof July 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19409 Filed 7–30–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[TA–W–37,156]

Ray-Ban Sun Optics, Luxottica,Formerly Known as Eyewear Divisionof Bausch & Lomb, San Antonio, TX;Amended Certification RegardingEligibility To Apply for WorkerAdjustment Assistance

In accordance with section 223 of theTrade Act of 1974 (19 USC 2273) theDepartment of Labor issued aCertification of Eligibility to Apply forWorker Adjustment Assistance onFebruary 4, 2000, applicable to workersof Ray-Ban Sun Optics, San Antonio,Texas. The notice was published in theFederal Register on March 17, 2000 (65FR 14627).

At the request of the petitioners, theDepartment reviewed the certificationfor workers of the subject firm. Theworkers are engaged in the productionof sunglasses. Findings show that thesubject firm, which was originallynamed the Eyewear Division of Bausch& Lomb, was sold in June 1999 toLuxottica and was renamed Ray-BanSun Optics. the Department is amendingthe certification determination tocorrectly identify the new title name toread ‘‘Ray-Ban Sun Optics, Luxottica,formerly known as Eyewear Division ofBausch & Lomb.;’’

The amended notice applicable toTA–W–37,156 is hereby issued asfollows:

All workers of Ray-Ban Sun Optics,Luxottica, formerly known as EyewearDivision of Bausch & Lomb, San Antonio,Texas who became totally or partiallyseparated from employment on or afterNovember 20, 1998 through February 4, 2002are eligible to apply for adjustment assistanceunder Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.



Signed at Washington, D.C. this 24th dayof July 2000.

Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19403 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Investigations Regarding Certificationsof Eligibility To Apply for WorkerAdjustment Assistance

Petitions have been filed with theSecretary of Labor under Section 221(a)of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) andare identified in the Appendix to this

notice. Upon receipt of these petitions,the Director of the Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance, Employmentand Training Administration, hasinstituted investigations pursuant toSection 221(a) of the Act.

The purpose of each of theinvestigations is to determine whetherthe workers are eligible to apply foradjustment assistance under Title II,Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigationswill further relate, as appropriate, to thedetermination of the date on which totalor partial separations began orthreatened to begin and the subdivisionof the firm involved.

The petitioners or any other personsshowing a substantial interest in thesubject matter of the investigations mayrequest a public hearing, provided suchrequest is filed in writing with theDirector, Division of Trade Adjustment

Assistance, at the address shown below,not later than August 11, 2000.

Interested persons are invited tosubmit written comments regarding thesubject matter of the investigations tothe Director, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance, at the addressshown below, not later than August 11,2000.

The petitions filed in this case areavailable for inspection at the Office ofthe Director, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance, Employmentand Training Administration, U.S.Department of Labor, 200 ConstitutionAvenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

Signed at Washington, DC this 17th day ofJuly, 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.



APPENDIX

[Petitions instituted on 07/17/2000]

TA–W Subject firm(petitioners) Location Date of petition product(s)

37,877 ......... Swiss Maid, Inc. (Wkrs) ............. Greentown, PA ............ 06/28/2000 .................................. Embroidered Emblems.37,878 ......... Sebago (Co.) .............................. Westbrook, ME ........... 06/30/2000 .................................. Men’s and Women’s Footwear.37,879 ......... Beaulieu of America (Co.) .......... Anadarko, OK ............. 06/29/2000 .................................. Broadloom Carpet.37,880 ......... All Technologies, Inc (Wkrs) ...... El Paso, TX ................. 06/30/2000 .................................. Computers.37,881 ......... Hart Mountain Millworks (Wkrs) Lakeview, OR .............. 06/29/2000 .................................. Finger Joint Blocks.37,882 ......... Walpole, Inc. (Co.) ..................... Westampton, NJ .......... 06/30/2000 .................................. Industrial Textile Bags.37,883 ......... Corrpro Companies (Wkrs) ........ Midland, TX ................. 06/30/2000 .................................. Provide Cathodic Protection Ma-

terials.37,884 ......... Rycraft, Inc (Co.) ........................ Covallis, OR ................ 06/27/2000 .................................. Cookie Stamps.37,885 ......... PF Technologies (Co.) ............... Phoenix, AZ ................ 07/07/2000 .................................. Painting and Assembly of Cell

Phones.37,886 ......... Racing Champions (Wkrs) ......... Dyersville, IA ............... 06/27/2000 .................................. Toy’s.37,887 ......... Avent, Inc. (Co.) ......................... Tuscon, AZ .................. 07/07/2000 .................................. Disposable Surgical Gowns,

Caps.37,888 ......... Federal Mogul Wiper (Co.) ......... Michigan City, IN ......... 07/06/2000 .................................. Wiper Blades and Refill Blades.37,889 ......... Crown Pacific (Wkrs) .................. Gilchrist, OR ................ 07/05/2000 .................................. Lumber.37,890 ......... TCE, Inc (Co.) ............................ Dunmore, PA .............. 07/05/2000 .................................. 27″ Color Televisions Picture

Tubes.37,891 ......... Acorn Window Systems (Wkrs) Quincy, MI ................... 06/30/2000 .................................. Windows and Patio Doors.37,892 ......... CRH Catering Co. (Wkrs) .......... Connellsville, PA ......... 07/05/2000 .................................. Provides Vending Service, Ca-

tered Lunch.37,893 ......... IKG Industries (USWA) .............. Nashville, TN ............... 06/27/2000 .................................. Steel and Fiberglass Grating.37,894 ......... GT Bicycles (Co.) ....................... Santa Ana, CA ............ 06/19/2000 .................................. Bicycles.37,895 ......... DeFarr, Inc (Wkrs) ...................... New York, NY ............. 07/07/2000 .................................. Ladies’ Dresses.




DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[TA–W–37,563]

Tecumseh Products Company,Somerset, Kentucky; Notice ofNegative Determination RegardingApplication for Reconsideration

By application dated July 7, 2000,attorneys on behalf of the workers(hereinafter referenced as thepetitioner), request administrativereconsideration of the Department’snegative determination regardingeligibility to apply for Trade AdjustmentAssistance (TAA), applicable to workersand former workers of the TecumsehProducts Company, Somerset,Kentucky. The denial notice was signedon May 12, 2000, and published in theFederal Register on June 8, 2000 (65 FR36469).

Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c)reconsideration may be granted underthe following circumstances:

(1) If it appears on the basis of factsnot previously considered that thedetermination complained of waserroneous;

(2) If it appears that the determinationcomplained of was based on a mistakein the determination of facts notpreviously considered; or

(3) If in the opinion of the CertifyingOfficer, a misinterpretation of facts or ofthe law justified reconsideration of thedecision.

To support the application forreconsideration, the petitioner provideda published article quoting a companyofficial of Tecumseh Products Companylinking the Somerset plant closing withthe dumping of cheap Asiancompressors in the United States,devastating the subject firm customerbase. The petitioner states also that thearticle cites that the layoffs and plantclosure are intended to help Tecumsehcut prices so it can combat thechallenge.

The workers at Tecumseh ProductsCompany, Somerset, Kentucky,produced refrigeration and airconditioner compressors. The workerswere denied eligibility to apply for TAAbased on the finding that thecontributed importantly criterion (3) ofthe worker group eligibilityrequirements of Section 222 of theTrade Act of 1974, as amended, was notmet. Section 222 (3) requires thatincreased imports of articles like ordirectly competitive with thoseproduced at the subject firm contributeimportantly to declines in sales orproduction and worker separations.

Layoffs at Tecumseh Products Companywere attributable to the company’sdecision to transfer production to otherdomestic facilities. The investigationfurther revealed that the majority of theoutput at the Somerset, Kentucky plantwas for the export market. A lost ofexport market business cannot beconsidered a basis for worker groupcertification.

Conclusion

After review of the application andinvestigative findings, In conclude thatthere has been no error ormisinterpretation of the law or of thefacts which would justifyreconsideration of the Department ofLabor’s prior decision. Accordingly, theapplication is denied.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 17th dayof July 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19410 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Solicitation for Grant Applications(SGA) H–1B TechnicaL Skill TrainingGrants

AGENCY: Employment and TrainingAdministration (ETA), Labor.ACTION: Notice of availability of fundsand solicitation for grant applications(SGA).

SUMMARY: This Notice contains all of thenecessary information and formsneeded to apply for grant funding. TheEmployment and TrainingAdministration (ETA), U.S. Departmentof Labor (DOL), announces theavailability of grant funds for skilltraining programs for unemployed andemployed workers. Funding for thesegrants is coming from the user feemandated for applicants for new H–1Bnonimmigrant visa workers andestablished under the AmericanCompetitiveness and WorkforceImprovement Act of 1998 (ACWIA). Thegrants will have the longer term goal ofraising the skill levels of domesticworkers so that they can fill high skilljobs which are presently being filled bytemporary workers being admitted tothe United States under the provisionsof H–1B. Department of Labor willconvene Bidders Conferences in earlyAugust to share information witheligible applicants and other interested

parties. Detailed information as to theexact times and locations of thesesessions together with other pertinentfacts may be found on the ETA webpage (http:/www.doleta.gov) or bycalling a toll-free help line (1–877–US2–JOBS).

Eligible applicants for these grantswill be local Workforce InvestmentBoards (WIBs) established under section117 of the Workforce Investment Act(WIA) that will carry out such programsor projects through one-stop deliverysystems established under section 121of WIA, or regional consortia of localboards. Regional consortia may beinterstate. Successful applicants underearlier H–1B Solicitations will beeligible for grants under thiscompetition; however those currentawardees will be required to indicatethat this proposal provides a completelynew approach to skill training(including a different skill shortage area,e.g., health occupations rather thaninformation technology) from that beingconducted under their current grant.Proposals submitted by those currentawardees will be subject to pre-screening to assure that they propose anapproach that is clearly innovative anddifferent from the activity that wasimplemented under the previous award.

WIA provides a framework for anational workforce investment andemployment system designed to meetboth the needs of the nation’sbusinesses and the needs of job seekersand workers who want to further theircareers. ACWIA will provide resourcesfor skill training in occupations that arein employer demand; one measure ofthis demand is employer H–1Bapplications for workers. In particular,industries that appear to generate themost H–1B demand include informationtechnology and health. Appendix A tothis Solicitation provides informationon the kinds of occupations certifiedunder the H–1B program by theDepartment of Labor for Fiscal Year1999 (Oct.1, 1998 to May 1999), and thenumber of job openings certified in eachoccupation.

This notice describes the applicationsubmission requirements, the processthat eligible entities must use to applyfor funds covered by this solicitation,and how grantees will be selected. It isanticipated that about $45 million willbe available for funding the projectscovered in this second-roundsolicitation, that approximately fifteenprojects will be selected for funding,



and that the maximum grant award willnot exceed $3.0 million.DATES: Applications for grant awardswill be accepted commencingimmediately. The closing date forreceipt of applications shall beSeptember 19, 2000 at 4 p.m. (EasternTime) at the address below.ADDRESSES: Applications shall bemailed to the U.S. Department of Labor,Employment and TrainingAdministration, Division of FederalAssistance, Attention: Diemle Phan,SGA/DFA 00-108, 200 ConstitutionAvenue, NW, Room S–4203,Washington, D.C. 20210.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Questions should be faxed to DiemlePhan, Grants Management Specialist,Division of Federal Assistance, Fax(202) 219–8739. This is not a toll freenumber. All inquiries should includethe SGA number (DFA 00–108) and acontact name, fax and phone number.This solicitation will also be publishedon the Internet on the Employment andTraining Administration’s Homepage athttp://www.doleta.gov. Awardnotifications will also be published onthis Homepage.

BackgroundThis initiative will build on similar

ETA initiatives that deal with the issueof skill shortages including the June1998 dislocated worker technologydemonstration, the new dislocatedworker technology demonstration, theregional skills consortium buildingawards announced in March 2000, theindividual training accountdemonstration grant awards announcedin February 2000 and the skillsstrategies, partnership training/systembuilding demonstration awards whichwere announced in June. These effortswere intended to strengthen linkagesbetween employers experiencing skillshortages in specific occupations andthe publicly funded workforcedevelopment system. In June 1998, $7.5million in JTPA Title III dislocatedworker funds was awarded to 11organizations throughout the country totrain workers in skills related to theinformation technology industry. InJune 1999, over $9.57 million wasawarded to 10 grantees to traindislocated workers in the skillsnecessary to obtain work requiringadvanced skills in occupations inmanufacturing industry settings,including computers and electronicsmanufacturing, machinery and motorvehicles, chemicals and petroleum,specialized instruments and devices,and biomedics. On March 2, 2000, 23awards totaling $15.2 million were

announced for the regional skillsconsortium competition. Finally, thisSolicitation is taking into account theexperience gained from the first andsecond rounds of the H–1B competitionfor which 9 awards totaling $12.4million were announced on February10, 2000 and 12 awards totaling $29.2million were announced on July 19,2000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ETA issoliciting proposals on a competitivebasis for the conduct of demonstrationprojects to provide technical skillstraining for workers, including bothemployed and unemployed workers.This announcement consists of threeparts:

• Part I Application Process.• Part II Statement of Work/

Reporting Requirements.• Part III Review Process/Rating

Criteria

Legislative Mandate

The relevant portions of ACWIAdealing with the establishment of a fundfor implementing a program of H–1Bskill training grants state:

‘‘Section 286(s)—H–1B NonimmigrantPetitioner Account

(1) In General—There is establishedin the general fund of the Treasury aseparate account, which shall be knownas the ‘‘H–1B Nonimmigrant PetitionerAccount.’’ Notwithstanding any othersection of this title, there shall bedeposited as offsetting receipts into theaccount all fees collected under section214(c)(9).

(2) Use of Fees For Job Training—56.3percent of amounts deposited into theH–1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Accountshall remain available to the Secretaryof Labor until expended fordemonstration programs and projectsdescribed in section 104(c) of theAmerican Competitiveness andWorkforce Improvement Act of 1998.’’

‘‘Section 104(c)—DemonstrationPrograms and Projects To ProvideTechnical Skills Training for Workers

(1) In General—In establishingdemonstration programs under section452(c) of the Job Training PartnershipAct (29 U.S.C. 1732(c)), as in effect onthe date of the enactment of this Act, ordemonstration programs of projectsunder section 171(b) of the WorkforceInvestment Act of 1998, the Secretary ofLabor shall use funds available undersection 286(s) to establishdemonstration programs or projects toprovide technical skills training forworkers, including both employed andunemployed workers.

(2) Grants—The Secretary of Laborshall award grants to carry out theprograms and projects described inparagraph (1) to—

(A)(i) private industry councilsestablished under section 102 of the JobTraining Partnership Act (29 U.S.C.1512), as in effect on the date of theenactment of this Act; or

(ii) local boards that will carry outsuch programs or projects through one-stop delivery systems established undersection 121 of the Workforce InvestmentAct of 1998; or

(B) regional consortia of councils orlocal boards described in subparagraph(A). The Immigration and NationalityAct (INA) (section 101(a)(15)( H)(i) (b))defines the ‘‘H–1B alien as one who iscoming temporarily to the United Statesto perform services in a specialtyoccupation or as a fashion model.’’

The INA (Section 214(i)) sets criteriato define the term ‘‘specialtyoccupation:’’

(1) For purposes of section101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) and paragraph 2, a‘‘specialty occupation’’ means anoccupation that requires—

(A) theoretical and practicalapplication of a body of highlyspecialized knowledge and,

(B) attainment of a bachelor’s orhigher degree in the specific specialty(or its equivalent) as a minimum forentry into the occupation in the UnitedStates

(2) For purposes of section101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b)), the requirements ofthis paragraph with respect to aspecialty occupation are—

(A) full state licensure to practice inthe occupation, if such licensure isrequired.

(B) completion of the degreedescribed in paragraph (1)(B) for theoccupation, or

(C)(i) experience in the specialtyequivalent to the completion of suchdegree, and (ii) recognition of expertisein the specialty through progressivelyresponsible positions relating to thespecialty.

Part I—Application Process

A. Eligible Applicants

ACWIA specifies under Section104(c)(2) that the Secretary shall awardgrants to private industry councils(PICs) established under section 102 ofthe Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA)(Note: The Workforce Investment Actwas implemented on July 1, 2000 andsuperseded JTPA; therefore privateindustry councils have been replaced byworkforce investment boards), or localboards that will carry out such programsor projects through one-stop delivery



systems established under section 121of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)of 1998, or regional consortia ofcouncils or local boards. ThisSolicitation contemplates that the localboards will designate a fiscal agent to bethe recipient of grant funds. Successfulapplicants under earlier H–1BSolicitations will be eligible for grantsunder this competition; however thosecurrent awardees will be required toindicate that this proposal provides acompletely new approach to skilltraining (including a different skillshortage area, e.g., health occupationsrather than information technology)from that being conducted under theircurrent grant. Proposals submitted bythose current awardees will be subjectto pre-screening to assure that theypropose an approach that is clearlyinnovative and different from theactivity that was implemented underprevious award.

While the statute is quite specificabout the fact that only local boards(through their designated fiscal agents)and consortia may apply for and receivethese grant awards, it does not preemptthe participation of other concernedentities which are integral to the processof planning for and conducting skilltraining in skill shortage areas. TheDepartment of Labor is requiring thateligible applicants must demonstratethat they have the involvement of awide representation of the businesscommunity in their region. They arealso strongly encouraged to reach outwidely and involve a broad spectrum ofother organizations such as laborunions, community colleges and otherpostsecondary educational institutions,and community based and faith basedorganizations in a partnership orconsortium arrangement.

Applicants are encouraged toassociate with entities which possess asound grasp of the job marketplace inthe region and which are in a positionto address the issue of skill shortageoccupations. Such organizations wouldinclude private, for profit businesses—including small- and medium-sizebusinesses; business, trade, or industryassociations such as local Chambers ofCommerce and small businessfederations; and labor unions. Also,those entities should include businessesand business associations which haveexperienced first hand the problems ofcoping with skill shortages and whichemploy workers engaged in skillshortage occupations. This Solicitationwill not prescriptively define the rolesof individual entities within thepartnership beyond requiring, asACWIA states, that local workforceinvestment boards, or consortia be the

applicant and the recipient of (or fiscalagent for receiving) grant funds. It isanticipated, however, that the proposalwill provide a detailed discussion ofparticipating organizations’ respectiveresponsibilities. The proposal shoulddescribe a consortium of severalemployers that will lead the consortiumand provide matching funds and whointend to employ workers participatingin the technical skills training.

Based on Department of Laborexperiences, regional partnerships thatactively engage a wide range ofparticipation from community groups—particularly with strong privateemployer involvement—appear to besuccessful. In general, applicants will beencouraged to include a broad spectrumof stakeholder groups, including suchemployers, in their partnership effort.Also, local workforce investment boardsor consortia thereof representing morethan one region that share commoneconomic goals may band together asone applicant rather than applyingindividually.

The application must clearly identifywho the applicant is (or who the fiscalagent is). As part of this certification,the applicant must identify who thegrant recipient (and/or fiscal agent) isand describe its capacity to administerthis project; it shall also indicate thatthe project is consistent with and willbe coordinated with the workforceinvestment system(s) that are involvedin technical skills activities in theregion(s) encompassed by the applicant.

Part III of this announcementenumerates and defines in depth aseries of criteria that will be utilized torate applicant submissions. Briefly,these criteria are:

• Statement of Need• Service Delivery Strategy• Target Population• Sustainability• Linkages with Key Partners• Outcomes• Cost Effectiveness

B. Submission of Proposals

Applicants must submit four (4)copies of their proposal, with originalsignatures. The proposal must consist oftwo (2) separate and distinct parts, PartsI and II.

• Part I of the proposal shall containthe Standard Form (SF) 424,‘‘Application for Federal Assistance’’(Appendix B) and the BudgetInformation Form (Appendix C). Theindividual signing the (SF) 424 onbehalf of the applicant shall representthe responsible financial andadministrative entity for a grant shouldthat application result in an award. Theindividual who signs the application

should be the same individual whosigns the certification discussed in theprevious section. According to theLobbying Disclosure Act of 1995,Section 18, an organization described inSection 501 (c) 4 of the Internal RevenueCode of 1986 which engages in lobbyingactivities shall not be eligible for thereceipt of federal funds constituting anaward, grant, or loan.

In preparing the Budget Informationform, the applicant must provide aconcise narrative explanation to supportthe request. The statutory language ofACWIA is specific in stating that grantresources are to be expended forprograms or projects to providetechnical skills training. Therefore,ACWIA grant resources to be utilized forthe costs of administration will belimited to no more than 10 percent ofthe request and should clearly supportthe goals of the project. Administrativecosts include such items as project staff,travel, and fungible supplies. In general,however, this does not contemplate orpermit the purchase of capitalequipment. The budget narrative shoulddiscuss precisely how theadministrative costs support those goals.

• Part II must contain a technicalproposal that demonstrates the Offeror’scapabilities in accordance with theStatement of Work contained in thisannouncement. A grant application islimited to twenty (20) double-spaced,single-side, 8.5 inch × 11 inch pageswith 1-inch margins. The Offeror mayprovide statistical information andrelated material in attachments.Attachments may not exceed fifteen (15)pages. Letters of commitment frompartners or from those providingmatching resources may be submitted asattachments; however, letters of supportare not required. Such letters will notcount against the allowable maximumpage total. The Applicant must brieflyenumerate those entities in the text ofthe proposal. Text type shall be 11 pointor larger. Applications that do not meetthese requirements will not beconsidered. Each application mustinclude a Time Line outlining projectactivities and an Executive Summarynot to exceed two pages. The Time Lineand the Executive Summary do notcount against the 20 page limit. No costdata or reference to price is included inthe technical proposal.

C. Hand Delivered ProposalsIf proposals are hand delivered, they

must be received at the addressidentified above by September 19, 2000,at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. All overnightmail will be considered to be handdelivered and must be received at thedesignated place by 2:00 on the



specified closing date. Telegraphed and/or faxed proposals will not be honored.Failure to adhere to the aboveinstructions will be a basis for adetermination of nonresponsiveness.

D. Late Proposals

A proposal received at the designatedoffice after the exact time specified forreceipt will not be considered unless itis received before award is made and it:

• Was sent by registered or certifiedmail not later than the fifth calendar daybefore the date specified for receipt ofapplications (e.g., a proposal submittedin response to a solicitation requiringreceipt of applications by the 20th of themonth must be mailed by the 15th);

• Was sent by U.S. Postal ServiceExpress Mail Next Day Service, PostOffice to addressee, not later than 5 p.m.at the place of mailing two working daysprior to the date specified for proposals.The term ‘‘working days’’ excludesweekends and U.S. Federal holidays.The only acceptable evidence that anapplication was sent in accordance withthese requirements is a printed,stamped, or otherwise placedimpression (exclusive of a postage metermachine impression) that is readilyidentifiable without further action ashaving been supplied or affixed on thedate of mailing by employees of the U.S.Postal Service.

E. Period of Performance

The initial period of performance willbe up to 24 months from the date ofexecution of the grant documents. It isanticipated that about $45 million willbe disbursed. U.S. Department of Labormay elect to exercise its option toextend these grants for an additionalperiod not to exceed 36 months, basedon the availability of funding andsuccessful program operation.

F. Definitions

For purposes of this solicitation:• Technical skills training includes

occupational skills training—that maycombine academic and work-placelearning and related instruction,customized training with a commitmentof an employer or group of employers toemploy an individual upon successfulcompletion of training, and that may betailored to meet the needs of theindividual participant. Section 134(d)(4)(D) of WIA provides a definition oftraining services that shall be viewed asgenerally applicable to the term‘‘technical skills training’’ in thisSolicitation. This definition of technicalskills training specifically allows theuse of grant funds to provide necessarybooks.

• Region means an area whichexhibits a commonality of economicinterest. Thus, a region may comprise afew labor market areas, one large labormarket, one labor market area joinedtogether with a couple of adjacent ruraldistricts, a few special purpose districts,or a few contiguous local boards.Clearly, if the region involves multipleeconomic or political jurisdictions, it isessential that they be contiguous to oneanother. A region may be eitherintrastate or interstate. Although therating criteria will provide more detail,it is the applicant’s responsibility todemonstrate the regional nature of thearea which that application covers.Also, a region may be coterminous witha single local board.

G. Sustainability

No applicant may receive a grantunless that applicant agrees to provideresources equivalent to at least 25percent of the grant award amount as amatch. That match may be provided incash or in kind, however, Federalresources may not be counted againstthe matching requirement. In view ofthe fact that the singular focus of grantresources is to provide skill training,ETA particularly encourages theprovision of essential capitalequipment, such as computerequipment, as part of the match. Thematch will not be tied to the drawdownof funds, however, the amount andnature of it must be clearly described inthe application.

The 25 percent matching requirementshould be viewed as a minimumdesigned to assist grantees indeveloping sustainability. TheDepartment is particularly interestedthat applicants demonstrate clearevidence through matched and/orleveraged resources (those Federalresources which may not be countedagainst match but which are integral tostrengthening the quality of technicalskills training provided and whichcontribute materially to sustainability)that the project will have the capacity tocontinue its training activities after theexpiration date of the grant.

Part II—Statement of Work/ReportingRequirements

A. Principles

Five basic key principles underlie thiseffort:

• Partnership Sustainability: Thegrant awards will be of relatively shortduration—up to 24 months. Althoughthe primary focus of these awards istechnical skill training, ETA intendsthat regional partnerships sustainthemselves over the long term—well

after the federal resources from thisinitiative have been exhausted. The 25percent non-Federal matchingrequirement is an integral part ofensuring sustainability; matchingresources will help sustain the skillshortages training effort beyond the termof the grant. This concept relates toLinks with Key Partners andSustainability (What resources doeseach partner bring to the table and howdoes this contribution assist in buildingthe foundation for a permanentpartnership?)

• Business Involvement: Business isan essential partner. It articulates skillrequirements, hires skilled workers, andprovides support for lifelong learning.Under WIA, business plays a criticalrole in planning and overseeing trainingand employment activities. WIArequires that the majority of themembership of State and local boards bebusiness representatives, and that theState and local board chairs be drawnfrom business. For the purpose of thesegrants, it is imperative that businessesrepresented include businesses withcurrent skill shortages who intend tohire graduates of the technical skillstraining. This concept relates to threeRating Criteria: Statement of Need(Assists in determining what skillshortage occupations are in demand inthe region), Linkages with Key Partnersand Sustainability (What private sectorinvolvement is there in the partnership;what resources does each of the partnersbring to the table; how do contributionsassist in building the foundation for apermanent partnership?), and Outcomes(Businesses involved in the partnershipswill provide a key resource in hiring/upgrading workers who have beentrained).

• Current Skills Gap: Current skillshortages are the immediate focus ofthis initiative. Training investmentsshould be targeted in occupational areasthat have been identified on the basis ofH–1B occupations as skill shortageareas. This concept relates to Statementof Need (The most important issue to beaddressed under this section isidentifying the particular skill shortagesthat manifest themselves in the region.)and Service Delivery Strategy (How willskill training meet the skill needs of theregion.)

• Innovative and Effective Tools: Thegrantees will use innovative or proventools and approaches to close particularskills gaps and provide strategies fortraining that promote regionaldevelopment. This concept relates toService Delivery Strategy (There can beinnovation in the way training servicesare provided.) and Cost Effectiveness(Innovative tools and approaches may



more effectively deliver trainingservices to individual participantsthereby resulting in better employmentoutcomes and higher levels of skillachieved by those participants for thesame cost.)

• Target Population: The primaryemphasis of the ACWIA technical skillstraining will be to focus on employedand unemployed workers who can betrained and placed directly in the highlyskilled H–1B occupations. As part ofidentifying people with the appropriatebackgrounds that would benefit fromsuch training, there should be a specialoutreach effort to target women,minorities, persons with disabilities,and other underrepresented groups.This relates to the rating criterion,Target Population (Discussion of whothe targeted workers are.)

B. Skills ShortagesSection 104(c) of ACWIA mandates

that the grants awarded under thisauthority be used for technical skilltraining to employed and unemployedworkers. The basis of the funding for thegrants, however, is a user fee paid by anemployer seeking nonimmigrant alienworkers (H–1B) that possessqualifications in occupations with skillshortages at high skill levels inAmerican industry. Thus, trainingconducted under these auspices shouldbe in occupations that have beendemonstrated to be in short supply.What is a skills shortage? In the simplestterms possible, such shortages occur ina market economy when the demand forskilled workers for a particularoccupation is greater than the supply ofworkers who are qualified, available,and willing to do that job. Although,some of the explanations for why thisdemand or supply disequilibrium existsare fairly complex, the basic concept isstraightforward. In many instances,labor markets adjust quickly and theskill shortage is resolved.

Problematic skills shortages occurwhen there is imbalance betweenworker supply and demand for anunusual period of time. The H–1B visaprogram is a response to thoseshortages, and this skill training grantprogram helps alleviate such shortages.It should be noted that the concept ofskill shortages also may include animbalance between the demand andsupply of workers at some definableskill level.

C. Skills StandardsAs noted earlier, the definition of the

minimum proficiency level required tobe considered an H–1B occupation,contained in section 214 (i) of INA,speaks to a very high skill level for these

‘‘specialty occupations’’ (8 U.S.C. 1184(i)). To reiterate, these are occupationsthat require ‘‘theoretical and practicalapplication of a body of highlyspecialized knowledge,’’ and full statelicensure to practice in the occupation(if it is required). These occupationsalso must require either completion of atleast a bachelor’s degree or experiencein the specialty equivalent to thecompletion of such degree andrecognition of expertise in the specialtythrough progressively responsiblepositions relating to the specialty.

Skill standards represent a benchmarkby which an individual’s achievedcompetence can be measured. Muchwork has been done in this area—someby private industry and tradeassociations, some by registeredapprenticeship training systems, someby public and private partnerships,including local School-to-Workpartnerships, and the Job Corps.Succinctly stated, well-defined skillstandards can be a useful tool inmatching training goals to targetedoccupational areas. Applicants areencouraged to survey the progress todate in developing occupational skillstandards in their communities. Docompanies that will be seeking skilledworkers for H–1B occupations have aclearly defined set of expectations forthe requisite capabilities of thoseworkers?

D. Regional PlanningApplicants must describe the local

area or region that will be served withparticular emphasis on its skillshortages. That discussion shouldinclude an articulation of thedimensions, nature and specifics ofthose skill shortages. The proposal mustalso identify the political jurisdictionsto be included as well as provide anenumeration of the specific local areasunder WIA. Although comprehensiveoccupational vacancy data do not exist,current H–1B applicant data should beutilized to the extent feasible to describeoccupational shortages. Attachment A tothis Solicitation is a listing byoccupation of the most current H–1Bapplicant data. Applicants may take intoconsideration that occupations listed inhigh demand among those for which H–1B visas were sought nationally alsomight be in short supply in their region.However, applicants should availthemselves of all available local dataincluding data provided by areabusinesses and business associations inmaking determinations as to shortages.They are encouraged to research widelyand be inclusive in utilization of labormarket information. In addition to thesources already described, applicants

are encouraged to analyze data madeavailable by the Bureau of LaborStatistics and through the local One-Stop delivery system.

E. Service Delivery and SupportiveServices

Applicants should carefully describeskill training that will be providedunder the grant in context of the goalsthat are to be achieved by participants.These goals should be expressed interms of targeted occupations. TheStatement of Work should provide adetailed discussion of the kinds oftraining to be provided and themechanisms to be used to provide it.Applicants also should build linkages tothe One-Stop system established underWIA to reach out, inform, and recruitindividuals to participate in the H–1Bfinanced training. It is expected that theapplicant’s work statement will includea discussion of the types of skills beingtrained for, the necessary skill levelsthat are targeted, how they will bemeasured, and how skill shortages inthe local area or region will be metthrough this training

The central role of the local boards inthe planning and policy activitysurrounding these grants is critical. WIArequires the local board to prepare astrategic workforce investment plan forthe area that it embraces. The localboard also designates One-Stop servicecenter operators and selects eligibletraining providers. In short, local boardsare already engaged in much of thenecessary work that could provide asolid foundation for the trainingactivities to be undertaken in ACWIA.

ACWIA requires that grant resourcesbe used for technical skills training.However, ETA anticipates thatapplicants may need to make availablea range of supportive services toenhance the quality and effectiveness ofthe skill training provided under thegrant. Grant funds may not be used toprovide supportive services.Appropriately focused services,however—such as transportation orchild care and others defined by section101(46) of WIA—could be viewed as animportant factor enhancing thetechnical skills training package. To theextent that these services are providedutilizing non-Federal resources,applicants may present them as part ofthe proposed matching requirement.Federal resources such as coenrollmentin WIA while participating in ACWIAtraining for supportive services clearlycannot be counted toward the matchingrequirement; however, such coordinatedcoenrollment and services are clearlydesirable features of these projects.Successful applicants are encouraged to



leverage such Federal resources as partof making the technical skills trainingmore effective.

F. Reporting Requirements

The Grantee is required to provide thereports and documents listed below:

• Quarterly Financial Reports. Thegrantee must submit to the GrantOfficer’s Technical Representative(GOTR) within the 30 days followingeach quarter, two copies of a quarterlyFinancial Status Report (SF269) untilsuch time as all funds have beenexpended or the period of availabilityhas expired.

• Progress Reports. The grantee mustsubmit brief narrative quarterly reportsto the GOTR within the 30 daysfollowing each quarter. Two copies areto be submitted; the report provides adetailed account of activitiesundertaken during that quarterincluding:

a. A discussion of occupational areasfor which skill training is beingprovided,

b. Job placements in skill shortageoccupations, and

c. An indication of any currentproblems which may affect performanceand proposed corrective action.

• Final Report. A draft final reportwhich summarizes project activities andemployment outcomes and relatedresults of the demonstration shall besubmitted no later than the expirationdate of the grant. The final report shallbe submitted in 3 copies no later than60 days after the grant expiration date.

G. Evaluation

ETA will arrange for or conduct anindependent evaluation of theoutcomes, impacts, and benefits of thedemonstration projects. Grantees mustagree to make available records onparticipants and employers and toprovide access to personnel, as specifiedby the evaluator(s) under the directionof ETA.

Part III—Review Process and RatingCriteria

A careful evaluation of applicationswill be made by a technical reviewpanel who will evaluate theapplications against the criteria listedbelow. The panel results are advisory innature and not binding on the GrantOfficer. The Government may elect toaward the grant with or withoutdiscussions with the offeror. Insituations without discussions, anaward will be based on the offeror’ssignature on the (SF) 424, whichconstitutes a binding offer. Awards willbe those in the best interest of theGovernment.

A. Statement of Need (15 points)

The underlying statute authorizingthis competitive grant program—ACWIA—is a response to skill shortagesaround the country in specificoccupations. ETA has provided the mostrecent H–1B application data as anattachment to this solicitation. The mostimportant issue to be addressed underthis section is identifying, to the extentpossible, the particular skill shortagesthat manifest themselves in the regionthat is encompassed by the application.Applicants are encouraged to utilize allavailable data resources—H–1Bapplications, newspaper want ads,expressed employer consortium hiringdesires, and One Stop system’s labormarket information—in responding tothis criterion. To provide a focusedbackdrop for the discussion of skillshortages, applicants should describeclearly the region for which services areto be provided. What are thecharacteristics that make this area acohesive region? What are the particularcharacteristics of the local political,economic and administrativejurisdictions—local workforceinvestment boards, labor market areas,special district authorities—that causedthem to associate for the purpose of thisapplication? There are several usefulitems of information that could beprovided to enhance the description ofthe region. A general discussion of theregion should include socioeconomicdata—with a particular focus on thegeneral education and skill levelprevalent in the area. Also, it is usefulto include such items as transportationpatterns, demographic information(such as age and general income ofresidents). Judicious use of statisticalinformation is encouraged. Otherpertinent questions that will providegreater depth of description include:What is the general businessenvironment? What industries andoccupations are growing, and whichones are cutting back? What are thecharacteristics of the major employers inthe region? What is the particularsituation of the consortium membercompanies?

B. Service Delivery Strategy (30 points)

Applicants must lay out acomprehensive strategy for providingthe technical skills training that ismandated as the core activity of thesegrant awards. Concomitantly, thereneeds to be a discussion of how thisskill training will meet the skill needsof the region. Several specific issuesmust be focused on as part of thissection. Those issues include:

What is the range of potential trainingproviders, what kinds of skill trainingwill be offered, how will that meet theregional skill needs, and how willtraining be provided? How will thetypes of training planned for projectparticipants be determined? Also,although there is a separate section onoutcomes, it is strongly recommendedthat some brief mention in context ofthe service delivery strategy, be made ofthem here. Such outcomes wouldinclude job placements in skill shortageoccupations, increased salary, andmeasurable skill gains or certificatesobtained that demonstrate how thetraining will alleviate skill shortages.

Supportive services, per se, are not anallowable activity with grant funds.However, making such servicesavailable on an as needed basis(utilizing other available resources) isencouraged. Innovation in the context ofservice delivery can represent a widevariety of items. There can beinnovation in the way training servicesare provided—e.g., distance learning toprovide instruction, interactive videoself-instructional materials, and flexibleclass scheduling (sections of the sameclass scheduled at different times of theday to accommodate workers whoseschedules fluctuate). Creativity indeveloping the service strategy is alsoencouraged.

C. Target Population (10 points)The eligibility criterion for skill

training enumerated in ACWIA isextremely broad—employed andunemployed workers. This sectionshould include an extensive focuseddiscussion of who the targeted workersare, including their characteristics, andwhy they are being targeted. Adiscussion of what assessmentprocedures are to be used is integral. Inthe case of employed workers, thereshould be some articulation of what isto be accomplished. The applicantshould address some specific issuesrelating to the target employed workerpopulation such as:

—How many employed workers willbe targeted for services and why?

—What are the technical skillstraining needs of those workers to fulfillskill shortage occupations? In the caseof unemployed workers, there needs tobe an extensive discussion of criteria tobe used to assess and enroll individuals.It is true that the target occupations andspecific jobs to be trained for within theH–1B rubric are statutorily geared to avery high skill standard. It is extremelyimportant that the selection process forworkers be carefully described to makeit clear how those individuals willpossess the capacity after the



completion of training to take jobs thatpreviously were filled by resorting tothe H–1B visa process. In particular, theapplicant should describe withprecision the methods that will be usedto reach out and include minorities,women, and individuals withdisabilities who can meet thesestandards.

D. Sustainability (5 points)There is a 25 percent matching

requirement. To what extent does any ofthese partners provide matching fundsor services and how does thiscontribution assist in building thefoundation for a permanent partnership,i.e., sustainability? As noted earlier,Federal resources cannot be countedagainst the matching requirement;however, it is important that suchresources be provided as part of theproject because they certainly supportand strengthen the quality of thetechnical skills training provided in theproject and contribute materially towardsustainability. ACWIA resources arelimited to training individuals to fillhigh skill H–1B jobs, however,applicants will be given preference forenumerating other resources -Federaland non Federal—because they cancontribute materially towardsustainability. For example, local boardscould commit through One-Stop centerssuch valuable participant services asparticipant assessment and casemanagement. Applicants are encouragedto enumerate these resources under thissection to support their discussion ofsustainability. This section should alsoenumerate any specific existingcontractual commitments. Briefly stated,the sustainability issue can be addressedby providing concrete evidence thatactivities supported by thedemonstration grant will be continuedafter the expiration date of the grantusing other public or private resources.

E. Linkages With Key Partners (15points)

The applicant should enumerate whothe partners are in this endeavor andhow they will link together—i.e., whatrole each will play. In particular, thissection should articulate ties to theprivate sector, including ties with small-and medium-sized businesses and smallbusiness federations. The ServiceDelivery Strategy section of theStatement of Work described the roleeach of the actors would play inproviding services. This section looks at

the linkages from a somewhat differentmore structural perspective withparticular emphasis on the employers inthe consortium that are experiencingskill shortages. What resources doeseach partner bring to the table? Theapplication will specify a managemententity (together with a staffing patternand resumes of major staff members)and will articulate with some precisionthe roles of various actors. Eachapplication MUST designate anindividual who will serve as projectdirector and who will devote asubstantial portion of his/her time to it.(For purposes of this requirement, asubstantial portion of time is defined asat least 40 percent.) A short portion ofthis discussion should dwell upon theorganizational capacity and track recordof the primary actors in the partnership.

F. Outcomes (15 points)

Applicants must describe thepredicted outcomes resulting from thistraining. It is posited that the projectedresults will be somewhat varied giventhe broad range of people that willprobably be served. For example,employed workers may be trained toachieve a higher skill level than mostunemployed workers. Their successcould manifest itself through jobplacements in H–1B skill shortageoccupations, increased wages, or skillattainment in H–1B occupations. Thereare, however, unemployed workers whomay well already possess a very highskill level. They could receive refreshertechnical skills training to update theirskills. The outcomes for this group mayalso be projected in terms of gainingemployment and skills attainment;those outcomes would simply be at asomewhat higher level than for thoseunemployed workers who do notpossess similar skills at the outset.Ideally, the applicant’s outcomessection will describe some version of arelatively cohesive mosaic that weavestogether the outcomes for bothemployed and unemployed workers inthe context described in the precedingthree paragraphs. Additionally, theoutcomes section should focus veryspecifically on the changes that occurbecause of the training. Thus, anapplicant might state that a certain skilllevel is projected for a given group; butthe applicant should couch thatoutcome in context of what the initialpre-training skill level had been for thegroup.

G. Cost Effectiveness (10 points)

Applicants will provide a detailedcost proposal including a discussion ofthe expected cost effectiveness of theirproposal in terms of the expected costper participant compared to theexpected benefits for these participants.Applicants should address theemployment outcomes and the levels ofskills to be achieved (such as attainingState licensing in an occupation)relative to the amount of training thatthe individual had to receive to achievethose outcomes. Benefits can bedescribed both qualitatively in terms ofskills attained and quantitatively interms of wage gains. Cost effectivenessmay be demonstrated in part by cost perparticipant and cost per activity inrelation to services provided andoutcomes to be attained. This sectionMUST contain a detailed discussion ofthe size, nature, and quality of the non-Federal match. Proposals not presentinga detailed discussion of the non-Federalmatch or not meeting the 25 percentmatch requirement will be considerednonresponsive. Applicants are advisedthat discussions and/or site visits maybe necessary in order to clarify anyinconsistencies in their applications.The reviewers’ evaluations are onlyadvisory to the Grant Officer. The finaldecisions for grant award will be madeby the Grant Officer after consideringthe panelists’ scoring decisions. TheGrant Officer’s decisions will be basedon what he or she determines is mostadvantageous to the FederalGovernment in terms of technicalquality and other factors.

Signed in Washington, D.C. , this 26th dayof July 2000.Laura A. Cesario,Grant Officer.

Appendix A: Selected H–1B Professional,Technical and Managerial Occupations, andFashion Models: Number of Job OpeningsCertified by the U.S. Department of Labor,Fiscal Year 1999 (Oct. 1, 1998–May 31,1999).

Appendix B: (SF) 424–Application Form.Appendix C: Budget Information Form.

Appendix A—Selected H–1BProfessional, Technical and ManagerialOccupations, and Fashion Models:Number of Job Openings Certified bythe U.S. Department of Labor, FiscalYear 1999 (Oct. 1, 1998—May 31, 1999)

Occupational code Occupational title Number of openingscertified

030 ...................................... Occupations In Systems Analysis And Programming ........................................................ 360,745



Occupational code Occupational title Number of openingscertified

076 ...................................... Therapists ........................................................................................................................... 181,665160 ...................................... Accountants, Auditors, And Related Occupations ............................................................. 35,665039 ...................................... Other Computer-Related Occupations ............................................................................... 28,529003 ...................................... Electrical/Electronic Engineering Occupations ................................................................... 16,859070 ...................................... Physicians And Surgeons .................................................................................................. 11,264019 ...................................... Other Occupations In Architecture, Engineering And ........................................................ 11,175090 ...................................... Occupations In College And University Education ............................................................ 9,028199 ...................................... Miscellaneous Professional, Technical, And Manager ...................................................... 8,964189 ...................................... Miscellaneous Managers And Officials .............................................................................. 8,824007 ...................................... Mechanical Engineering Occupations ................................................................................ 7,115050 ...................................... Occupations In Economics ................................................................................................. 5,608163 ...................................... Sales And Distribution Management Occupations ............................................................. 5,368033 ...................................... Occupations In Computer Systems Technical Support ..................................................... 4,573161 ...................................... Budget And Management Systems Analysis Occupations ................................................ 4,263169 ...................................... Other Occupations In Administrative Occupations ............................................................ 4,135031 ...................................... Occupations In Data Communications And Networks ....................................................... 4,121041 ...................................... Occupations In Biological Sciences ................................................................................... 3,981079 ...................................... Other Occupations In Medicine And Health ....................................................................... 3,764012 ...................................... Industrial Engineering Occupations .................................................................................... 2,725186 ...................................... Finance, Insurance And Real Estate Managers And Off ................................................... 2,624020 ...................................... Occupations In Mathematics .............................................................................................. 2,599001 ...................................... Architectural Occupations ................................................................................................... 2,490141 ...................................... Commercial Artists: Designers & Illustrators, Graphics ..................................................... 2,371297 ...................................... Fashion Models .................................................................................................................. 2,367092 ...................................... Occupations In Preschool, Primary, Kindergarten Ed ....................................................... 2,359187 ...................................... Service Industry Managers And Officials ........................................................................... 2,347022 ...................................... Occupations In Chemistry .................................................................................................. 2,345005 ...................................... Engineering Occupations ................................................................................................... 2,186032 ...................................... Occupations In Computer System User Support ............................................................... 1,595091 ...................................... Occupations In Secondary School Education .................................................................... 1,579110 ...................................... Lawyers .............................................................................................................................. 1,353029 ...................................... Other Occupations In Mathematics And Physical Sciences .............................................. 1,306131 ...................................... Interpreters and Translators ............................................................................................... 1,270166 ...................................... Personnel Administration Occupations .............................................................................. 1,229165 ...................................... Public Relations Management Occupations ...................................................................... 1,216185 ...................................... Wholesale And Retail Trade Managers And Officials ........................................................ 1,183008 ...................................... Inspectors And Investigators, Managerial & Public ........................................................... 974142 ...................................... Environmental, Product And Related Designers ................................................................ 955119 ...................................... Other Occupations In Law And Jurisprudence .................................................................. 882099 ...................................... Other Occupations In Education ........................................................................................ 841023 ...................................... Occupations In Physics ...................................................................................................... 836010 ...................................... Mining And Petroleum Engineering Occupations .............................................................. 777164 ...................................... Advertising Management Occupations ............................................................................... 773132 ...................................... Editors: Publication, Broadcast, And Script ....................................................................... 748078 ...................................... Occupations In Medical And Dental Technology ............................................................... 699183 ...................................... Manufacturing Industry Managers And Officials ................................................................ 681184 ...................................... Transportation, Communication, And Utilities Management .............................................. 659049 ...................................... Other Occupations In Life Sciences ................................................................................... 612162 ...................................... Purchasing Management Occupations .............................................................................. 604040 ...................................... Occupations In Agricultural Sciences ................................................................................. 574074 ...................................... Pharmacists ........................................................................................................................ 508159 ...................................... Other Occupations In Entertainment And Recreation ........................................................ 506

Technical Note: The Immigration andNationality Act (Act) assigns responsibility tothe Department of Labor with respect to thetemporary entry of foreign professionals towork in specialty occupations in the U.S.under H–1B nonimmigrant status. Before theImmigration and Naturalization Service willapprove a petition for an H–1B nonimmigrantworker, the employer must have filed andhad certified by the Department a LaborCondition Application. The employer mustindicate on the application the number of H–1B nonimmigrant workers sought, the rate of

pay offered to the nonimmigrants, and thelocation where the nonimmigrants will work,among other things.

The Act limits the number of foreignworkers who may be assigned H–1B status ineach fiscal year, however, there is no limit onthe number of job openings that may becertified by the Department. Historically, theactual number of job openings certified bythe Department each year far exceeds thenumber of available visas. This excess in thenumber of certified openings is due to anumber of factors: extension of status filings

that are not subject to the annual cap;openings certified for anticipatedemployment that does not transpire; ormovement from one employer to another(again, not subject to cap).

The occupational codes in the left-handcolumn represent the three-digitoccupational groups codes for professional,technical and managerial occupations fromthe Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT).




[FR Doc. 00–19296 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–C

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Solicitation for Grant Applications(SGA) Workforce Investment Act of1998; Minority Colleges andUniversities Workforce Partnershipsand Training Strategies To AddressSkill Shortages DemonstrationProgram

AGENCY: Employment and TrainingAdministration, Labor.

ACTION: Notice of availability of fundsand Solicitation for Grant Applications(SGA).

This notice contains all of thenecessary information and forms neededto apply for grant funding.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Labor(DOL), Employment and TrainingAdministration (ETA) announces acompetitive demonstration solicitationfor grant applications (SGA) to respondto employers’ identified skill shortagesthrough the establishment or



strengthening of regional consortia.Grants will be made to successfulapplicants representing minoritycolleges and universities which provideevidence of being positioned to planand implement a successful strategy torespond to shortages of workers seekingemployment with skills needed byspecific employers in a regional labormarket (including typical localcommuting area). Successful applicantsmust also initiate a skill training designfor preparing eligible dislocatedworkers, incumbent workers and newentrants into the workforce that willalleviate skill shortages within theregion which the applicant representsand provide the necessary skill sets tothose seeking new employment orreemployment. DOL will convene aninformational session in early August toshare information with eligibleapplicants and other interested parties.Refer to Pre-Application InformationSession.

The funding for this program will bethe demonstration authority of theSecretary as appropriated for Title I,Section 171(b) (1) and (2) of theWorkforce Investment Act of 1998 andadministered in accordance with 29CFR parts 95 and 97, as applicable.Applicants are encouraged to becomefamiliar with the provisions of theWorkforce Investment Act of 1998(WIA). With the implementation of WIAwhich became effective July 1, 2000,and for the next few years, it isanticipated that even greater emphasiswill be placed on regional and unifiedplanning and other initiatives toaccommodate or address regionalworkforce development concerns. It isexpected that the consortia establishedor strengthened as a result of the awardof these demonstration grant funds willactively collaborate with the emergingstructures of WIA implementation.

The Department encourages interestedapplicants to consult with other on-going programs such as grantees fundedby the June 1998 $7.7 million dislocatedworker technology demonstration, June1999 $10 million manufacturingtechnology demonstration program andthe June 2000 $11.2 million skillshortages, partnership training/systembuilding demonstration program.Information regarding thesedemonstrations may be found at http://www.doleta.gov.

Two types of demonstration grants toaddress skill shortages will be availableunder this solicitation—(1) Three tonine partnership building grants of upto $750,000 and (2) up to three traininggrants in the approximate range of $1.5to $2 million. Each type of grant(partnership building and skill shortage

training) will require coordination andcollaboration with the local workforceinvestment system.

In addition, experiences gainedthrough current regional initiatives mayprovide insight into developing aregional consortia approach toaddressing workforce developmentneeds and strategies for partnershipbuilding grants as well as traininggrants. The partnership building grantsfunded as a result of this SGA to addressskill shortages will also supportassessment of community employmentneeds (community audits), designing oradapting training curricula based uponspecific employer needs, and limitedoperational testing of a training design.Partnerships and systems for respondingto skill shortages developed as a part ofthis demonstration will be expected tocontinue, and indeed improve andexpand, after the conclusion of thisinitiative. One objective of thisdemonstration initiative is to assistminority colleges and universities indeveloping and sustaining an activepartnership with local workforceinvestment boards and chief electedofficials in the addressing strategies andtraining programs that respondeffectively to area employers’ needs forskilled workers. Of particular interest tothe Department are broad-basedstrategies that address such issues asshortages in technology, health care,and H–1B visa-identified occupations.

Consortia developed in response tothis solicitation could also beappropriate applicants to apply for skilltraining grants established under theAmerican Competitiveness andWorkforce Improvement Act of 1998(ACWIA). Potential grants under theACWIA authority would provideadditional funding to address the skillshortages identified under this grant,and could utilize the information gainedfrom pilot testing the trainingcurriculum to ensure an effective skilltraining delivery approach. Eligibleapplicants for the ACWIA grants arelimited by statute to local WorkforceInvestment Boards (WIBs) under Section117 of the Workforce Investment Act of1998 (WIA), and consortia of WIBs. Forthis reason, WIB participation inactivities conducted under thePartnership Building grants will be arequirement to show satisfactoryprogress toward achieving the objectivesof this demonstration program forreceipt of Phase II Implementationfunding.

Training grants funded under thisSGA will test the ability of minoritycolleges and universities to partner withthe local workforce investment systemwith employers, training providers and

others to train participants in the skillsnecessary to obtain work in occupationsand industries experiencing shortages ofsuch workers. In order to assure that thetraining provided under the grant isconsistent with workforce developmentplans for the local area and to preparethe local area to possibly sustain thetraining activity by applying for a skilltraining grant under the AmericanCompetitiveness and WorkforceImprovement Act of 1998 (ACWIA), thelocal Workforce Investment Board(s)must be an active partner in planningfor the training including thedetermination that the proposedtraining is consistent with employer-identified skill needs in the community.The application must contain astatement from the local WorkforceInvestment Board(s) explaining its roleas the policy decision-making entitiesfor the targeted geographic area(s) aswell as the role its One Stop operator(s)will play in the planned service deliveryactivities.DATES: The closing date for receipt ofthe application is Friday, September 22,2000. Applications must be received by4 p.m. eastern standard time. Noexceptions to the mailing and hand-delivery conditions set forth in thisnotice will be granted. Applications thatdo not meet the conditions set forth inthis notice will not be considered.Telefacsimile (FAX) applications willnot be honored.ADDRESSES: Applications must bemailed or hand-delivered to: U.S.Department of Labor, Employment andTraining Administration, Division ofFederal Assistance, Attention: Mamie D.Williams, Reference: SGA/DFA 00–109;200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., RoomS–4203; Washington, DC 20210.

Hand Delivered Proposals. Ifproposals are hand delivered, they mustbe received at the designated address by4:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time onFriday, September 22, 2000. Allovernight mail will be considered to behand delivered and must be received atthe designated place by the specifiedclosing date and time. Telegraphed, e-mailed and/or faxed proposals will notbe honored. Failure to adhere to theabove instructions will be a basis for adetermination of nonresponsiveness.

Late Proposals. A proposal received atthe designated office after the exact timespecified for receipt will not beconsidered unless it is received beforethe award is made and it:

• Was sent by U.S. Postal Serviceregistered or certified mail not later thanthe fifth (5th) calendar day before theclosing date specified for receipt ofapplications (e.g., an offer submitted in



response to a solicitation requiringreceipt of applications by the 20th of themonth must be mailed by the 15th);

• Was sent by U.S. Postal ServiceExpress Mail Next Day Service, PostOffice to Addressee, not later than 5p.m. at the place of mailing two workingdays prior to the deadline date specifiedfor receipt of proposals in this SGA. Theterm ‘‘working days’’ excludesweekends and U.S. Federal holidays.

The only acceptable evidence toestablish the date of mailing of anapplication received after the deadlinedate for the receipt of proposals sent bythe U.S. Postal Service registered orcertified mail is the U.S. postmark onthe envelope or wrapper affixed by theU.S. Postal Service and on the originalreceipt from the U.S. Postal Service. Theterm ‘‘post marked’’ means a printed,stamped, or otherwise placedimpression (exclusive of a postage metermachine impression) that is readilyidentifiable without further action ashaving been supplied or affixed on thedate of mailing by employees of the U.S.Postal Service.

Withdrawal of Applications.Applications may be withdrawn bywritten notice or telegram (includingmailgram) received at any time beforean award is made. Applications may bewithdrawn in person by the applicant orby an authorized representative thereof,if the representative’s identity is madeknown and the representative signs areceipt for the proposal.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Questions/clarifications should be faxedto Mamie D. Williams, GrantsManagement Specialist, Division ofFederal Assistance at (202) 219–8739(this is not a toll free number). Allinquiries should include the SGA/DFA00–109 and contact name, fax andphone number. This solicitation willalso be published on the Internet, on theEmployment and TrainingAdministration (ETA) Home Page athttp://www.doleta.gov. Awardnotifications will also be published onthe ETA Home Page.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ETA issoliciting proposals on a competitivebasis for the conduct of partnershipsystem-building activities to assistminority colleges and universities inpartnership with local WorkforceInvestment Boards and interestedemployers in developing the capacity toplan and implement regional skillshortage training strategies. It isenvisioned that the consortia developedunder this grant will focus on serving aregional labor market area. The area tobe served may be multi-jurisdictional,and could be multi-State depending on

the geographic area encompassing theregional labor market area.

This announcement consists of five(5) parts:

• Part I—Background Summary:describes the authorities, the purposeand the goals of the solicitation for thisdemonstration program;

• Part II—Eligible Applicants andApplication Process: describes theorganizations authorized to apply forfunds under this program, theapplication process and requirementsfor submitting an application(deadlines);

• Part III—Statement of Work:contains the Statement of Work for thetwo types of projects that will be fundedunder this demonstration initiative;

• Part IV—Monitoring, IndependentEvaluation and Reporting Requirements:provides for the monitoring of the grantsby DOL staff to determine the project’sperformance, an independent evaluationof the grants awarded for thisdemonstration and describes thereviews that will be conducted by DOLof each of the projects; and notes therequirements for reports to DOL and theindependent evaluator; and

Part VI—Rating Criteria for Awardand Selection Process: describes theselection process, including the criteriafor each type of demonstrationapplication which will be used inreviewing and evaluating allapplications received by DOL as a resultof this solicitation.

See Appendix ‘‘C’’ for definitions

Part I. Background

A. Authority

Title I, Section 171(d) of theWorkforce Investment Act authorizesthe use for demonstration programs offunds reserved under section132(a)(2)(A) and establishes theadministration of these funds by theSecretary for that purpose under section173(b). In addition, the DOL FY 2000Appropriations Act enacted November17, 1999 authorizes dislocated workerdemonstration projects that provideassistance to new entrants in theworkforce and incumbent workers.

B. Purpose

The growth in the U.S. economy andthe increasing global competition thathas occurred throughout the 1990’s hasbeen accompanied by significantrestructuring actions regarding theorganization and performance of workin many industries. These actions haveredefined the job performancerequirements in these industries andhave resulted in the dual effects ofsubstantial numbers of worker layoffs

and of reported shortages of workersskilled in other areas.

As a result, employers and employeesalike are facing increasing challenges intheir efforts to remain competitive.Increased competition, along with otherfactors such as reductions in the defenseindustry, relocation of facilities outsidethe United States, and technologicaladvances in manufacturing processes,have resulted in significant reductionsin the size of many employers’workforces. The increased adoption oftechnology has resulted in therealization that the skills of manyworkers are redundant and must beupgraded in order for them to be able tocompete in the current economy and forthem to be successful candidates foravailable jobs in the future.

Despite the generally strong economy,pockets of Americans are at risk of beingleft behind the rest of the country. In aneffort to encourage minority collegesand universities to partner with regionalworkforce investment leaders to addressthe challenge of keeping all citizensemployed and competitive and ensuringthe health of the businesses on whichcommunities depend for their economicstability, this initiative will allow for themaximum flexibility in approaches toestablishing and/or enhancingpartnerships that will address skillshortages now and in the future.

Part II. Eligible Applicants and theApplication Process

A. Eligible Applicants

Any minority college or universityreferred to in the following ExecutiveOrders designed to strengthen thecapacity of such institutions to providequality education and increase theopportunities for them to participate inand benefit from Federal programswhich are capable of fulfilling the termsand conditions of this solicitation mayapply:

• Executive Order Number 12876Historically Black Colleges andUniversities issued November 1, 1993

• Executive Order Number 12900Educational Excellence for HispanicAmericans issued February 22, 1994

• Executive Order Number 13021Tribal Colleges and Universities issuedOctober 19, 1996

Although present DOL demonstrationgrantees who have received awardsaddressing skill shortage training issuesare not directly eligible for this grant.They may participate as a member of alocal area consortium addressing whichaddresses a skill shortages for which thelocal area is not already receivingdemonstration grant funds.



B. Demonstrated Capacity

Partnership Building Grant awardswill be made to applicants thatdemonstrate to the satisfaction of theDepartment the capacity in conjunctionwith the local workforce investmentsystem(s) (under the policy direction ofthe local board(s) and chief electedofficials) and other partners to—

1. develop a collaborative, integratedregional approach for the involvement,design and implementation of acomprehensive skill shortage actionplan. The basic design of the plan shallbe sufficiently robust to respond tocurrent and projected skill shortages inthe region;

2. collect information on current (realtime) local employer based skill needsand the availability of workers whopossess such skills in the labor marketand available training resources to meetthe established or developed standardsof the local employer or industry;

3. design a training strategy, that mayinclude curricula, to respond to at leastone specific skills shortage thatcurrently exists in the region;

4. test the plan on a small scale, byimplementing the training strategydeveloped and placing those trained inrelated employment that meets orexceeds the outcome goals of the grant;and

5. incorporate lessons learned into thelocal workforce investment system(s).

Note: As discussed later in this SGA, theseareas of expertise are not viewed or presentedby the Department as discrete or sequentialactivities, but rather to delineate the expectedcapacity of any successful candidate’sapplication for funding under thisSolicitation.

Training Grants will be made toapplicants that demonstrate to thesatisfaction of the Department thecapacity to engage with workforceinvestment partners especiallyemployers, workforce investment boardsand local One-Stop operators to provideresources for skill training inoccupations that are in employerdemand. Measures of this demand couldinclude data from employer surveys,review of local employmentadvertisements, job order listings at thelocal One-Stop, and employer H–1Bapplications.

C. Financial Management Capability

The applicant must demonstrate tothe satisfaction of the Department that ithas the financial management capacityto receive federal funds in accordancewith Sections 184 and 185 of theWorkforce Investment Act. Aconsortium organized by the applicantfor the purpose of responding to thisSGA must designate one entity of the

group as the fiscal agent to manage thefunds in the event an award is granted.

D. Cooperation With DOL, TechnicalAssistance Contractor and theIndependent Demonstration EvaluationContractor

An applicant must also commit tosharing on-going information with DOLand its independent evaluators. Anapplicant may propose to use grantfunds to purchase technical assistancesupport for the project from sourcesknown to the applicant. The Departmentwill make technical assistance availableto the grantee during the course of thegrant activities. The technical assistancecontractor will visit the grantee and, incoordination with the grantee and otherconsortium members, assist inidentifying the topic or operationalareas in which technical assistancewould be helpful. The grantee and itspartners may then determine whichareas would be most beneficial and setpriorities for the use of such assistance.A maximum number of hours oftechnical assistance per demonstrationgrantee will be established at the timeof the grant award. The applicant mustagree to participate with the DOLtechnical assistance contractor in itsprogress assessments. As part of theacceptance of a grant award theapplicant agrees to participate inconference calls during the course of thedemonstration and attend and conductworkshops at conferences and othermeetings to assist with further guidancethroughout the workforce investmentsystem, as necessary and appropriate. Areasonable amount of grant funds maybe earmarked for this purpose.

E. PartnershipsThe establishment of creative

partnership configurations that includerepresentatives of employers with skillshortages and are broadly representativeof community interest is stronglyencouraged. It is highly recommendedthat applicants submit a statement (orchart) that shows how the actual orproposed configuration represents fullythe community at large and how eachpartner adds value to the skill shortageassessment and planning process. Otherfederal partners, where present andappropriate, are suggested for inclusionin any consortium, such as the U.S.Department of CommerceManufacturing Extension Program,Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment neighborhood andcommunity enhancement programs andothers.

F. Support From PartnersThe partnerships that are being

established are an important part of any

application. Partnership Building grantapplicants are strongly encouraged toinclude letters of support signed byproposed consortium members,including the local WIB chair(s).Consideration should be given todemonstrations of support fromrepresentatives of key groups who arelikely to have a significant impact onthe likely success of this project in theregion, such as employer associations,curriculum developers, etc. Grant-funded partnership-building activitiesoperating in the local workforceinvestment area should be viewed as amechanism to improve the capacity ofthe area to address skill shortages andto provide the types of trainingopportunities that result in improvedoutcomes for workers and an adequatesupply of trained workers foremployers.

1. The Partnership Building grantapplication must also describe apreliminary agreement of key regionalstakeholders (beyond the requiredparties described above) to thoseactivities to be undertaken in the courseof operation described in theapplication, as well as a description ofother organizations or individuals whoare likely to be added to the list ofcollaborators, and what they areexpected to contribute to the initiative.

Appropriate partners to serve as partof the consortium to be formed includelocal Workforce Investment Boards(WIBs) or consortia of WIBs; employers;business and trade associations; laborunions; other post-secondaryeducational institutions includingcommunity colleges; economicdevelopment agencies, and private-sector led groups including community-and faith-based organizationsaddressing the needs of specificcultures, among others.

Regional consortia may be interstatein composition to accommodateadequate coverage of cohesive labormarkets or regional communities,including typical commuting patterns.No minimum size for the geographic orlabor market to be covered by thisdemonstration program has beenestablished, and the smallest grants maycover single local workforce investmentareas or portions thereof. A key goal ofthis initiative is to encourage regionalapproaches to cover the commuting areafrom which employers in the regiondraw or hire their employees.

2. Training grant applicants mustpartner with the local WorkforceInvestment Board(s), which forms thepolicy-making body for local workforceinvestment activities. Applicants arealso strongly encouraged to partner withother entities which possess a sound



grasp of the job marketplace in theregion and which are in a position toassist in addressing the issue of skillshortage occupations. Suchorganizations would include private, forprofit business—including small andmedium-size business; business, trade,or industry associations such as localChambers of Commerce and smallbusiness federations; and labor unions.While the Department is notprescriptive as to the partners required,beyond requiring comments from theWIB, in the past those grantees withstrong private employer involvementhave been particularly successful inachieving their grant’s plannedplacement outcomes.

Pre-Application Information SessionApplicants interested in becoming a

demonstration grantee are encouraged toattend a Pre-Application informationsession which will be held inGreensboro, North Carolina on August10, 2000, on the campus of BennettCollege. The purpose of this all-daysession is to summarize the currentknowledge about workforcepartnerships, approaches to skillshortages and the basics of preparing anapplication in response to a grantsolicitation. The session will review thegoals and objectives of thedemonstration project and explain thetwo phase methodology planned forfunding of the demonstration grants.Attendees will learn about the technicalassistance services that will be providedto grantees. This session is beingoffered, free of charge, to prospectiveapplicants on a space-available basis.Attendees will, however, have to pay fortheir own travel and lodging.Attendance at this session is stronglyencouraged but voluntary and nowritten summary of the meeting will bedistributed. Further information aboutthis session, the registration process,meeting agenda and availability oflodging can be found on the DOL webpage www.usworkforce.org or by callingAmerica’s Workforce Network Toll-FreeTelephone Number: 1–877–US–2JOBS.

Proposal SubmissionApplicants must submit four (4)

copies of their proposal, with originalsignatures. The introductory paragraphof the application must state the type ofgrant for which the proposal isdirected—(1) a Partnership Buildinggrant or (2) a Training grant. Theproposal must consist of two (2) distinctparts, Part I and Part II.

Part I of the proposal shall contain theStandard Form (SF) 424, ‘‘Applicationfor Federal Assistance’’ (Appendix #A)and Budget Form (Appendix #B). The

Federal Domestic Assistance Catalognumber is 17.246. Applicants shallindicate on the SF 424 theorganization’s IRS status, if applicable.According to the Lobbying disclosureAct of 1995, section 18, an organizationdescribed in section 501(c)(4) of theInternal Revenue Code of 1986 whichengages in lobbying activities shall notbe eligible for the receipt of federalfunds constituting an award, grant, orloan. The individual signing the SF 424on behalf of the applicant mustrepresent the responsible financial andadministrative entity for a grant shouldthat application result in an award.

The budget (Appendix #B) shallinclude on separate pages a detailedbreakout of each proposed budget lineitem found on the Budget InformationSheet, including detailed administrativecosts. An explanation of how the budgetcosts were derived must be included.The Salaries line item shall be used todocument the project staffing plan byproviding a detailed listing of each staffposition providing more than .05 FTEsupport to the project, by annual salary,number of months assigned todemonstration responsibilities, and FTEpercentage to be charged to the grant. Inaddition, for the Contractual line item,list each of the planned contracts andthe amount of the contract. Where acontract amount exceeds $75,000, adetailed backup budget to show how theamount of the contract was derivedmust be included. For each budget lineitem that includes funds or in-kindcontributions from a source other thanthe grant funds, identify the source, theamount and in-kind contributions,including any restrictions that mayapply to these funds.

DOL will convene a two-day granteeorientation meeting in Washington, DC.Attendance will be mandatory for allgrantees for this demonstration program.We anticipate this meeting to bescheduled within 45 days of the awardof grants to allow sufficient time to haveall project managers present as well asother appropriate representatives of theregional consortia in attendance. Travelfor three individuals (one to be a WIBrepresentative) to attend this meeting aswell as at least one other meeting to beconvened during the course of thegrant’s period of performance should beincluded in the grant budget .

Part II must contain a technicalproposal that demonstrates theapplicant’s capabilities in accordancewith the Statement of Work containedin this document. The grant applicationis limited to 25 one-sided, double-spaced pages with 12 point font size on8.5 x 11 inch paper with 1-inch marginswhich must include the following:

I. Executive summary—(1 page)II. Application narrative technical proposalIII. Time line implementation plan and the

appendix

The 25 page limitation includes allattachments.

Funding/Period of PerformanceIt is anticipated that up to $12 million

will be available for funding thesedemonstrations. It is expected that 6 to12 awards will be made, dependingupon the quality of the proposalsreceived and the amount of fundsrequested and awarded. The maximumgrant award will be $750,000 forPartnership Building grants (maximumof nine awards) and $2 million forTraining grants (maximum of three grantawards).

1. For Partnership Building grant,twenty percent of the grant amount, upto a maximum of $100,000, will bemade available upon announcement ofthe grant award. The funds will bereleased in phases: (1) Phase I: PlanDevelopment; and, (2) Phase II:Implementation—this phase will onlytake place pending approval of the grantplan by DOL. Further directionsregarding the expected products to beprovided to indicate completion ofPhase I: Plan Development will beprovided by DOL at the granteeorientation meeting. The remaininggrant funds will be made availablebased upon achievement of progressbenchmarks consistent with thepurposes of the Workforce InvestmentAct and this demonstration initiative.

2. For Training grants, the full amountof the grant will be available uponannouncement of the grant award.

The maximum duration of anydemonstration project under this SGAwill be 30 months, beginning on thedate of a signed award. This includescloseout time and preparation of thedraft final report. Successful granteeswill be expected to commenceoperations within 30 days of the awarddate. If the applicant anticipates that aperiod longer than the 30 days will berequired prior to commencingoperations, it should be stated in theapplication and provide an explanationfor the expected delay.

Training grants shall be required tocommence the delivery of services toparticipants within 90 days of executionof a grant unless a significant portion ofthe grant implementation addresses thedevelopment of new curriculum orplanning strategies. If participantenrollments are not anticipated to occurwithin 90 days, the circumstancesshould be specifically addressed in theapplication with the reasons providedand an alternative time frame provided.



Option To ExtendDOL may elect to exercise its option

to extend either type of grant offeredunder this solicitation for an additionalone (1) or two (2) years of operation,based on the availability ofdemonstration funding under theWorkforce Investment Act, successfulprogram operation, and thedetermination that a grantee’s initialprogram findings could further informthe workforce development systemthrough refinement of the presentdemonstration. However, in most cases,future funding is expected to be theresponsibility of all stakeholders,including employers, local Boards andother members of the community.

Part III—Statement of Work

A. BackgroundOn January 12, 1999, during his

summit on 21st Century Skills for 21stCentury jobs, Vice President Goreannounced a major new skills shortageinitiative to accomplish two purposes:

• To promote the creation of regionalconsortia to assess employers’ need forskilled workers and workers’ skillsdeficits, and

• To provide resources to establishedpartnerships to provide technical skilltraining to incumbent and unemployedworkers.

Traditionally, overall tight labormarkets and even skill shortages aregood for workers in that they can leadto rising wages, improved workingconditions, and new opportunities forworkers and new labor market entrants.However, problematic regional orsectoral industry skills shortages—thosethat occur when there is imbalancebetween worker supply and demand fora persistent period of time—can meanthat particular goods and services arenot provided and that the economy isoperating less efficiently than it could.At the microeconomic level, i.e., forindividual employers, the inability tofind an adequate supply of workers evenafter offering higher wages and betterworking conditions can cause a loss ofbusiness and profits.

B. Purpose1. Partnership building grants will

support minority colleges anduniversities in their creation of, ormembership in, regional alliances forthe development and implementation ofskills training strategies focused onqualifying significant numbers ofminorities to work within the identifiedoccupations at specific companiesexperiencing such shortages. Thisinitiative acknowledges thatcommunities and regions will be at

different starting points in theirresponses to skill shortages. It isenvisioned that this demonstration willbe used as a catalyst to build a coalitionof community-wide leaders, includingthose from the applicant colleges anduniversities, to work with specificemployers to identify skill shortages andthen develop processes for amelioratingor eliminating them or to strengthen anexisting partnership.

2. Training grants will enableminority colleges and universities toprovide specific training in occupationsexperiencing skill shortages which havebeen identified by employers to assureminority participants access to jobs ingrowth occupations. Successfulapplications may be based on the use ofinnovative service strategies such as theinvolvement of traditionally underrepresented groups of dislocatedworkers for existing training programs;the development and use of curriculageared specifically to eligible groups ofdislocated workers and the needs ofemployers with openings in skillshortage occupations; or thedevelopment of concentrated trainingmodels for workers with a residue ofskill knowledge from previous relatedemployment, or use of curriculum andskills training interventions designed toimpart knowledge, skills and abilities ofindustry skill standards (whereavailable or under development).

A major challenge, then, in addressingboth types of grant applications,becomes how does a local workforceinvestment system work with employersto identify the skills they need, developthe necessary training to respond to theneed, and outreach to the workers whoare being laid off soon enough to acquirethe skills needed for the jobs thatemployers have. This means thattraining curricula must be flexible andeasily adjusted or reconfigured to meetemployer needs in a timely andresponsive manner as they respond toindustry technological advances, marketchanges, new certification requirementsand other changes. This approach isdistinctly different from the generalacademic setting, and this type offlexibility and responsiveness willrequire substantial commitment on thepart of the institution and its leadership.

Another challenge to the communityis how to encourage individualscurrently in the workforce tocontinually upgrade their skills (life-long learning) so that if a layoff occursthe transition to a new job can bequicker and smoother—a benefit to theeconomic well-being of the communityand the economic security of the family.This means that applicants shouldconsider training to upgrade currently

employed individuals in skills ingrowth occupations, especially thosewith career ladders that may offer someof the best opportunities for theeconomic stability of both thecommunity and the family. Offeringtraining in the evenings and onSaturdays, to permit employedindividuals to improve their skills andemployability may be part of thisstrategy.

C. Activities Conducted as Part ofDemonstration Program

1. Partnership Building Grants ‘‘There are four elements (they may runconcurrently in some circumstances) inthis initiative described below.Although they may be occurringconcurrently, the funding related to theelements are indicated by Phase I andPhase II .

a. Phase I: Coalition Building andPlanning

The first phase or element of a projectwill be the development andsolidification of the coalition of all thepartners—including the grantee andother educational institutions,community businesses (and businessorganizations), community-basedorganizations, labor organizations—intoa functioning entity.

Throughout the demonstration, it isexpected that there will be cooperationwith and active collaboration andconsultation between the grantee andthe regional workforce investmentsystem(s). This means that if the regionproposed under this solicitation coversmore than one local workforceinvestment area, the cooperation andconsultation expected under thissolicitation must be demonstrated tohave taken place with the appropriaterepresentatives and organizations ineach local area from early in thedevelopment of application, on acontinuing basis during the planningperiod as policies and systems aredeveloped, and, finally but not lessimportantly, as the project activities areimplemented. If there are regionalstrategies such as those authorizedunder WIA Section 116(c) in placecurrently, DOL expects thoserelationships will be built upon for thepurpose of this initiative.

Skill shortage assessment andplanning is a dynamic process—reflecting the changing nature ofbusiness demands and labor marketsupplies. It is therefore anticipated thatthe partnerships established under thisrubric would be open-ended and inviteadditional members—especially fromprivate industry—as emerging needs areperceived or additional sectors of



industry are considered for furtherstrategic planning.

A significant aspect of coalitionbuilding is the resources that partnerscan bring to the table and contribute tothe partnership. DOL is not requiring amatch for this competition. However, amajor emphasis of this effort is to createentities and relationships which cansustain themselves once the partnershipbuilding grant has expired, and a keyaspect of that sustainability will be theamount of resources—both cash and inkind—that can be generated by theparticipants in the partnership.Sustainability is an importantconsideration for the fullimplementation of the action plan,beyond the scope of this grant, that willbe developed as part of this project andwhich is discussed immediately below.

When a substantial number of theworkers (20 percent or more) in atargeted skill shortage occupation/industry is represented by one or morelabor organizations, or where thetraining is for jobs where a labororganization represents a substantialnumber of workers engaged in similarwork, the application must providedocumentation of consultation on theproject concept from applicable labororganizations. Further, in incumbentworker settings or those involvingcustomized training where the unionhas been involved in bargaining relativeto the introduction of either thetechnology or the addition of newskilled workers at the workplace, theapplication shall provide information asto any role the union played in thedesign and delivery of the training aswell as any impact on the workers withrespect to the growth or shrinkage in thenumber of jobs, and the selection ofworkers for retraining.

b. Phase I: Plan DevelopmentThis element of the project will

involve activities to assess specificemployer skill needs and to measure thegaps between the skills needed byindustry and the skills held bydislocated, employed and incumbentworkers in the region. The applicationmust identify what is presently knownregarding the skill shortage needs of theemployers, the skill needs of theworkforce and the training resourcesavailable to meet these needs. In manyinstances, this information will bepreliminary and require additionalinvestigation, research and datacollection. The selection of theassessment tools necessary to add to theexisting body of knowledge includingdata sources, survey instruments,interview protocols, etc., as well asmeasurement processes, is a key aspect

of the development of a strategy toaddress skill shortages. Although finalselection of the specific assessmenttools may not occur until the planningphase of the grant, inclusion of somediscussion of the preliminary directionthe consortium plans to consider wouldbe useful in providing a sense of thelevel of understanding that presentlyexists among consortium members.

The plan will enumerate the datasources that are used to support thestatement of skill shortages. Coalitionsare encouraged to research widely andbe inclusive in utilization of data.Resources for general skill shortageinformation include data generated bythe Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)(such as the Current Population Survey(CPS) and the OccupationalEmployment Statistics (OES) survey), byregional and local trade associations,and by national and regional businessassociations (such as the U.S. Chamberof Commerce). However, the action planwill also be required to deal withcurrent and short term needs of localemployers identified, in part, by theinitiatives developed as a result of thisdemonstration program such ascommunity audits, evaluated in thecontext of the skills of workers currentlyseeking reemployment or employment.Regional and local hiring patterns asprovided by local industry and tradeassociations are also extremely valuableinformation in terms of any sustainedskills shortage. Information regardingminority skill levels and hiring practicesin the targeted skill shortageoccupations will also be helpful inassessing the need for the proposedproject.

The plan for the implementationphase of the grant will include ananalysis of the data informationdeveloped. The analysis will contributesubstantially to the formulation of atraining strategy that will be agreed toand signed off by all of the partners inthe coalition and signed off on by thelocal board(s) if it is not an activemember of the coalition. Thecertification by the local board in thelatter instance will attest that thisproposed specific training strategy is notinconsistent with and does not conflictwith the activities of the workforceinvestment system and does notconstitute the development of a parallelworkforce investment system. Activitiesthat may be part of the implementationplan include the identification, designand/or adaptation of appropriatetraining curricula to meet the needs ofskill shortage occupational areas or toreflect the employment demands of keyregional businesses or industries.

c. Phase II: Implementation—Operational Testing, Assessment ofResults, and Program Adjustments

This phase of the project (which may,in fact, occur concurrently with thepursuit of strategies to begin to addressother skill shortages) will be to test theimplementation plan and the trainingstrategy by training eligible individualsdescribed in this SGA in the skillsidentified as a result of the first twoelements of this demonstration program.Thus, although planning and capacity/partnership building are the primaryobjectives, grantees will be required totest any new curricula they developand, in a limited trial fashion, toimplement the action plan that theyformulate. The test is required to see ifthe strategy developed can beoperationalized, and if not, whatchanges need to be made. This testshould be conducted to work outwhatever imperfections there are in theaction plan, so that upon completion ofthis grant period, the partnership isprepared to successfully implement theaction plan on a fully operational basis.Most of the training to be conducted inthis test period, will be relatively of anintensive or compressed nature. It isexpected that during this period andupon completion of the pilot trainingeffort, the consortium will determinethe appropriateness of initiating theapplication process for the WIA StateEligible Training Provider List.

Please note that the training may beprovided by more than one trainingprovider based on level of complexity,geographic convenience or otherreasons. The training may be developedas part of a career ladder system, withdifferent training providers addressingdifferent levels of the career ladder.However, regardless of the trainingapproach used, the participantscompleting training are expected to beready for jobs in the skill shortage areasidentified and analyzed in the planningphase of the demonstration. Trainingmay include paid and unpaidinternships with employers.

(1) Operational Activities. Applicantsmust describe:

• How and through what entity(ies)trainees will be outreached andselected;

• What entity will have operationalresponsibility for the training and casemanagement activities;

• The expected outcomes (jobs) forthe trainees, including wage goals, and

• Training activities like thoseauthorized under WIA Section134(d)(4)(D) which will be conducted aspart of the operational testing under thisdemonstration. Because the applicant



will likely not know what skill trainingwill be provided as part of thedemonstration, the description of thetraining activities to be funded as partof the operational test will at first needto be more conceptual in the initialapplication.

Grantees will receive more detailedinformation describing the informationto be submitted in the Phase I plan inorder for Phase II implementationfunding to be released. In addition toother information, the grantee will beexpected to submit a description of thetraining provider selection process; thedevelopment or modification ofcurricula; identification and recruitmentof eligible individuals; and the types ofassessments (including employerassessments) that will be used toidentify candidates who would be likelyto be able to succeed in the proposedskill training.

(2) Participant Services. Threecategories of individuals who may betrained with any funds awarded as aresult of this demonstration are eligibledislocated workers, employed andincumbent workers and new entrants.

The application will describe at whatpoints during the operation of ademonstration the training is likely tooccur. This is particularly importantwhere applicants have alreadyidentified and gathered information ona skill shortage which they are preparedto begin addressing upon receipt of thegrant. In other words, testing of atraining concept or process is notlimited to a period of time in any projectthat other ‘‘phases’’ or ‘‘segments’’ havebeen completed. In such cases, within abrief time after release of the Phase Iplanning funds, additional Phase IIimplementation funds will be releasedupon satisfying the Department’srequirements to show that a consortiumof appropriate community interests hasbeen involved in the identification andplanning regarding the skill shortage,adequate data exists to support theshortage, and the training planaddresses the additional informationrequirements.

Prior to the release of additionalfunds, the applicant must identify theentities responsible for the following:

• Determining eligibility;• Selecting individuals for training or

referral to employers participating in thedemonstration for screening;

• Case management and otherservices (such as orientation toemployer expectations, internships,supportive services, etc.,) that will beavailable to maximize the trainees’success in completing the training;

• Developing and filling job openingsidentified as part of the employers’participation in this demonstration;

• Addressing contingencies fortrainees who encounter difficulties andfor whom alternative reemploymentstrategies must be developed outside thedemonstration;

• Developing opportunities for work-based training which may or may not bein conjunction with classroom training(if not held on site or not a type ofcontextual training);

• Arranging for trainees to receivecredit toward some kind of credentialthat provides evidence ofaccomplishment in the event aparticipant later changes jobs.

Other categories of individuals maybe served through processes developedunder projects implemented as a resultof this solicitation, using resources otherthan demonstration grant funds tosupport training expenses.

d. Internal Monitoring and Evaluation/Next Steps

(1) Project Benchmarks

A time line (Appendix to theapplication) must be provided ofimplementation and projectperformance benchmarks covering theperiod of performance of the project.The monthly schedule of plannedimplementation activities and start-upevents (including benchmarks such ascompletion of lease arrangements forspace, selection of an employer orcommunity advisory group, advisorygroup meetings, hiring of staff,completion of data collection survey,design of customer satisfactionmeasures, development of a participantselection policy, initiation of customersatisfaction activities for employers andparticipants, etc.).

(2) Quantitative projections

A chart indicating quarterlyprojections of cumulative expendituresfor Phase I funds should be includedwith the grant application. Prior to therelease of Phase II funds, a number ofproducts will be required in addition tothe Implementation Plan. These includea second chart of quarterly projectionsof cumulative expenditures based onfull funding of the demonstrationproject and a chart providing plannedparticipant activity levels-enrollments,assignment to training, enteredemployment (or retained employment)and terminations.

It is expected that there will beongoing reports (monthly progressreports during the early stages of theproject, followed by quarterly reports asthe projects as the pilot testing phase of

the training is underway) by thedemonstration project director to theconsortia signatories. Further, it isexpected that there will be sufficientopportunity to review decisions madeand strategies implemented ifcircumstances change or initial projectdesign proves to be unproductive orinsufficiently productive to proceedfurther. These reports and an activeinterest on the part of the key leadershipin the Region and the entities involvedwill serve as a progress review andoversight function to ensure continuousimprovement of the strategy and itsimplementation.

As indicated in the coalition buildingsection and reemphasized here, part ofthis initiative also will be to explore theresources that the newly joined partnersin the regional consortia can bring to thetable. DOL is not imposing a matchingrequirement on this procurement. Oneof the key questions that has emergedwith regard to this partnership initiativerevolves around the issue ofsustainability, i.e., how will these newlyemerging partnerships keep themselvesgoing once Federal funding abates?Clearly, one of the root factors in thisarea will be whether the partnership hasmanaged to establish a viable financialbase, as well as the leadership to ensurethat the community can build a timelyresponse to the needs of the employersand the workers, and continuallyimprove the systems to meet this long-term commitment. At the end of thegrant period, the grantee will beexpected to prepare an assessment ofthe activities undertaken as part of theproject, in particular providing anassessment of whatever operationaltesting was carried out under theauthority of the project. That assessmentwill comprise a portion of the finalreport for the project. This requirementis in addition to the evaluation reportthat will be prepared by theindependent evaluator.

2. Training Grantsa. Funds provided through this

demonstration may be used only toprovide services of the type described atSection 134(d)(2)(A)–(K), (3)(C), (4)(D),and (e)(2)and (3) of WIA. (Use DOL/ETA’s web site www.doleta.gov to view.)

Grant funds may be used to reimburseemployers for extraordinary costsassociated with on-the-job training ofprogram participants, in accordancewith the provisions of 20 CFR 663subpart G. In addition to the limitationsand requirements provided in WIA,prospective applicants should be awarethat grant funds may not be used for thefollowing purposes: (a) for training thatan employer is in a position to provide



and would have provided in the absenceof the requested grant; (b) to pay salariesfor program participants; and (c) foracquisition of employers’ equipment.Applicants may budget limited amountsof grant funds to work with technicalexperts or consultants to provide adviceand develop more complete projectplans after a grant award, however, thelevel of detail in the project plan mayaffect the amount of funding provided.

b. Grant activities may include:(1) Development, testing and initial

application of curricula focused onintensive, short-term training to getparticipants into productive, highdemand employment as quickly aspossible;

(2) Working with employers indevelop and apply worksite-basedlearning strategies that utilize cutting-edge technology and equipment;

(3) Development of employer-basedtraining programs that will takeadvantage of opportunities created byemployers’ needs for workers;

(4) Development and initialapplication of contextual learningopportunities for participants to learnworksite theory and practices in aclassroom setting while applying thatlearning in an on-the-job setting;

(5) Use of curriculum and skillstraining programs that are designed toimpart learning to meet employer-specified or industry specific skillstandards or certification requirements;

(6) Convening of an EmployerAdvisory Board to identify skills gaps ofjob applicants and present workersaffecting the ability of the employer tooffer a competitive product and developa strategy for retraining;

(7) Innovative linkage andcollaboration between employers andthe local Substate Grantee and/or One-Stop/Career Center system to ensure asteady supply of high demand, skilledworkers.

The above are illustrative examplesand are not intended to be an exhaustivelisting of possible demonstration projectdesigns or approaches which mayachieve the purpose of this solicitation.However, successful applicants mustdemonstrate the direct involvement byemployers experiencing skill shortagesin the design and operation of theproject as well as provide substantivedocumentation about the existence ofskill shortages for the industry oroccupations to be targeted by theproposed project. Documentationshould include a description of theemployer involvement anticipated inthe project. An employer advisorycommittee may be one means ofaccomplishing employer involvement.

c. Applications must address thefollowing areas:

(1) Target PopulationDescribe the characteristics of the

proposed target population for theproject, e.g.,educational level, previousoccupation, age range, likelytransferrable skills, length ofunemployment, and languagelimitations. If that population to beserved represents a particular minoritygroup, describe the size and needs of thetarget population in the local area asthey relate to the services availableeither through the grant or otherresources in the geographic area coveredby the grant. Provide documentation orother assurance showing there aresufficient numbers of WIA eligibleindividuals with the target population’scharacteristics in the project area(s) whocan be expected to succeed in theplanned training.

Indicate how the number of workersto be enrolled was determined.Documentation should be provided toshow that individuals with appropriatecharacteristics to meet the purposes ofthis grant are available in sufficientnumbers to meet the recruitment goalsof the grant recognizing that not allworkers with appropriate characteristicswill chose to participate.

Available JobsDescribe the jobs that will be available

and targeted for placement to projectparticipants upon completion oftraining and placement servicesincluding the strategy(ies) foridentifying job openings that appearappropriate to the training planned andmeet the target wage at placement goalsestablished in the proposal. Includeinformation about the number and typeof jobs, wage information and thespecific set of skills, knowledge orduties (industry-sponsored standards ofcertifications). Provide documentation(Footnote sources) that a shortage ofqualified workers exists in the local areato fill positions in the targetedoccupations in the absence of theproposed project. Anecdotal data shouldnot be used. Information from theBureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)available through a variety of web sitesincluding BLS, O*NET and America’sLabor Market Information System(ALMIS), should be considered as a keysource of documentation. In addition,State Occupational InformationCoordinating Committee (SOICC) andWIA local workforce investment planmay also be cited. Other sources fromthe private sector such as Chamber ofCommerce or employer associationstudies as well as university studies are

also acceptable. The data must relate tolocal employment shortages.

Substantive linkages with specificemployers who are experiencing skillshortages among their present workforceand/or the demand for additionalemployees with identified skill sets indocumented occupational shortagesmust be provided. Letters fromemployers who have made acommitment to the demonstrationproject are the most appropriate form ofdocumentation.

If some placements will be made withemployers who have not been identifiedat the time of application, describe thejob development and placement strategyto be used to assure placement ofdemonstration participants.

(3) Project Design• Service Plan. Describe the services

to be provided from the time ofselection of participants throughplacement of those participants in jobs.Describe any services to be providedsubsequent to job placement. Thedescriptions shall provide a clearunderstanding of the services andsupport that will be necessary forparticipants to be placed successfully injobs and to retain those jobs, includingservices not funded under the grant, andways to address participants’ financialneeds during periods of training. Grant-funded activities should, at a minimum,include recruitment, eligibilitydetermination, assessment, retraining,job placement, and supportive services.

• Outreach and recruitment. Describehow eligible dislocated workers will beidentified and recruited forparticipation in the project. Recruitmentefforts may address public servicecommunications and announcements,use of media, coordination with theOne-Stop Career Center system, use ofcommunity-based organizations andother service groups. Describe theapplicant’s experience in reachingdislocated workers, especially thetargeted population. It is highlyrecommended that applicants partnerwith the appropriate local One-StopCareer Center operators to plan andimplement effective outreach andrecruitment strategies.

• Eligibility determination. Describethe process to be used in determiningthe WIA eligibility of potentialparticipants in the project. It is highlyrecommended that applicants partnerwith the local One-Stop Career Centeroperators or community-basedorganizations with eligibilitydetermination experience to carry outthis critical activity.

• Selection criteria. Describe thecriteria and process to be used in



selecting those individuals to be servedby the project from among the totalnumber of eligible persons recruited forthe project. Explain how the selectioncriteria relate to the specific purpose ofthe proposed project. Identify anyassessment tools that will be used aspart of selection process.

• Training Services. Describe thetraining to be provided—classroom,experiential, on-the-job, internships, etc.Include the length (days and hours) andschedule, any perquisite courses, andcustomization to account fortransferable skills, previous education(note: whether the training requires newand higher educational levels thanprevious skill training in the sameindustry), and particular circumstancesof the target population and the skillneeds of the hiring employer(s). Includeinformation to demonstrate that anyproposed training provider is qualifiedto deliver training that meetsappropriate employment standards, andany applicable certification or licensingrequirement. Past performance,qualifications of instructors,accreditation of curricula, and similarmatters should be addressed ifappropriate. Address the costs ofproposed training and other servicesrelative to the costs of similar trainingand services including courses providedby both public and private providers inthe local area. If the training is becustomized to account for individualdifferences in skills levels ofparticipants or employer hiring needs,describe how these considerations willbe taken into account in the delivery ofthe training. The training provided mustsupport the information providedregarding skill shortages and demandfor jobs.

• Job Placement. Describe the role ofthe employer linkages previouslyaddressed in assuring the availability ofjobs for participants completingtraining. If an Employer AdvisoryCommittee is the primary employerlinkage, the members of the committeeshould be listed and the type ofexpertise they bring to the committeenoted. Provide a discussion of therole(s) of the advisory committee and itsprojected meeting frequency. Describeany additional job seeking skills trainingor assistance provided to participantscompleting training.

• Post placement services. Describeany post placement services to beprovided and explain their value to theachievement of the project’s purposeand planned outcomes.

• Supportive services. Describe thosesupportive services determined to beappropriate to the target population’sneeds. Describe policies and procedures

to ensure that supportive services areprovided only when they are necessaryto enable an individual who is eligiblefor training but cannot afford to pay forsuch supportive services, to participatein the training program. Indicate howthe participants’ financial needs duringthe period of training will be addressed.

• Relocation. Describe the limitationsand eligibility criteria for relocationassistance, if such assistance is includedin the proposal.

• Participant flow. Provide aflowchart noting length of time forvarious activities (such as one day forassessment, etc.) to illustrate how theproject will ensure access to necessaryand appropriate reemployment andretraining services. Show the sequenceof services and the criteria to be used todetermine the appropriateness ofspecific services for particularparticipants. Note where service choiceoptions will be available to participants.Indicate the average length ofparticipation from eligibilitydetermination and enrollment in thedemonstration project to placement inan unsubsidized job.

• Relationship to prior experience.Discuss how the applicant’s priorexperience in working with the targetedpopulation affects or influences thedesign of the proposed project. Noteespecially lessons learned or positiveexperiences that will be replicated.

(4) CollaborationDescribe the nature and extent of

collaboration and working relationshipsbetween the applicant and otherworkforce development partners in thedesign and implementation of theproposed project. Include services to beprovided through resources other thangrant funds under this demonstration.Provide documentation that thecollaboration described can reasonablybe expected to occur (signed letters ofagreement and/or the charter of aformally established advisory councilare considered the strongest evidence,while letters of support are consideredweaker evidence). Because a corepurpose of this demonstration programinvolves the publicly funded workforcesystem, the applicant shall describeworking relationships with local One-Stop Career Center partners wherepresent.

Describe the number and types ofemployers to be directly involved inimplementation of the demonstrationthrough activities as participation on anadvisory council, provision of input tocurriculum development and design,training provider, internshipsupervision, participation inestablishment of local skill standards,

etc. Describe activities, presently inplace or to be undertaken to linkactivities to program interventionsunder this grant to employers, industry,or curriculum/learning centers currentlydesigning and developing occupational/job skill standards and certifications.

Collaboration should focus on linkingemployers involved in grant activitieswith any employer, industry, or tradeand worker association that has alreadydeveloped or is developing skillstandards certifications. Employerlinkages must be specifically addressedin the application and documentationprovided of the specific role(s) theemployer(s) will play in implementationof the grant provided.

D. Outcome Goals

Outcome goals for this demonstrationprogram include, but are not limited tothose stated below:

1. Partnership Building Grants

a. Increasing opportunities forminority colleges and universities toplay a significant role in addressing skillshortages as a partner in the workforceinvestment system;

b. Increasing job opportunities forminorities through skill training ingrowth occupations where employershave identified skill shortages in orderto access quality jobs that provide foreconomic self-sufficiency and long-termemployability security;

c. Providing minority colleges anduniversities with access to timely,meaningful workforce data to be used inplanning curriculum and futuredirections for their institutions;

d. Providing minority colleges anduniversities with an additional means ofaccessing the employer community;

e. Formation of region skills alliancesthat include minority colleges anduniversities to collaborate inimplementing integrated strategies inresponse to employer needs;

f. Identification of ways to bestrespond to reported skill shortages;

g. Testing the viability of conductingon-going community audits to helpavoid future skill shortages and to assistin community-or regional-wideplanning for adjusting to economicchange;

h. Development of a broad basedconsortium which will continue afterthe conclusion of this demonstration;and

i. Development of a process forcollecting information and respondingto employer needs which can be used bylocal workforce investment boards andchief elected officials as a basis forpolicy development for the local onestop system.



In addition, the Phase II—OperationalTesting of the program shoulddemonstrate connections betweentraining provided to participants andthe industries where participants areemployed. Unless otherwise providedfor in the grant, it is expected that 95%of the participants placed in jobs willfind employment with those businessesor industries for which the trainingstrategy is implemented. For dislocatedworkers, the wage replacement rate isexpected to be 90% or better; forincumbent workers and new entrants,the wage rates will be consistent withrequirements in the proposal, and anysubsequent negotiations; and foremployed workers, the wage rates willresult in wages that meet the localworkforce investment board’s standardfor achieving self-sufficiency, takinginto consideration each application’sdescription of these populations thatwill be trained as part of any fundedproject.

2. Training Grantsa. The number of participants

projected: to be enrolled in services, tosuccessfully complete services throughthe project, and to be placed into newjobs; a minimum of—percent enteredemployment rate is required;

b. Measurable effects of the servicesprovided to project participants asindicated by gains in individuals’ skills,competencies, or other outcomes;

c. Wages of participants prior to, atplacement and 90 days after placement:(1) for dislocated worker participants: aminimum of—percent wagereplacement rate is required for atleast—percent of the participants and anaverage—percent wage replacement forthe overall demonstration project isrequired; (2) for incumbent workerparticipants: a minimum of 100 percentwage retention is required for allparticipants successfully completingtraining and meeting the competencies/skills levels specified by the employerprior to the training.

d. For projects serving dislocatedworkers, as part of the targeted outcomefor wage at placement, each projectshould benchmark at least two key wageaverages for the labor market in whicheach project will operate. Suggestedbenchmarks might include: (1) Theaverage weekly wage in themanufacturing sector, if the project isfocused on manufacturing; the averageweekly wage for technical and skilledtrade jobs; or the average weekly wagefor technical or professional workers;whichever is appropriate to the trainingprogram selected and (2) the averagewage at placement for the local JTPATitle III, dislocated worker program

operated June 1999 to July 2000 by thelocal Substate Grantee prior to transferto the operations under the WorkforceInvestment Act. Provide an explanationof the particular benchmarks chosen forthe project. For incumbent workers,indicate the present wage level of theworkers to be trained and discuss howthis wage level compares with theappropriate benchmark wage for thelocal labor market area.

e. For each project serving dislocatedworkers, at least 80 percent of theindividuals placed shall be placed at awage that meets or exceeds (1) theaverage benchmarked wage in the labormarket area, or (2) the average wage atplacement for the last program yearcompleted (currently 1999) for the JTPATitle III dislocated worker programoperated in the targeted labor market,whichever is greater. The manufacturingwage and other wage information forany labor market may be obtained fromthe Covered Wages and EmploymentProgram administered by each State’sEmployment Service.

f. Customer satisfaction with theproject services including participant atcritical points in the service deliveryprocess as well as upon placement andemployer satisfaction with the skills andpreparation of the participants placedwith their organization; and

g. Planned average cost per placement(amount of the grant request divided bythe number of program-relatedplacements, and the cost per placementfor continued placements (the amountof the grant request minus development/start-up costs divided by the number ofprogram-related placements).

E. StaffingEach grantee will be expected to hire

a full-time project director who willbegin within 30 days of the grant awardto ensure that an appropriate level ofeffort is committed to the success of theinitiative. A tentative staffing planshould be provided listing each positionof more than .10 FTE with a briefdescription of the position, salary,fringe, and the percentage of time to bedevoted to the demonstration project.The individual with primaryaccountability for the implementation ofthe demonstration should be identified,with the information provided as towhere this key individual will be placedin the organizational structure and towhom he/she will report.

Part IV. Monitoring, IndependentEvaluation and ReportingRequirements

As part of the agreement for thereceipt of funds under this solicitation,each Grantee will be required to provide

reports and documents as well asparticipate in evaluation and reviewactivities described below. DOL willarrange for or provide technicalassistance to grantees in establishingappropriate reporting and participantdata collection methods and processestaking into account the applicant’sproject management plan. An effort willbe made to accommodate and provideassistance to grantees to be able tocomplete all reporting electronically.

A. Monitoring

The Department shall be responsiblefor ensuring effective implementation ofeach competitive grant in accordancewith the WIA, the Regulations at 20 CFR652, the provisions of thisannouncement and the negotiated grantagreement. Applicants should assume atleast one on-site project review will beconducted by DOL staff, or theirdesignees.

This review will focus on the project’sprogress and performance in meetingthe grant’s programmatic gals andparticipant outcomes, complying withthe targeting requirements regardingparticipants who are served,expenditure of grant funds on allowableactivities, collaboration with employersand other organizations as required, andmethods for assessment of theresponsiveness and effectiveness of theservices being provided. Grants may besubject to additional reviews at thediscretion of the Department.

B. Independent Evaluation

DOL will contract for an independentevaluator of all phases of projectsfunded under this Solicitation. Thepurpose of the evaluation is to informthe system on all phases of thedemonstration program in order thatothers who subsequently establish suchpartnerships to address skill shortagesmay learn from grantees’ experiences.Each Grantee is required to participatein this effort.

C. Reporting

1. Progress Reports

a. Partnership Building Grants. Thegrantee must submit brief narrativeprogress reports. The reports will besubmitted monthly during the Phase I ofthe project and during the first threemonths of Phase II funding and thenquarterly thereafter. These reports aredue 15 days following the end of eachreporting period during which theproject is operational (funded). Thequarters end March 31, June 30,September 30 and December 31.

b. Training Grants. The grantee mustsubmit brief narrative progress reports



as well as quantitative reports based onthe planned levels ofactivity’enrollment, training assignment,completion, job placement. The reportswill be submitted monthly until 50percent of the enrollment goal has beenreached. Thereafter they may besubmitted quarterly.

2. Quarterly Financial Status Report.Each grantee must submit to the GrantOfficer’s Technical Representative(GOTR) identified in each grantagreement within the 30 days followingthe end of each quarter, three copies ofa quarterly Financial Status Report (SF269) until such time as all funds havebeen expended or the period ofavailability has expired.

3. Final Project report. A draft finalreport which summarizes projectactivities and results of thedemonstration shall be submitted nolater than 30 days prior to the expirationdate of the grant. The grantee’sassessment of operational testingactivities under the grant is to beincluded. The final report shall besubmitted in 3 copies no later than 15days before the grant expiration date. Itis expected that this report includesinformation on challenges to the systemand how those challenges wereovercome as well as what worked bestand what did not work as well, or didnot work at all.

D. Other Documents or Reports To BeSubmitted to DOL

1. Partnership Building Grant

a. It is expected that either with theapplication or within 90 days after thegrant award, the grantee shall submit acopy of a signed consortium partnershipagreement. The agreement shall includea written statement of operatingprinciples and procedures defining rolesand decision-making processes for eachmember of the partnership, asappropriate, as well as the overallprinciples and procedures of thepartnership. It must include thefrequency of meetings and how thereview and oversight function will beconducted. A copy of the partnershipagreement when modified thereafter toadd additional partners should also besubmitted.

b. The grantee must submit a copy ofthe Phase II—Implementation Plan uponcompletion of its development, andwhen modified thereafter. TheImplementation Plan must be signed bythe consortium partners.

Part V. Rating Criteria for Award andSelection Process

A careful evaluation of applicationswill be made by a technical review

panel who will evaluate theapplications against the criteria listed inthe SGA. The panel results are advisoryin nature and not binding on the GrantOfficer. The Government may elect toaward grants with or withoutdiscussions with the offerors. Insituations without discussions, anaward will be based on the offeror’ssignature on the Standard Form (SF)424, which constitutes a binding offer.The Government reserves the right tomake awards under this section of thesolicitation to ensure geographicalbalance. The Grant Officer will makefinal award decisions based upon whatis most advantageous to the FederalGovernment in terms of technicalquality, responsiveness to thisSolicitation (including goals of theDepartment to be accomplished by thissolicitation) and other factors.

Rating Criteria for Partnership BuildingGrants

A. Overall Statement of Problem andObjectives (5 Points)

A concise statement clearly settingforth the problem(s) to be addressed andthe objectives for accomplishing thepurposes of the grant.

B. Regional Characteristics (15 Points)

1. Region Description. The applicantmust provide a clear statementdescribing the region or area that thepartnership will encompass. Thedescription must enumerate conciselythe economic conditions of the region.Socioeconomic and demographic datashould also be provided to buttress thediscussion. Judicious use of relevantstatistical information is encouraged.The statistical information must identifythe characteristics that make this area acohesive region.

2. Employer Characteristics. Adiscussion of the general businessenvironment, including some emphasison small and medium-sized businesses,the characteristics of the majoremployers in the region and inparticular, identification of thoseemployers—both major and small andmedium-sized—that have experiencedskill shortages. The application shouldinclude a discussion of the nature of theskills shortages as presently known andthe extent to which additional areas ofinformation needed to develop aresponse strategy and action plan andwhat is the nature of those shortages.

3. Identified Data Needs. The extent towhich the applicant identified theadditional information regarding theemployer community necessary for thedevelopment of an implementationplan.

C. Strength of the Consortium (15Points)

1. Partners and Roles. The applicantshould enumerate who the partners arein this endeavor and how they will linktogether-i.e., what role each will play.This may be presented in chart form.The Department is interested in a broadrepresentation of organizations andentities that are identified as able tocontribute to this effort to addressreported employer skills shortages in atimely and responsive manner. Theapplication must clearly differentiatebetween actual and prospectivepartners.

2. Private Sector Involvement. Thissection should articulate ties to theprivate sector, including ties with small-and medium-sized businesses, minoritybusinesses, and small businessfederations and businesses with skillshortages. Provide in detail the role ofthe private sector-employers, employerassociations and training providers(where appropriate) in developing theapplication.

3. Resources provided by partners. Adiscussion of what resources, actual andleveraged, each partner will bring to thepartnership. Although DOL has notimposed a matching requirement uponthis procurement, applicants arestrongly encouraged to enumerate insubstantial detail exactly what assets thepartners (including employers andemployer associations) propose tocontribute. Assets may include, but arenot limited to, office or training space,equipment, curriculum development,office support staff, meeting space,communication lines, as well as cashcontributions. Identify additionalsources of support to be pursued if thegrant is funded.

4. Role of training institutions. Thedevelopment of a training strategy toequip individuals in the Region with theskills to address the skill shortagesidentified is important to the outcomesof the overall demonstration. Thistraining may be accomplished throughcustomized training contracts orthrough the Individual TrainingAccount mechanisms established by thelocal workforce investment systems. Inselecting a training approach, applicantswill need to consider the replicability ofthe approach for other workforceinvestment systems as well as thesustainability of the approach under theWIA program design developed in thelocal area . The rationale on whichconsideration of the selection processwill take occur or the approach mostlikely to be selected should bediscussed. Note: There is no particularapproach that is favored by DOL.



However, since the sustainability of theproject will depend to some extent onthe local or regional WIA programtraining designs, it will be important torecognize the philosophy of WIAtraining in developing the project’straining rationale.

Role of unions should be discussedwhere appropriate.

5. Sustainability of the partnershipand strategies. To be highly rated underthis criterion, applicants must provide adetailed discussion of how thepartnership is presently operating, or isenvisioned to operate and how it will(could) sustain itself once the Federalgrant funding has expired. Clearly,establishing a strong resource base is asignificant factor in resolving thatquestion.

D. Prospective Target Population (20Points)

1. Characteristics of the targetpopulation. The description of thecharacteristics of those individuals theplan envisions serving should be clearand sufficiently detailed to determinethe potential participants’ service needs.If the individuals to be served will bedrawn from one eligible group ofparticipants (by industry, workingstatus, etc.) the application should sostate and provide the rationale for thatgroup’s selection. Describe the extent towhich target populations will be drawnfrom groups under represented in thetargeted industries/occupations.

2. Documentation of availableparticipants. Documentation should beprovided showing that a significantnumber of incumbent, employed, anddislocated workers as well as newentrants are available for participationwithin the project area.

E. Strategy and Service Plan (20 Points)

1. Collection and Data Analysis. Theextent to which the applicant providesinformation about the approach to datacollection and analysis, specificallyciting rationale for methodologyselected for data collection,responsibilities assigned regardingcollection and analysis, and timelinessof data collection and analysis as itrelates to development of an action planand training strategy.

2. Strategy. The extent to which theproposed strategy approach addresses:

a. identification of the region orgeographical area within the region tobe served;

b. the relationship of the employers’skill shortages and employment needs,including an assessment of the currentworkforce’s skills if the skill shortage isidentified and confirmed as a result ofthe data collection and analysis at the

time of application, or a description ofthose areas of reported skill shortageswhich the proposal plans to examineand verify and the types of datacollection and analysis presently underconsideration; and

c. the employment and training needsof the targeted minority population toassure that the required demonstrationoutcomes are achieved.

3. Geographic, neighborhood orindustry concentration. Applicants arestrongly encouraged to include underrepresented communities andpopulations particularly those that mayreside in Empowerment Zones andEnterprise Communities (EZ/ECs) in theregion, or industries, and/or areas in thecommunity or region that have beentargeted for other assistance thattogether with funds from this initiativemay result in sufficient concentration ofresources to achieve even greater goalsthan those established for thisdemonstration. This approach alsoallows for great opportunity to leverageother funding sources.

4. Participant Services. While thisSolicitation envisions only limitedoperational testing of the action plan, itis expected that some participants willbe served during the period of this startup grant. Applicants must describe withclarity the participant focus of projectedactivities (from outreach/recruitment,assessment, case management, andsupportive services to job search andplacement activities) that will emanatefrom the Phase II: Implementation Plan.It is expected that the appropriate mixof services will be tailored to thecharacteristics of the target population.

F. Previous Experience andManagement Plan (15 Points)

1. Previous individual staffexperience and experience of partnerorganizations. Applicants shouldprovide a detailed discussion of specificexperience in the activitiescontemplated by the Solicitation. Thekinds and quality of experience theregional skills alliance (including theapplicant and other partners) has had ineconomic planning including the use ofeconomic and demographic data toidentify skill shortage occupations. Thelevel and quality of experience theapplicant and other partners have incurriculum planning and development.The quality of the experience thepartners bring to the demonstrationregarding occupational skill training.

2. Staffing. The application shouldinclude resumes of key staff who will beexpected to play a key role in the firstsix months of the projectimplementation. As noted above, it maywell be that the individual staff

members do not have substantiveexperience in partnership buildingactivities. Therefore, it will beacceptable to demonstrate that the keystaff has substantial background ineconomic planning and other activities(e.g., curriculum development)contemplated as part of the coalitionbuilding effort for this initiative.

3. Management Plan. The applicationshould include a management plan forhow this grant will be administered.The structure under which the projectwill operate must be carefully describedand must identify the lines of authorityfor accountability for the achievement ofthe project goals. The required time linewill indicate the key benchmarkachievements identified by theapplicant and the timeframe for theiraccomplishment. It is recommendedthat the time line include suchbenchmarks as the selection and hiringof staff, finalization of an MOU with alldemonstration project partners,selection of the methodology forgathering and analyzing necessary datato determine the occupational areas ofskill shortages and employer needs, theidentification of training needs andappropriate curricula, initial testing oftraining to meet employer skill shortageneeds, formation of any subcommitteesto focus on particular aspects of thedemonstration activity, establishment ofpolicies for the selection of participantsand employers, approval of trainingstrategy, assessment of customersatisfaction and assurance of continuousimprovement efforts, and schedule forreview of progress reports. This list isnot meant to be inclusive, but rather toillustrate some activities to beaccomplished that could serve asbenchmarks for oversight review and fornegotiation with DOL in determiningthe appropriate time for the release ofthe balance of demonstration grantfunds.

G. Cost Effectiveness (10 Points)Applicants will provide a detailed

cost proposal including a detaileddiscussion of the expected costeffectiveness of their proposal. Thisdiscussion should be couched in termsof the reasonableness of the cost inrelation to the activities planned,including such factors as the geographicarea covered by the proposed project,the number and range of the partners,the operational testing of theImplementation Plan (in particular,training). The agreement shall include awritten statement of operatingprinciples and procedures defining rolesand decision-making processes for eachmember of the partnership, asappropriate, as well as the overall



principles and procedures of thepartnership. It must include thefrequency of meetings and how thereview and oversight function will beconducted. Expenses should beidentified that will be incurred in termsof establishing and/or strengthening thecollaborative, cooperative partnership.The cost benefits of assessingcommunity needs and curriculumdevelopment should also be addressed.Benefits can be described bothqualitatively in terms of the value ofestablished cooperative relationshipsand skills attained and quantitatively interms of wage gains and cost savingsresulting from collaborative efforts andactivities.

In view of the fact that there will berelatively little actual provision ofservices to individuals; proposals willhave to discuss costs and benefits, tosome extent, in terms of projectedparticipants. This may, of necessity,involve a certain amount of hypotheticalmodel building. However, it isanticipated that applicants would havea fully completed and tested action planwhich is ready to be fully implementedupon completion of this grant, so thatthe model building could produce someexcellent guide posts for the successfulapplicant to use in carrying out thisgrant.

Selection Criteria for Training Grants

A. Statement of Need (15 Points)

1. Region Description. The applicantmust provide a clear statementdescribing the region or area that thepartnership will encompass. Thedescription must enumerate conciselythe economic conditions of the regionincluding those industries in growthand decline. Socioeconomic anddemographic data should also beprovided to buttress the discussion.Judicious use of relevant statisticalinformation is encouraged. Thestatistical information must identify thecharacteristics that make this area acohesive region.

2. Employer Characteristics. Adiscussion of the general businessenvironment, including some emphasison small and medium-sized businesses,the characteristics of the majoremployers in the region and inparticular, identification of thoseemployers—both major and small andmedium-sized’’ that have experiencedskill shortages.

3. Identification of the skill shortages.A discussion of information and datasources used in selecting the particularskill shortages selected for training mustbe provided. The application shouldinclude a discussion of the nature of the

skills shortages as presently known andthe extent to which additional areas ofinformation needed to develop aresponse strategy and action plan andwhat is the nature of those shortages.

B. Target Population (10 Points)

1. Description of the characteristics.The applicant must provide a clearstatement describing the target group tobe served that is sufficiently detailed todetermine the potential participants’service needs.

2. Availability of Sufficient Number ofWorkers. Documentation must beprovided showing that a significantnumber of eligible dislocated workerswho possess these characteristics areavailable for participation within theproject area. An explanation of how thenumber of dislocated workers to beenrolled in the project was determinedshould be provided.

3. The recruitment plan must supportthe number of planned enrollments. Thetarget population must be appropriatefor the specific purpose of the proposedproject.

C. Targeted Jobs (15 Points)

1. Appropriateness of SelectedOccupations. The applicant shouldprovide information indicating that thejobs identified for training are clearlyavailable to workers who successfullycomplete the planned training andpreparation given that:

a. the match between the documentedskill shortage and the training planned;

b. the documentation providedspecifying that training meets or isdeveloped based on industry drivenskill standards or certifications;

c. the substantial level of involvementof employers in making known theirneeds regarding requisite worker skillsnecessary for hiring programcompleters;

d. the documentation and reliabilityof job availability is based uponrecognized, reliable and timely sourcesof information;

e. where appropriate, the role ofworkers or representatives of a labororganization representing the workers inthe design and/or delivery of training inenhancing worker skills duringworkplace change;

2. Consultation with labor unions hasoccurred where appropriate and astatement is included noting theconsultation or determination that suchconsultation was not necessary.

D. Service Delivery Strategy. (20 Points)

1. Strategy. Applicants must lay out acomprehensive strategy of providing theskills training. It must include howmany types of training will be provided,

by what organizations (in addition tothe grantee), and demonstrate that thescope of services to be provided isconsistent with the demonstrationprogram and project purposes.

2. Scope of Services. The scope ofservices must be adequate to meet theneeds of the target population given:

a. their characteristics andcircumstances;

b. the complexity of the training andthe skills to be developed relative totheir characteristics and previous jobexperience, including discussion onhow internships, hands-on training, orother practicum opportunities will bepart of the curricula;

c. the jobs in which they are to beplaced relative to targeted wage atplacement goals;

d. the length of program participationplanned prior to placement.

3. Services to be Provided. Theapplicant should discuss the services tobe provided including at a minimum:outreach and recruitment, assessment,selection process, training, job searchassistance and job placement,supportive services and follow-upservices. The provision of any trainingor employment related tools anduniforms should be noted.

4. Innovation. Innovation in thecontext of service delivery can representa wide variety of items. There can beinnovation in the way training servicesare provided—e.g., distance learning toprovide instruction to rural areas,interactive self-instructional videomaterials, flexible class scheduling (toaccommodate employed and incumbentworkers schedules), professionalmentoring. Creativity in developingother aspects of service strategy(recruitment, assessment, transportationlinkages, etc.) is also encouraged.

E. Cost Effectiveness (10 Points)1. Reasonableness of Costs.

Applicants should address theemployment outcomes and the levels ofskills to be achieved (such as attainedState licensing, an industry-recognizedcertification, etc.) relative to the amountof training that the individual wouldneed to receive in order to achieve thoseoutcomes. The cost informationprovided regarding similar trainingavailable through other trainingproviders is within an acceptable rangeor sufficient rationale is provided for thecost differences. The impact ofdevelopment/start-up and innovation oncosts is explained clearly in theproposal and is reasonable. Benefits canbe described both qualitatively in termsof skills attained and quantitatively interms of wage gains. Proposed costsmust be reasonable in relation to the



characteristics and circumstances of thetarget group, the services to be provided,planned outcomes, the managementplan, and coordination/collaborationwith other entities, including One-Stop/Career Center organizations.

2. Leveraged resources. Identificationshould be provided of the specificsources and amounts of other fundswhich will be used, in addition to fundsprovided through this grant, toimplement the project. The applicationmust include information on any non-WIA resources committed to thisproject, including employer funds,grants, and other forms of assistance,public and private. The degree to whichother interested partners in theworkforce development system investresources to test the concepts put forthin the application. In-kind contributionsshould also be discussed. Value andlevel of external resources beingcontributed, including employercontributions, to achieve program goalswill be taken into consideration in therating process.

3. Cost effectiveness may also bedemonstrated in part by cost perparticipant and cost per activity inrelation to services provided andoutcomes to be attained taking intoconsideration the characteristics of theplanned participants.

F. Management (10 Points)1. Project progress tracking system.

The project management plan must bedesigned to track project performance insuch a way as to assure that benchmarksare achieved in a timely manner, issuesaffecting performance such as employerinvolvement, collaboration partnerscommitments, etc. are quickly identifiedand addressed, and planned outcomeswill be achieved in a cost effectivemanner.

2. Integrity of WIA funds. Themanagement structure and managementplan for the proposed project mustensure the integrity of the fundsrequested. The project work plandemonstrates the applicant’s ability toeffectively track project progress with

respect to planned expenditures.Sufficient procedures are in place to usethe information obtained by the projectoperator(s) to take corrective action ifindicated.

3. Customer Satisfaction. Theproposal must have a method ofassessing customer feedback for bothparticipants and employers involved,and establish a mechanism to take intoaccount the results of such feedback aspart of a continuous system ofmanagement and operation of theproject.

G. Collaboration (15 Points)1. Evidence of involvement of key

workforce investment stakeholders. Theapplication must include evidence ofpartnership with the local WorkforceInvestment Board(s) and the local One-Stop/Career Center operator(s) in theplanning and other appropriatedemonstration activities. Evidence ofcoordination with other programs andentities for project design or provisionof services should also be provided. Awritten agreement or memorandum ofunderstanding is a suggested vehicle forpresenting a clear indication that thesignatory stakeholders have agreed tocooperate and coordinate resources andoperating responsibilities, as applicable,for the life of the proposed project.

2. Employer Involvement. Theapplicant should discuss and providedocumentation of the role of theemployer(s) in the overall design of theproject, the occupations targeted fortraining and the identification of theskills for which training is provided,and in the placement of trainingcompleters. The project includes areasonable method of assessing andreporting on the impact of suchcoordination, relative to thedemonstration purpose and goals andthe specific purpose and goals of theproposed project.

H. Sustainability and Replicability (5Points)

1. Sustainability. The applicant mustprovide evidence that, if successful,

activities supported by thedemonstration grant will be continuedafter the expiration date of the grant,using WIA-allotted formula funds orother public or private resources.

2. Replicability. The likelihood thatthe approach may be applicable to abroad range of dislocated workerprograms across the country. Theproposal must provide evidence that theapproach and training strategy(ies) usedcan be replicated by other workforcedevelopment partners to address skillshortages in their local area.

This solicitation is designed topromote involvement and providesupport of minority colleges anduniversities in establishing a role intheir local workforce investment areas’strategies to address skill shortages aswell as in their provision of trainingservices in response to employer-identified skill shortages. For thisreason, the Federal Government intendsto award grants to institutionsrepresenting each of the three primarycategories of minority colleges anduniversities—Historically BlackColleges and Universities, HispanicServing Institutions, and Tribal Collegesand Universities.

Applicants are advised thatdiscussions may be necessary in orderto clarify any inconsistency orambiguity in their applications. Thefinal decision on awards will be basedon what is most advantageous to theFederal Government as determined bythe ETA Grant Officer. The Governmentmay elect to award grant(s) withoutdiscussion with the applicant(s). Theapplicant’s signature on the Applicationfor Federal Assistance (Standard Form)SF–424 constitutes a binding offer.

Signed this date, July 26, 2000 atWashington, D.C.Laura A. Cesario,Grant Officer.

Appendix ‘‘A’’—Standard Form (SF) 424Appendix ‘‘B’’—Budget Information SheetAppendix ‘‘C’’—DefinitionsBILLING CODE 4510–30–P



BILLING CODE 4510–30–C

Appendix ‘‘C’’

Definitions That Will Apply to ThisDemonstration Program

1. Community Audit. A mechanism usedby a community or region that collects ‘‘real-time data’’ from regional employers regardingactual and projected short term and longerterm labor surpluses and needs, to enable theregional workforce development system (theentire community) to plan effectively forexpected events— both positive andnegative—in order to improve the

functioning of the market and minimize theoverall negative impact on the community.

2. Consortium. A group of entities(agencies or organizations) representing keypolicy makers within a Region (as identifiedin the application, consistent with thedefinition herein) which has a commoninterest in developing strategies andprocesses to respond to skill shortages withinthe Region. At a minimum, the consortiummust include the local workforcedevelopment board chairs, or theirrepresentatives (speaking on behalf of theboard), and chief elected officials, or theirrepresentatives, within the Region who will

use the outcomes developed as part of thisdemonstration to develop or direct policydecisions for the workforce investmentsystem.

3. Contextual Learning. A combination ofcompressed work and class-based learningstrategies that may include integrated basicskills, literacy, and vocational training.

4. Chief Elected Officials. Those electedofficials whose responsibilities are defined inJTPA and the Workforce Investment Act.

5. Customized Training. Training and orcurricula that is developed for specificemployers’ specific hiring needs in acollaborative fashion by the employer, the



education system, the local workforceinvestment system. It may be entirely work-based, entirely classroom or a combination ofthe two. The cost of the training must beleveraged from a variety of sources, includingthe employer, the education system and thisdemonstration program.

6. Displaced Homemaker. An individualwho meets the definition at WIA Section101(10).

6. Eligible Dislocated Worker. Anindividual who meets the definition at WIASection 101(9)(A), (B), and (D). See also‘‘employed dislocated worker.’’

7. Employed Dislocated Worker. Anindividual who meets the definition of aneligible dislocated worker at WIA Sec. 101(9)and who has not yet been laid off or has beendislocated and has accepted a temporary,income-maintenance job at a wage of lessthan 90% of layoff wage; and is determinedby the project operator or the designated one-stop operator to require training to obtain orretain employment that permits theindividual to achieve self-sufficiency inaccordance with the criteria set by the Stateor local workforce investment board underWIA.

8. H1–B Visa Skill Shortages. Those skillshortages identified by the Immigration andNaturalization Service (I&NS) for whichemployers are permitted to apply to bringinto the U.S. foreign workers to meetdemands when the supply of workers withsuch skills in the local labor market areinsufficient. A list of the occupationscertified by the Department of Labor underthe H1–B program for non-immigrant visasmay be found on page 44549 of the FederalRegister, Volume 64, Number 157, Monday,August 16, 1999.

9. Incumbent Worker. An individual whois currently employed at small or medium-sized businesses (see definition) whose jobskills do not meet the current or future needsof the company if it is to remain competitiveby keeping workers employed, avertinglayoffs, and upgrading workers’ skills. As aresult, the company has identified suchworkers as being at risk of being laid off inthe future (5 year projection). This definitionis for purposes of this grant solicitation.

10. Independent Evaluation. A process andoutcome evaluation conducted by acontractor hired by DOL. The evaluation willbe designed to identify the lessons learnedand the variety of effective models developedin order to maximize the value of systemstested and inform the workforce investmentsystem.

11. Local Workforce Investment Areas.Those geographic areas designated by theGovernor of each State under the WorkforceInvestment Act (WIA) of 1998 (or servicedelivery areas under JTPA).

12. Local Workforce Investment Boards.Boards are authorized under Section 117 ofthe Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998.More than half of the membership of eachlocal board must be key officials from theprivate employers.

13. Memorandum of Understanding orCooperative Agreement. A living andgrowing agreement that is a critical elementof the establishment and on-goingdevelopment of a regional skills alliance

process. The initial agreement to besubmitted with an application, at aminimum, articulate the outcomes and actionplant to occur if a project is funded. It mustinclude the affected local workforcedevelopment board chairs and the chiefelected officials in the Region for whichapplication is made must be parties to theagreement. This agreement shall include therole each organization will take inimplementing the demonstration strategy aswell as any monetary and in-kindcontribution by each signatory organization.

14. New Entrants. Eligible individuals inthis category include-young adults aged 18years and over; welfare recipients; disabledindividuals and others who have limitedwork histories but for whom the type oftraining envisioned under this demonstrationwill lead to self-sufficiency as defined by theState or local workforce investment board.

15. Private Industry Council (PIC). Thepolicy making local entity as described inJTPA Sections 102 and 103.

16. Performance Outcomes. Adetermination of how many participantsenter jobs for which the training wasconducted and the wage received as a resultof the training, both in terms of prior wagefor incumbent workers and dislocatedworkers, and in relationship to self-sufficiency for new entrants to the workforce.Other performance factors will be negotiatedfor each grant depending upon the design ofthe demonstration project and shall includefactors for planning and implementation ofstrategies to respond to area employers’ skillshortages and consistent with the goalsarticulated in this SGA.

17. Region. An area which exhibits acommonality of economic interest. Thus, aregion may comprise several labor marketareas, one large labor market, one labormarket area joined together with several ofadjacent rural districts, special purposedistricts, or a few contiguous PICs or localboards. If the region involves multipleeconomic or political jurisdictions, it isessential that they be contiguous to oneanother. A region may be either intrastate orinterstate. Although the rating criteria willprovide more detail, it is the applicant’sresponsibility to demonstrate the regionalnature of the area which that applicationcovers. Also, a region may be coterminouswith a single PIC or local board.

18. Regional Planning. A process describedin WIA Section 116(c).

19. Self-Sufficiency for:Dislocated workers. The wage of the job for

which the individual is trained will pay atleast 95% of the worker’s layoff wage withinone year of entering employment as a resultof the training received.

New entrants. The wage of the job forwhich the individual is trained will at aminimum exceed the lower living standardfor the family size as published by the DOL.

20. Skills Shortage. Those specificvocational skills that employers haveidentified as lacking in sufficient numbers tomeet their needs. A labor shortage occurswhen the demand for workers possessing aparticular skill is greater than the supply ofworkers who are qualified, available andwilling to perform those skills. Problematic

skills shortages occur when there is animbalance between worker supply anddemons for a significant amount of time forwhich the labor market does not, or isunable, adjust in a timely manner.

21. Small and Medium-sized Business. Abusiness with 500 or fewer full-timeemployees.

22. Unified Plan. A State plan authorizedunder WIA Section 501(b), containingcoordination principles strongly encouragedby the Department.


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[NAFTA–3854]

Chevron Products Company,Roosevelt, UT Notice of NegativeDetermination Regarding Applicationfor Reconsideration

By application transmitted May 25,2000, the petitioners requestadministrative reconsideration of theDepartment’s denial of TA–W–37,240,TA–W–36,295I, and North AmericanFree Trade Agreement-TransitionalAdjustment Assistant (NAFTA–TAA).The NAFTA–TAA petition number wasnot provided.

At an earlier date, the samepetitioners filed application forreconsideration of the Department’sdenial of Trade Adjustment Assistance(TAA) for workers of Chevron ProductsCompany, Roosevelt, Utah, TA–W–37,240, and were notified that their wasdismissed. The dismissal notice, datedMarch 29, 2000, was published in theFederal Register on April 11, 2000 (65FR 19387). With respect to TA–W–36,295I, the petition is a certificationissued on July 6, 1999, applicable toworkers of Chevron Production,Chevron USA, Inc., all locations inUtah. Since the petitioners in this caseare not employees of that company,there is no basis to reexamine thefindings of that investigation.

The only petition that the Departmentmay consider under the May 25, 2000appeal, is the denial of NAFTA-TAA forworkers and former workers of ChevronProducts Company, Roosevelt, Utah(NAFTA–3854), signed on April 24,2000, and published in the FederalRegister on May 11, 2000 (65 FR 30444).

Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c)reconsideration may be granted underthe following circumstances:

(1) If it appears on the basis of factsnot previously considered that thedetermination complained of waserroneous;



(2) If it appears that the determinationcomplained of was based on a mistakein the determination of facts notpreviously considered; or

(3) If in the opinion of the CertifyingOfficer, a misinterpretation of facts or ofthe law justified reconsideration of thedecision.

The petitioners explain that the lowprice of imported crude oil forced U.S.producers to reduce activity whichcontributed to a loss of demand by oilproducers for gaugers, and thus, workerseparations at the subject firm. Thepetitioners also cite an increase inCanadian crude imports, includingimports by Chevron, to replace lostproduction in the local area.

The petition investigation conductedon behalf of workers at ChevronProducts Company in Roosevelt, Utah,revealed that there were no companyimports of crude oil.

The petitioners state that othertrucking and non-producing entitieshave been certified for TAA. That is notrelevant to worker groups applying forNAFTA-TAA eligibility.

The Department’s denial of NAFTA-TAA for workers engaged in lifting andtransporting crude oil at ChevronProducts Company, Roosevelt, Utah,NAFTA-3854, was based on the findingthat the worker group provided a serviceand did not produce an article withinthe meaning of Section 250(a) of theTrade Act of 1974, as amended. Asexplained in the decision document forNAFTA–3854, eligibility requirementcriteria under which service workerscould be certified under the Trade Actwere not met for the petitioning workergroup. There were no NAFTA–TAAcertifications in effect for workers ofChevron Products Company. Otherfindings of the investigation, notelaborated on in the decision document,show that the subject firm workers liftedand transported crude oil that wasprimarily purchased from unaffiliatedfirms.

The petitioners add that theDepartment’s negative determinationwas premature because Utah had notissued their preliminary findings of theinvestigation. The Department had all ofthe information necessary (from theinvestigation conducted in response tothe TAA petition for the same workergroup), with which to determine if thegroup eligibility criteria underparagraph (a)(1) of Section 250 of theTrade Act of 1974 were met.

The petitioners state that theindividual issuing denials of workergroup eligibility should not bereviewing appeals. The response is thatthere is no provision in the FederalRegulations for any other means of

administrative reconsideration. Theappeal process described in 29 CFR§ 90.18, affords the worker group theopportunity to present to the certifyingofficer (the

Conclusion

After review of the application andinvestigative findings, I conclude thatthere has been no error ormisinterpretation of the law or of thefacts which would justifyreconsideration of the Department ofLabor’s prior decision. Accordingly, theapplication is denied.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 21st dayof July 2000.

Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19404 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[NAFTA–04016]

ITT Industries, Fluid HandlingSystems, Oscoda, Michigan; Notice ofTermination of Investigation

Pursuant to Title V of the NorthAmerican Free Trade AgreementImplementation Act (P.L. 103–182)concerning transitional adjustmentassistance, hereinafter called (NAFTA–TAA), and in accordance with Section250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II,of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended(19 U.S.C. 2273), an investigation wasinitiated on June 30, 2000 in responseto a petition filed on behalf of workersat ITT Industries, Fluid HandlingSystems, Oscoda, Michigan.

In a letter dated July 16, 2000, thepetitioner requested that the petition forNAFTA–TAA be withdrawn.Consequently, further investigation inthis case would serve no purpose, andthe investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 20th dayof July, 2000.

Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19406 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


[NAFTA–03963]

Sagaz Industries, Inc., Miami, Florida;Amended Certification RegardingEligibility To Apply for NAFTA-Transitional Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 250(A),Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of theTrade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), theDepartment of Labor issued aCertification for NAFTA TransitionalAdjustment Assistance on June 20,2000, applicable to workers of SagazIndustries, Inc., Miami, Florida. Thenotice was published in the FederalRegister on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40136).

At the request of the State agency, theDepartment reviewed the certificationfor workers of the subject firm. Theworkers are engaged in the productionof car seat covers. New informationprovided by the company shows thatworkers separated from employment atSagaz Industries, Inc. had their wagesreported under a separateunemployment insurance (UI) taxaccount, ADP Total Services, Miami,Florida.

Accordingly, the Department isamending the certification to properlyreflect this matter.

The intent of the Department’scertification is to include all workers ofSagaz Industries, Inc. adversely affectedby imports from Mexico.

The amended notice applicable toNAFTA–03963 is hereby issued asfollows:

All workers of the Sagaz Industries, Inc.,Miami, Florida, including those receivingtheir compensation through ADP TotalServices, Miami, Florida, who became totallyor partially separated from employment on orafter March 31, 1999 through June 20, 2002are eligible to apply for NAFTA-TAA underSection 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 17th dayof July, 2000.Grant D. Beale,Program Manager, Division of TradeAdjustment Assistance.[FR Doc. 00–19411 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4510–30–M


[Notice 00–083]

Information Collection: Submission forOMB Review, Comment Request

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).



ACTION: Notice of Agency report formsunder OMB review.

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration has submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) the following proposal for thecollection of information under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).DATES: Comments on this proposalshould be received on or before August31, 2000.ADDRESSES: All comments should beaddressed to Mr. Harry Lupuloff, Officeof the General Counsel, Code GP,National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Washington, DC 20546–0001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Carmela Simonson, Office of the ChiefInformation Officer, (202) 358–1223.

Reports: None.Title: Patent License Report.OMB Number: 2700–0010.Type of review: Extension.Need and Uses: Each licensee is

required to report annually on itsactivities in commercializing itslicensed inventions and any royaltiesdue. NASA uses information collectedto monitor the activities of its licensees.

Affected Public: Individuals orhouseholds, business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents: 60.Responses Per Respondent: 1.Annual Responses: 60.Hours Per Request: 30 min.Annual Burden Hours: 30.Frequency of Report: Annually.

David B. Nelson,Deputy Chief Information Officer, Office ofthe Administrator.[FR Doc. 00–19328 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7510–01–P

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS ANDSPACE ADMINISTRATION AGENCY

[Notice 00–084]

Information Collection: Submission forOMB Review, Comment Request

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).ACTION: Notice of Agency Report FormsUnder OMB Review.

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration has submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) the following proposal for thecollection of information under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).DATES: Comments on this proposalshould be received on or before August31, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All comments should beaddressed to Mr. Harry Lupuloff, Officeof the General Counsel, Code GP,National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Washington, DC 20546–0001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Carmela Simonson, Office of the ChiefInformation Officer, (202) 358–1223.

Reports: None.Title: Application for a Patent

License.OMB Number: 2700–0039.Type of review: Extension.Need and Uses: The information

supplied is used by the NASA AssociateGeneral Counsel to make agencydeterminations that NASA should eithergrant or deny a request for a patentlicense, and whether the license shouldbe exclusive, partially exclusive, ornonexclusive.

Affected Public: Individuals orhouseholds, business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents: 80.Responses Per Respondent: 1.Annual Responses: 80.Hours Per Request: 8.Annual Burden Hours: 640.Frequency of Report: Annually.



[Notice 00–085]

Agency Information Collection:Submission for OMB Review,Comment Request

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration has submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) the following proposal for thecollection of information under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).DATES: Comments on this proposalshould be received on or before August31, 2000.ADDRESSES: All comments should beaddressed to Mr. Richard Kall, Code HK,National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Washington, DC 20546–0001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Carmela Simonson, Office of the ChiefInformation Officer, (202) 358–1223.

Reports: none.Title: Patents.

OMB Number: 2700–0048.Type of Review: Extension.Need and Uses: The information is

needed to ensure the proper dispositionof rights to inventions made in thecourse of NASA funded research.

Affected Public: Businesses or otherfor-profit, Not-for-profit institutions,State, Local or Tribal Government.

Estimated Number of Respondents:9,347.

Responses Per Respondent: 1.Estimated Annual Responses: 9,347.Estimated Hours Per Request: 30 min

to 8 hrs.Estimated Annual Burden Hours:

17,276.Frequency of Report: Annually.



[Notice 00–086]


AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration has submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) the following proposal for thecollection of information under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).DATES: Comments on this proposalshould be received on or before August31, 2000.ADDRESSES: All comments should beaddressed to Ms. Lois Ryno, GoddardSpace Flight Center, NationalAeronautics and Space Administration,Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20771–0001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Carmela Simonson, NASA ReportsOfficer, (202) 358–1223.

Reports

Title: Locator and InformationServices Tracking System (LISTS).

OMB Number: 2700–0064.Type of Review: Extension.Need and Uses: The LIST System is

used primarily to support services onthe Center dependent upon accuratelocator-type information.

Affected Public: Individuals orhouseholds.




Responses Per Respondent: 1.Estimated Annual Responses: 8,456.Estimated Hours Per Request: .083.Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 702.Frequency of Report: As required.



[Notice 00–087]


AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration has submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) the following proposal for thecollection of information under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).DATES: Comments on this proposalshould be received on or before August31, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All comments should beaddressed to Mr. Richard Kall, Code HK,National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Washington, DC 20546–0001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Carmela Simonson, NASA ReportsOfficer, (202) 358–1223.

Title: Small Business and SmallDisadvantaged Business Concerns.

OMB Number: 2700–0078.Type of review: Extension.Need and Uses: Reports are required

to monitor Mentor-Protege performanceand progress according to the Mentor-Protege Agreement. Reports are internalcontrol to determine if Agencyobjectives are met.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit institutions, State,Local or Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents: 48.Responses Per Respondent: 2.Annual Responses: 96.Hours Per Request: 1.Annual Burden Hours: 96.Frequency of Report: Semi-annually.



[Notice 00–088]

Agency Information Collection:Submission for OMB Review;Comment Request

AGENCY: National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA).SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration has submitted tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) the following proposal for thecollection of information under theprovisions of the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).DATES: Comments on this proposalshould be received on or before August31, 2000.ADDRESSES: All comments should beaddressed to Mr. Richard Kall, Code HK,National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Washington, DC 20546–0001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Carmela Simonson, NASA ReportsOfficer, (202) 358–1223.

Title: Uncompensated Overtime.OMB Number: 2700–0080.Type of review: Extension.Need and Uses: For contracts over

$500,000, uncompensated overtimeinformation is used to determine (i)whether a contractor will be able to hireand retain qualified individuals, (ii)whether uncompensated overtime hourswill be properly accounted, and (iii) thevalidity of the proposed uncompensatedhours.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents: 650.Responses Per Respondent: 1.Annual Responses: 650.Hours Per Request: 3.25.Annual Burden Hours: 2113.Frequency of Report: Annually.


NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDSADMINISTRATION

Records Schedules; Availability andRequest for Comments

AGENCY: National Archives and RecordsAdministration (NARA).ACTION: Notice of availability ofproposed records schedules; request forcomments.

SUMMARY: The National Archives andRecords Administration (NARA)

publishes notice at least once monthlyof certain Federal agency requests forrecords disposition authority (recordsschedules). Once approved by NARA,records schedules provide mandatoryinstructions on what happens to recordswhen no longer needed for currentGovernment business. They authorizethe preservation of records ofcontinuing value in the NationalArchives of the United States and thedestruction, after a specified period, ofrecords lacking administrative, legal,research, or other value. Notice ispublished for records schedules inwhich agencies propose to destroyrecords not previously authorized fordisposal or reduce the retention periodof records already authorized fordisposal. NARA invites publiccomments on such records schedules, asrequired by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a).DATES: Requests for copies must bereceived in writing on or beforeSeptember 15, 2000. Once the appraisalof the records is completed, NARA willsend a copy of the schedule. NARA staffusually prepare appraisalmemorandums that contain additionalinformation concerning the recordscovered by a proposed schedule. These,too, may be requested and will beprovided once the appraisal iscompleted. Requesters will be given 30days to submit comments.ADDRESSES: To request a copy of anyrecords schedule identified in thisnotice, write to the Life CycleManagement Division (NWML),National Archives and RecordsAdministration (NARA), 8601 AdelphiRoad, College Park, MD 20740–6001.Requests also may be transmitted byFAX to 301–713–6852 or by e-mail [email protected]. Requestersmust cite the control number, whichappears in parentheses after the name ofthe agency which submitted theschedule, and must provide a mailingaddress. Those who desire appraisalreports should so indicate in theirrequest.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Marie Allen, Director, Life CycleManagement Division (NWML),National Archives and RecordsAdministration, 8601 Adelphi Road,College Park, MD 20740–6001.Telephone: (301) 713–7110. E-mail:[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each yearFederal agencies create billions ofrecords on paper, film, magnetic tape,and other media. To control thisaccumulation, agency records managersprepare schedules proposing retentionperiods for records and submit these



schedules for NARA’s approval, usingthe Standard Form (SF) 115, Request forRecords Disposition Authority. Theseschedules provide for the timely transferinto the National Archives ofhistorically valuable records andauthorize the disposal of all otherrecords after the agency no longer needsthem to conduct its business. Someschedules are comprehensive and coverall the records of an agency or one of itsmajor subdivisions. Most schedules,however, cover records of only oneoffice or program or a few series ofrecords. Many of these updatepreviously approved schedules, andsome include records proposed aspermanent.

No Federal records are authorized fordestruction without the approval of theArchivist of the United States. Thisapproval is granted only after athorough consideration of theiradministrative use by the agency oforigin, the rights of the Government andof private persons directly affected bythe Government’s activities, andwhether or not they have historical orother value.

Besides identifying the Federalagencies and any subdivisionsrequesting disposition authority, thispublic notice lists the organizationalunit(s) accumulating the records orindicates agency-wide applicability inthe case of schedules that cover recordsthat may be accumulated throughout anagency. This notice provides the controlnumber assigned to each schedule, thetotal number of schedule items, and thenumber of temporary items (the recordsproposed for destruction). It alsoincludes a brief description of thetemporary records. The recordsschedule itself contains a fulldescription of the records at the file unitlevel as well as their disposition. IfNARA staff has prepared an appraisalmemorandum for the schedule, it tooincludes information about the records.Further information about thedisposition process is available onrequest.

Schedules Pending1. Department of the Air Force,

Agency-wide (N1–AFU–99–10, 5 items,5 temporary items). Electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing that are associatedwith unfavorable information files ofenlisted personnel and officers. Thisschedule also revises the dispositioninstructions for recordkeeping copies ofthese files, which were previouslyapproved for disposal.

2. Department of the Air Force,Agency-wide (N1–AFU–00–2, 6 items, 6temporary items). Records relating to

Air Force radio and television service.Included are workload reports, productquality assessments, informationconcerning broadcast scheduling,broadcast material inventories, anddocuments relating to the dispositionand shipment of library materials. Alsoincluded are electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing.

3. Department of the Air Force,Agency-wide (N1–AFU–00–10, 2 items,2 temporary items). Electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing that are associatedwith student operations training recordscontaining personal data and courseinformation. This schedule alsoincreases the retention period forrecordkeeping copies of these files,which were previously approved fordisposal.

4. Department of the Army, Agency-wide (N1–AU–00–12, 2 items, 2temporary items). Master files andoutputs of the Army Career and AlumniProgram System, an electronicinformation system pertaining toservices and benefits for military andcivilian personnel transitioning from theArmy. The system includesdemographic data concerning programparticipants and information concerningthe nature and scope of the assistanceneeded for them to successfullytransition.

5. Department of the Army, Agency-wide (N1–AU–00–17, 2 items, 2temporary items). Files relating toprograms to provide active duty specialwork for reserve component personnel.Included are budget and resourcemanagement files, requests, approvals,and disapprovals. Also included areelectronic copies of documents createdusing electronic mail and wordprocessing.

6. Department of the Army, Agency-wide (N1–AU–00–19, 2 items, 2temporary items). Individual academicrecords of military personnel. Filesinclude information relating to suchmatters as courses attended, extent ofcompletion, results, aptitudes andpersonal qualities, and grade or ratingattained. Also included are electroniccopies of documents created usingelectronic mail and word processing.Records predating 1981 were previouslyapproved for disposal.

7. Department of the Army, Agency-wide (N1–AU–00–24, 2 items, 2temporary items). Master files andoutputs of the Dental Readiness System,an electronic information systemconcerning the dental readiness statusof all active duty personnel. The systemincludes name and unit of service

members and date of last annual dentalexamination.

8. Department of the Army, U.S.Forces Korea (N1–AU–00–25, 2 items, 2temporary items). Master files andoutputs of the Biometrics IdentificationSystem, an electronic informationsystem used to control access to U.S.facilities in Korea. The system includespersonal identifying data concerningU.S. military and civilian personnel,level of access, and vehicle andweapons registration information.

9. Department of Commerce, NationalOceanographic and AtmosphericAdministration (N1–370–00–1, 2 items,2 temporary items). Records relating tothe management of weather stations andfield offices of the National WeatherService. Records document dailymanagement, emergency procedures,and administrative policies. Includedare such records as annual inspectionreports, local office instructions,manuals, and electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing.

10. Department of Defense, DefenseInformation Systems Agency (N1–371–99–1, 3 items, 2 temporary items). Olderrecords accumulated during the 1960sand 1970s consisting of area officecorrespondence and automatic securevoice communications system projectmanagement files. Records relate tosuch matters as circuitry problems andimprovements, power outages, switchrelocations, monthly maintenance, andtechnical support. Headquartersprogram correspondence, 1960–1964, isproposed for permanent retention.

11. Department of Defense, DefenseIntelligence Agency (N1–373–00–2, 4items, 4 temporary items). Recordsrelating to identifying and addressingY2K issues. Included are overall plans,risk assessments, budget records, andfiles relating to the testing andmodification of specific systems. Alsoincluded are electronic copies of recordscreated using electronic mail and wordprocessing.

12. Department of Defense, NationalImagery and Mapping Agency (N1–537–00–3, 90 items, 88 temporary items).Paper and electronic records relating tobudget, finance, and accounting,including electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing. Records relate tosuch matters as budget preparation,financial transactions, civilianpersonnel pay and accounting, propertyand fund accounting, non-appropriatedfund accounting, and cost accounting.Recordkeeping copies of annual budgetestimate submissions and Congressionalbudget justifications are proposed forpermanent retention.



13. Department of Energy, Rocky FlatsEnvironmental Technology Site (N1–434–98–26, 2 items, 2 temporary items).Incoming and outgoing controlledcorrespondence, which consists ofdocuments identifying commitments toactions, dates, or resources for the on-site Management and Operationscontractor. Also included areattachments, enclosures, writtendissents, and electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing. Copies of recordsthat have historical value aremaintained in subject files, which werepreviously approved for permanentretention.

14. Department of Energy, Year 2000Project Office (N1–434–00–2, 10 items,10 temporary items). Records relating toefforts to ensure that agency computersystems are Y2K compliant. Includedare records relating to such matters aspolicy and planning, system testing andverification, and project administration.Also included are electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing. This schedule alsoauthorizes the agency to apply theproposed disposition instructions torecords regardless of medium.

15. Department of Energy, AssistantSecretary for Fossil Energy (N1–434–00–4, 4 items, 4 temporary items). Paperand microfilm copies of Natural GasImport/Export Case Files. Included aresuch records as applications, FederalRegister notices, correspondence,protests, interventions, and finalopinions. Also included are electroniccopies of documents created usingelectronic mail and word processing.

16. Department of Health and HumanServices, Centers for Disease Controland Prevention (N1–442–00–2, 3 items,3 temporary items). Paper and electronicrecords relating to Y2K efforts,including reports, lists, correspondence,memorandums, spreadsheets, compactdisks, and electronic copies of recordscreated using electronic mail and wordprocessing. Records relate to suchsubjects as system reviews, meetings,logistical matters, and contractoractivities.

17. Department of Health and HumanServices, Agency for Health and HumanServices (N1–510–00–1, 3 items, 3temporary items). User access logs andaccess log analysis reports for theQuality Interagency Coordination TaskForce’s web site. Records pertain tovisits to the site and include suchinformation as visitor’s origin, length ofstay, and activities while at the site.Also included are electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing.

18. Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment, Office of CongressionalRelations (N1–207–00–2, 16 items, 13temporary items). Records accumulatedby the Office of the Assistant Secretaryfor Congressional andIntergovernmental Relations. Includedare such records as travel plans,speaking invitations, correspondencewith Members of Congress, staffworking files, notifications provided toMembers of Congress concerningagency-assisted projects, and electroniccopies of documents created usingelectronic mail and word processing.Recordkeeping copies of substantivecorrespondence, calendars, andCongressional testimony are proposedfor permanent retention.

19. Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment, Office of Fair Housingand Equal Opportunity (N1–207–00–3, 2items, 1 temporary item). Electroniccopies of records created usingelectronic mail and word processingassociated with case files relating toagency-regulated security contracts atpublic housing sites. Recordkeepingcopies of case files are proposed forpermanent retention.

20. Department of the Interior, Bureauof Land Management (N1–49–00–3, 30items, 27 temporary items). Recordsrelating to the Federal helium programincluding electronic copies of recordscreated using electronic mail and wordprocessing. Records relate to suchmatters as the processing and clearanceof proposed and final rules, the design,inspection, and maintenance ofpipelines, the preparation of reports onhelium resources, helium sales, andhelium wells. Also included aredatabases used for billings and foridentifying sources of helium in naturalgas. Recordkeeping copies of publishedreports, records of easements and rights-of-way, and files containingdocumentation concerning majorpolicies and procedures are proposedfor permanent retention.

21. Department of Justice, DrugEnforcement Administration (N1–170–00–2, 3 items, 3 temporary items).Records relating to the cleanup ofhazardous waste sites and the disposalof hazardous waste in permanentlandfills and incinerators. Files includecorrespondence, instructions tocontractors, manifests, invoices, packinglists, delivery orders, teletypes, reportsand supporting documentation, andelectronic copies of documents createdusing electronic mail and wordprocessing. Recordkeeping copies offiles maintained by the office withagency-wide responsibility for theprogram will be retained for 75 years.

22. Department of Justice, U.S. ParoleCommission (N1–438–00–1, 2 items, 1temporary item). Input documents forthe Decision Reporting and MonitoringSystem (DRAM), an electronic databaserelating to parole hearings. Recordsconsist of such documents as copies ofprisoner parole applications, summariesof prisoner interviews, and notices ofaction. Master files for DRAM areproposed for permanent retention.

23. Department of Justice, UnitedStates Marshals Service (N1–527–00–3,10 items, 9 temporary items). Paper andelectronic records relating to felonyinvestigations, misdemeanor cases, andtraffic cases, including electronic copiesof documents created using electronicmail and word processing.Recordkeeping copies of significant casefiles are proposed for permanentretention.

24. Department of Labor, NationalOccupational Information CoordinatingCommittee (N1–174–00–3, 41 items, 27temporary items). Records relating tocareer development programs, includinggeneral correspondence, informationmemorandums, administrative meetingagendas, allotments, monthly planningcalendars, grant files, and electroniccopies of documents created usingelectronic mail and word processing.Proposed for permanent retention arerecordkeeping copies of administrativememorandums, interagency agreementsand memorandums of understanding,speeches, publications, long rangeplanning documents, sound and videorecordings, and Career DevelopmentTraining Institute Board minutes,agendas, and reports.

25. Department of State, Bureau ofPersonnel (N1–59–00–1, 20 items, 19temporary items). Records accumulatedby the Director General and Board of theForeign Service. Included are suchrecords as Director General messagesand correspondence, Board of theForeign Service administrative andsubject files, and files relating toemployee-management relations. Alsoincluded are electronic copies of recordscreated using word processing andelectronic mail. Recordkeeping copies ofminutes, transcripts, and other recordsrelating to meetings of the Board of theForeign Service are proposed forpermanent retention. This scheduleproposes minor changes in seriesdescriptions and dispositioninstructions for recordkeeping copies ofthese files, which were previouslyscheduled.

26. Department of State, Bureau ofPersonnel (N1–59–00–13, 84 items, 71temporary items). Records relating tothe administration of careerdevelopment programs for Foreign



Service Officers. Included are suchrecords as subject files relating to careercounseling and assignments, files onapplicants for limited durationassignments into Foreign Servicepositions, and other files accumulatedin connection with the administration ofcareer development and trainingprograms. Also included are electroniccopies of documents created usingelectronic mail and word processing.Proposed for permanent retention arerecordkeeping copies of files relating toPresidential appointments,appointments to the Foreign Service,and the Great Seal of the United States.Most of the series covered by thisschedule were previously scheduled;minor changes in dispositioninstructions are proposed for theserecords.

27. Department of State, Bureau ofInformation Resource Management (N1–59–00–19, 7 items, 7 temporary items).Records, including electronic copiescreated using electronic mail and wordprocessing, that relate to identifying andaddressing Y2K issues. Records relate tosuch matters as overall policies andplans, budgeting and resourceallocation, and the testing andmodification of specific systems.

28. Department of the Treasury,United States Secret Service (N1–87–00–1, 2 items, 2 temporary items).Records relating to Century DateConversion (Y2K) efforts. Files pertainto such matters as the development ofplans and strategies, the review andtesting of computer systems andapplications, and program reviews.Included are plans, copies of contracts,policy letters, correspondence, andelectronic copies of documents createdusing electronic mail and wordprocessing.

29. Department of the Treasury,United States Secret Service (N1–87–00–2, 6 items, 6 temporary items).Records accumulated by theHeadquarters Office of the CounterfeitDivision. Records include digests ofcounterfeit information, counterfeit U.S.Treasury checks, additional specimennotes, and raised and pieced notes. Alsoincluded are electronic copies of recordscreated using electronic mail and wordprocessing.

30. Department of the Treasury,United States Secret Service (N1–87–00–3, 8 items, 8 temporary items).Records accumulated by Field Offices ofthe Counterfeit Division. Recordsinclude logs of items provided to agentsfor use in investigations, contrabandproperty and related records, counterfeitU.S. Treasury checks, additionalspecimen notes, and raised and piecednotes. Also included are electronic

copies of records created usingelectronic mail and word processing.

31. Administrative Office of the U.S.Courts, Federal Appellate and DistrictCourts (N1–116–00–1, 7 items, 4temporary items). Electronic copies ofdocuments created using electronic mailand word processing that relate todisciplinary actions against attorneys,appellate judicial assignments anddesignations, attorney disbarmentproceedings, attorney admissions, andthe actions and minutes of circuitjudicial councils. Recordkeeping copiesof disciplinary action files and judicialassignment records are proposed fordisposal. Recordkeeping copies of filesrelating to attorney admissions,disbarments, and the activities ofjudicial councils are proposed forpermanent retention.

32. Environmental Protection Agency,Agency-wide (N1–412–00–1, 3 items, 3temporary items). Software programs,electronic data, and documentationassociated with the Envirofacts datawarehouse. The Envirofacts systemprovides access to agency databases toallow cross media analyses of programinformation. The source data availablein Envirofacts was previously approvedfor permanent retention.

33. Farm Credit Administration,Agency-wide (N1–103–00–1, 3 items, 3temporary items). Loan performancereports and financial and statisticalreports for which data has been enteredinto the Consolidated Reporting System.This schedule reduces the retentionperiod for these reports, which are nolonger created by the agency and werepreviously approved for disposal. TheConsolidated Reporting System waspreviously approved for permanentretention.

34. Federal Retirement ThriftInvestment Board, Agency-wide (N1–474–00–3, 1 item, 1 temporary item).Sound recordings of telephoneconversations of Thrift Savings Plancustomer service representatives withplan participants, Federal agencypersonnel and payroll offices, and otherindividuals or institutions.

35. Interagency Commission on Crimeand Security in U.S. Seaports, Agency-wide (N1–220–00–5, 23 items, 15temporary items). Unidentifiedphotographs, web-based forms,documents placed on the Commission’sweb site, duplicate copies of documents,and electronic copies of documentscreated using electronic mail, wordprocessing, and other applications.Records proposed for permanentretention include recordkeeping copiesof Commissioners’ minutes andcorrespondence, public meeting records,files accumulated by work groups,

subject files, reports, still photographs,and reference materials relating toseaport crime and security.

36. National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Agency-wide (N1–255–00–4, 3 items, 3 temporary items).Research and technology plans andobjectives files, which relate to thefunding levels of ongoing and proposedspace science research projects.Included are forms with projectdescriptions and funding profiles andelectronic copies of documents createdusing electronic mail and wordprocessing.

37. National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration, Agency-wide (N1–255–00–5, 2 items, 2 temporary items).Records of third party auditsdocumenting the certification ofcomputer and electronic equipmentmanufactured for the agency. Includedare quality control reviews of printedwiring boards inspected forworkmanship and defects and electroniccopies of documents created usingelectronic mail and word processing.

38. Office of Personnel Management,Agency-wide (N1–478–00–1, 3 items, 2temporary items). Electronic mail andword processing records associated withlegal advisory files. This schedule alsomodifies the transfer instructions forrecordkeeping copies of these files,which were previously approved forpermanent retention.

Dated: July 24, 2000.Michael J. Kurtz,Assistant Archivist for Record Services—Washington, DC.[FR Doc. 00–19345 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7515–01–P

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDSADMINISTRATION

Nixon Presidential Historical Materials;Opening of Materials

AGENCY: National Archives and RecordsAdministration.ACTION: Notice of opening of materials.

SUMMARY: This notice announces theopening of additional Nixonpresidential historical materials. Noticeis hereby given that, in accordance withsection 104 of Title I of the PresidentialRecordings and Materials PreservationAct (PRMPA, 44 U.S.C. 2111 note) and1275.42(b) of the PRMPA Regulationsimplementing the Act (36 CFR Part1275), the agency has identified,inventoried, and prepared for publicaccess approximately 420 hours ofNixon White House tape recordingsamong the Nixon Presidential historicalmaterials.



DATES: The National Archives andRecords Administration (NARA) intendsto make the materials described in thisnotice available to the public beginningOctober 26, 2000. In accordance with 36CFR 1275.44, any person who believesit necessary to file a claim of legal rightor privilege concerning access to thesematerials should notify the Archivist ofthe United States in writing of theclaimed right, privilege, or defense on orbefore August 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: The materials will be madeavailable to the public at the NationalArchives at College Park research room,located at 8601 Adelphi Road, CollegePark, Maryland, beginning at 8:45 a.mon October 26, 2000.

Petitions asserting a legal orconstitutional right or privilege whichwould prevent or limit access must besent to the Archivist of the UnitedStates, National Archives at CollegePark, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park,Maryland 20740–6001.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: KarlWeissenbach, Director, NixonPresidential Materials Staff, 301–713–6950.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NARA isproposing to open approximately 4,139conversations which were recorded atthe Nixon White House from August1971 to December 1971. These tapesegments total approximately 420 hoursof listening time.

This is the eighth opening of NixonWhite House tapes since 1980. Previousreleases included conversationsconstituting ‘‘abuses of governmentalpower’’ and conversations recorded inthe Cabinet Room of the Nixon WhiteHouse. The tapes now being proposedfor opening consist of the second of fivesegments comprising the remaininghours of conversations, processed forrelease in chronological order startingwith February 1971.

There are no transcripts for thesetapes. Tape logs, prepared by NARA, areoffered for public access as a finding aidto the tape segments and a guide for thelistener. There is a separate tape logentry for each segment of conversationreleased. Each tape log entry includesthe names of participants; date, time,and location of the conversation; and anoutline of the content of theconversation.

The tape recordings will be madeavailable to the general public in theresearch room at 8601 Adelphi Road,College Park, Maryland, Mondaythrough Friday between 8:45 a.m. and4:30 p.m. Researchers must have aNARA researcher card, which they mayobtain when they arrive at the facility,Listening stations will be available for

public use on a first come, first servedbasis. NARA reserves the right to limitlistening time in response to heavydemand. No copies of the taperecordings will be sold or otherwiseprovided at this time. No soundrecording devices will be allowed in thelistening area. Researchers may takenotes. Copies of the tape log will beavailable for a fee in accordance with 36CFR 1258.12.

Dated: July 25, 2000.John W. Carlin,Archivist of the United States.[FR Doc. 00–19346 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7515–01–P

NATIONAL CREDIT UNIONADMINISTRATION

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Submission to OMB forReview; Comment Request

AGENCY: National Credit UnionAdministration (NCUA).ACTION: Request for comment.

SUMMARY: The NCUA is submitting thefollowing new information collection tothe Office of Management and Budget(OMB) for review and clearance underthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995(Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).This information collection is publishedto obtain comments from the public. Itwas initially published as a proposedcollection on April 28, 2000. Nocomments relating to the informationcollection were received within the 60day comment period.DATES: Comments will be accepted untilAugust 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: Interested parties areinvited to submit written comments toNCUA Clearance Officer or OMBReviewer listed below:

Clearance Officer: Mr. James L.Baylen (703) 518–6411, National CreditUnion Administration, 1775 DukeStreet, Alexandria, Virginia 22314–3428, Fax No. 703–518–6433, E-mail:[email protected].

OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt(202) 395–7860, Office of Managementand Budget, Room 10226, NewExecutive Office Building, Washington,DC 20503.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Copies of the information collectionrequests, with applicable supportingdocumentation, may be obtained bycalling the: NCUA Clearance Officer,James L. Baylen, (703) 518–6411. It isalso available on the following website:www.NCUA.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposalfor the following collection ofinformation:

OMB Number: New.Form Number: N/A.Type of Review: New.Title: Office of Community

Development Credit Unions AnnualSurvey Report.

Respondents: Certain low-incomedesignated credit unions.

Estimated No. of Respondents/Recordkeepers: 300.

Estimated Burden Hours PerResponse: 30 minutes.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.Estimated Total Annual Burden

Hours: 150 hours.Estimated Total Annual Cost: N/ABy the National Credit Union

Administration Board on July 25, 2000.Becky Baker,Secretary of the Board.[FR Doc. 00–19294 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7535–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–400]

Carolina Power & Light Company;(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant,Unit 1); Exemption

I. Carolina Power & Light Company(CP&L or the licensee) is the holder ofFacility Operating License No. NPF–63,which authorizes operation of theShearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant,Unit 1 (HNP). The facility consists ofone pressurized-water reactor located atthe licensee’s site in Wake and ChathamCounties, North Carolina. The licenseprovides, among other things, that thelicensee is subject to all rules,regulations, and orders of the NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC, theCommission) now or hereafter in effect.

II. Title 10 of the Code of FederalRegulations (10 CFR) Part 50, AppendixG requires that pressure-temperature (P–T) limits be established for reactorpressure vessels (RPVs) during normaloperation, and hydrostatic pressure orleak testing conditions. Specifically, 10CFR Part 50, Appendix G states that‘‘[t]he appropriate requirements on* * * the pressure-temperature limitsand minimum permissible temperaturemust be met for all conditions.’’Appendix G of 10 CFR Part 50 specifiesthat the requirements for these limits arethe American Society of MechanicalEngineers (ASME) Code, Section XI,Appendix G Limits. Both 10 CFR Part50, Appendix G and the ASME Coderequire that the effects of neutron



irradiation on the material properties ofthe RPV be considered. RegulatoryGuide (RG) 1.99, Revision 2, ‘‘RadiationEmbrittlement of Reactor VesselMaterials,’’ dated May 1988, provides anacceptable method to account for theseeffects.

To address provisions of amendmentsto the technical specifications (TS) P–Tlimits and low temperature overpressureprotection (LTOP) system setpoints, thelicensee requested in its submittal datedApril 12, 2000, as amended by letterdated June 2, 2000, that the staff exemptHNP from application of specificrequirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Section50.60(a) and Appendix G, and substituteuse of ASME Code Case N–640. CodeCase N–640 permits the use of analternate reference fracture toughness(KIC fracture toughness curve instead ofKla fracture toughness curve) for reactorvessel materials in determining the P–Tlimits and LTOP setpoints. Since the KIC

fracture toughness curve shown inASME Section XI, Appendix A, FigureA–2200–1 (the KIC fracture toughnesscurve) provides greater allowablefracture toughness than thecorresponding KIa fracture toughnesscurve of ASME Section XI, Appendix G,Figure G–2210–1 (the KIa fracturetoughness curve), using Code Case N–640 for establishing the P–T limits andLTOP setpoints would be lessconservative than the methodologycurrently endorsed by 10 CFR Part 50,Appendix G and, therefore, anexemption to apply the Code Casewould be required by 10 CFR 50.60. Itshould be noted that although CodeCase N–640 was incorporated into theASME Code recently, an exemption isstill needed because the proposed P–Tlimits and LTOP setpoints (excludingCode Case N–640) are based on the 1989edition of the ASME Code.

The proposed amendment will reviseboth the P–T limits of TS 3/4.4.9.2related to the heatup and cooldown ofthe reactor coolant system (RCS), andthe LTOP setpoints of TS 3/4.4.9.4, foroperation to 36 effective full-poweryears (EFPYs).

The licensee has proposed anexemption to allow use of ASME CodeCase N–640 in conjunction with ASMESection XI, 10 CFR 50.60(a) and 10 CFRPart 50, Appendix G, to determine P–Tlimits and LTOP setpoints.

The proposed amendment to revisethe P–T limits and LTOP setpoints forHNP relies in part on the requestedexemption. These revised P–T limitsand LTOP setpoints have beendeveloped using the KIC fracturetoughness curve, in lieu of the Kla

fracture toughness curve, as the lower

bound for fracture toughness of the RPVmaterials.

Use of the KIC curve in determiningthe lower bound fracture toughness inthe development of P–T operating limitcurves and LTOP setpoints is moretechnically correct than use of the KIa

curve since the rate of loading during aheatup or cooldown is slow and is morerepresentative of a static condition thana dynamic condition. The KIC curveappropriately implements the use ofstatic initiation fracture toughnessbehavior to evaluate the controlledheatup and cooldown process of areactor vessel. The staff has required useof the conservatism of the KIa curvesince 1974, when the curve was adoptedby the ASME Code. This conservatismwas initially necessary due to thelimited knowledge of the fracturetoughness of RPV materials at that time.Since 1974, additional knowledge hasbeen gained about RPV materials, whichdemonstrates that the lower bound onfracture toughness provided by the KIa

curve greatly exceeds the margin ofsafety required to protect the publichealth and safety from potential RPVfailure. In addition, P–T curves andLTOP setpoints based on the KIC curvewill enhance overall plant safety byopening the P–T operating window,with the greatest safety benefit in theregion of low temperature operations.

Since an unnecessarily reduced P–Toperating window can reduce operatorflexibility without just basis,implementation of the proposed P–Tcurves and LTOP setpoints as allowedby ASME Code Case N–640 may resultin enhanced safety during critical plantoperational periods, specifically heatupand cooldown conditions. Thus,pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), theunderlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.60 andAppendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 willcontinue to be served.

In summary, the ASME Section XI,Appendix G, procedure wasconservatively developed based on thelevel of knowledge existing in 1974concerning RPV materials and theestimated effects of operation. Since1974, the level of knowledge about thesetopics has been greatly expanded. TheNRC staff concurs that this increasedknowledge permits relaxation of theASME Section XI, Appendix Grequirements by application of ASMECode Case N–640, while maintaining,pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), theunderlying purpose of the NRCregulations to ensure an acceptablemargin of safety.

III. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, theCommission may, upon application byany interested person or upon its owninitiative, grant exemptions from the

requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, when(1) the exemptions are authorized bylaw, will not present an undue risk topublic health or safety, and areconsistent with the common defenseand security; and (2) when specialcircumstances are present. The staffaccepts the licensee’s determination thatexemption would be required toapprove the use of Code Case N–640.The staff examined the licensee’srationale to support the exemptionrequests and concurred that the use ofthe Code case would meet theunderlying intent of these regulations.Based upon a consideration of theconservatism that is explicitlyincorporated into the methodologies of10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G; AppendixG of the Code; and Regulatory Guide1.99, Revision 2, the staff concludes thatapplication of the Code case asdescribed would provide an adequatemargin of safety against brittle failure ofthe RPV. This conclusion is alsoconsistent with the determinations thatthe staff has reached for other licenseesunder similar conditions based on thesame considerations. Therefore, the staffconcludes that requesting an exemptionunder the special circumstances of 10CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) is appropriate andthat the methodology of Code Case N–640 may be used to revise the P–T limitsand LTOP setpoints for HNP.

IV. Accordingly, the Commission hasdetermined that, pursuant to 10 CFR50.12(a), the exemption is authorized bylaw, will not endanger life or propertyor common defense and security, and is,otherwise, in the public interest.Therefore, the Commission herebygrants Carolina Power & Light Companyan exemption from the requirements of10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.60(a) and 10CFR Part 50, Appendix G, for HNP.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, theCommission has determined that thegranting of the exemption will not resultin any significant effect on the qualityof the environment (65 FR 45628).

This exemption is effective uponissuance.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26 dayof July 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John A. Zwolinski,Director, Division of Licensing ProjectManagement, Office of Nuclear ReactorRegulation.[FR Doc. 00–19391 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]





[Docket No. 50–286]

Power Authority of the State of NewYork Indian Point Nuclear GeneratingUnit No. 3; Issuance of Director’sDecision Under 10 CFR 2.206

By letter dated February 10, 2000, Mr.David A. Lochbaum, on behalf of theUnion of Concerned Scientists(Petitioner), pursuant to Section 2.206 ofTitle 10 of the Code of FederalRegulations (10 CFR 2.206), requestedthat the U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission (Commission or NRC) takeaction with regard to the Indian PointNuclear Generating Unit No. 3 (IP3),owned and operated by the PowerAuthority of the State of New York(PASNY). The Petitioner requested thatthe NRC order PASNY to assess thecorrective action process and the workenvironment at IP3 and to take timelyactions to remedy any deficiencies itmay identify.

The Director of the Office of NuclearReactor Regulation has addressed thetechnical concerns provided by thePetitioner. However, the Petitioner’srequest for the staff to take enforcementaction was not granted for the reasonsthat are explained in the ‘‘Director’sDecision Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206’’(DD–00–03). The complete text of theDirector’s Decision is available forpublic inspection at the Commission’sPublic Document Room located in theGelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,Washington, DC., and will be accessibleelectronically from the agencywidedocuments access and managementsystem (ADAMS) public librarycomponent on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov (the electronic readingroom).

A copy of the Decision will be filedwith the Secretary of the Commissionfor the Commission’s review inaccordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c) of theCommission’s regulations. As providedfor by this regulation, the Decision willconstitute the final action of theCommission 25 days after the date ofissuance of the Decision unless theCommission, on its own motion,institutes a review of the Decisionwithin that time.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th dayof July 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.Samuel J. Collins,Director,, Office of Nuclear ReactorRegulation.[FR Doc. 00–19392 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 7590–01–P



AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: NuclearRegulatory Commission.DATES: Weeks of July 31, August 7, 14,21, 28, and September 4, 2000.PLACE: Commissioners’ ConferenceRoom, 11555 Rockville Pike, RockvilleMaryland.STATUS: Public and Closed.MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Week of July 31

There are no meetings scheduled forthe Week of July 31.

Week of August 7—Tentative

There are no meetings scheduled forthe Week of August 7.


Tuesday, August 159:25 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public

Meeting) (If necessary)9:30 a.m. Briefing on NRC International

Activities (Public Meeting) (Contact:Ron Hauber, 301–415–2344)This meeting will be webcast live at

the Web address—www.nrc.gov/live.html


Monday, August 211:55 p.m. Affirmation Section (Public

Meeting) (If necessary)


There are no meetings scheduled forthe Week of August 28.

Week of September 4—Tentative

There are no meetings scheduled forthe Week of September 4.

*THE SCHEDULE FOR COMMISSIONMEETINGS IS SUBJECT TO CHANGEON SHORT NOTICE. TO VERIFY THESTATUS OF MEETINGS CALL(RECORDING)—(301) 415–1292.CONTACT PERSON FOR MOREINFORMATION: Bill Hill (301) 415–1661.* * * * *ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: By a vote of 5–0 on July 25, the Commissiondetermined pursuant to U.S.C. 552b(e)and § 9.107(a) of the Commission’s rulesthat ‘‘Affirmation of (a) Final Rule toAmend 10 CFR Part 70, DomesticLicensing of Special Nuclear Materialand (b) Final Rule: 10 CFR Part 72—Clarification and Addition ofFlexibility’’ be held on July 25, and onless than one week’s notice to thepublic.* * * * *

The NRC Commission MeetingSchedule can be found on the Internetat: http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/schedule.htm* * * * *

This notice is distributed by mail toseveral hundred subscribers; if you nolonger wish to receive it, or would liketo be added to it, please contact theOffice of the Secretary, Attn: OperationsBranch, Washington, D.C. 20555 (301–415–1661). In addition, distribution ofthis meeting notice over the Internetsystem is available. If you are interestedin receiving this Commission meetingschedule electronically, please sent anelectronic message to [email protected] [email protected].

Dated: July 28, 2000.William M. Hill, Jr.,SECY Tracking Officer, Office of theSecretary.[FR Doc. 00–19540 Filed 7–28–00; 2:16 pm]BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended;Revisions to Existing Systems ofRecords

AGENCY: Social Security Administration(SSA).ACTION: Revision to existing systems ofrecords.

SUMMARY: In accordance with thePrivacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)), we areissuing public notice of a revision toSSA’s special procedure for providingindividuals notification of, or access to,their medical records in SSA’spossession when direct access to therecords may have an adverse affect onthe individual to whom the recordpertains. The revised procedure isapplicable to 28 of SSA’s systems ofrecords. The revised procedure is theresult of a Seventh Circuit decisioninvalidating SSA’s regulation on accessto medical records. See 20 CFR 401.55.Thus, we are changing the ‘‘NotificationProcedure’’ and ‘‘Record AccessProcedures’’ sections in each system ofrecords notice to conform to the SeventhCircuit’s decision.

We invite public comment on thisproposal.DATES: The proposed revisions willbecome effective August 1, 2000.ADDRESSES: Interested individuals maycomment on this publication by writingto the SSA Privacy Officer, SocialSecurity Administration, 3–F–1Operations Building, 6401 SecurityBoulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235–6401. All comments received will be



available for public inspection at theabove address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.Pamela McLaughlin, Social InsuranceProgram Specialist, Social SecurityAdministration, Room 3–C–2Operations Building, 6401 SecurityBoulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235–6401, telephone (410) 965–3677.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Discussion of Revision

On June 13, 2000, in Bavido v. Apfel,No. 98–4046, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS13547, the Seventh Circuit held that thespecial procedure in the Social SecurityAdministration’s (SSA’s) regulations forproviding individuals access to theirmedical records through a designatedrepresentative is invalid. See 20 CFR401.55(b)(ii). Prior to the SeventhCircuit’s decision, the special procedurerequired individuals requestingnotification of, or access to, theirmedical records to designate aresponsible representative to receive therecord. The special procedures allowedthe designated representative to use hisor her discretion to withhold all or aportion of an individual’s medicalrecord. The Seventh Circuit held thatthe procedure was inconsistent with thePrivacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) because itrequires an individual to designate arepresentative who ultimately hascomplete discretion to disclose or towithhold the requested information.Although the court invalidated thisportion of the regulation, it recognizedthat an agency may have a specialprocedure for access to sensitivemedical records, such as psychologicalrecords, but the procedure must assurethe ultimate disclosure of the records tothe requesting individual.

As a result of the court’s decision,SSA is revising the Agency’s specialprocedure regarding providingindividuals access to their medicalrecords. The revised special procedurewill still require individuals requestingaccess to medical records to designate aresponsible representative to receive themedical records if the Agencydetermines that direct access mayadversely affect the individual.However, the responsible representativechosen by the subject of the medicalrecord(s) must ultimately provide all ofthe records to him or her. Therepresentative cannot use discretion towithhold any portion of the records.The revised special procedure found inthe ‘‘Notification Procedure’’ and‘‘Record Access Procedures’’ sections ofeach Privacy Act system notice listedbelow will read as follows:

An individual who requests access tohis or her medical records shall be givendirect access to those records unlessSSA determines that it is likely thatdirect access would adversely affect theindividual. If SSA determines thatdirect access to the medical record(s)would likely adversely affect theindividual, he or she must designate aresponsible representative who iscapable of explaining the contents of themedical record(s) to him and whowould be willing to provide the entirerecord(s) to the individual.

We are not republishing in theirentirety the notices of systems ofrecords to which we are revising thespecial procedures for access to medicalrecords because of the large number ofthose systems of records and the costsof republishing individual notices ofeach one. Instead, we are republishingonly the identification number, and thename of each system, and the volume,page number, and date of the FederalRegister issue in which the systemsnotice was last published. The revisionwill be included in the following SSAsystems notices:

(1) Working File of the AppealsCouncil, 60–0004 (59 FR 46439, dated09/08/94),

(2) Storage of Hearing Records: TapeCassettes, 60–0006 (59 FR 46439, dated09/08/94),

(3) Hearing and Appeals Case ControlSystem, 60–0009 (59 46439, dated 09/08/94),

(4) Quality Review System, 60–0040(59 FR 46439, dated 09/08/94),

(5) Quality Review Case Files, 60–0042 (59 FR 46439, dated 09/08/94),

(6) Disability Determination ServiceProcessing File, 60–0044 (59 FR 46439,dated 09/08/94),

(7) Completed Determination Record-Continuing Disability Determinations,60–0050 (59 FR 46439, dated 09/08/94),

(8) Quality Evaluation Data Records,60–0057 (59 FR 46439, dated 09/08/94),

(9) Public Inquiry CorrespondenceFile, 60–0078 (59 FR 52308, dated 10/17/94),

(10) Claims Folders System, 60–0089(65 FR 13808, dated 03/14/00),

(11) Master Beneficiary Record, 60–0090 (60 FR 52948, dated 10/11/95),

(12) Supplemental Security IncomeRecord and Special Veterans Benefits,60–0103 (65 FR 32142, dated 05/22/00),

(13) Matches of Internal RevenueService and Social SecurityAdministration Data with CensusSurvey Data (Joint SSA/CENSUSStatistics Development Project), 60–0148 (47 FR 45589, dated 10/13/82),

(14) Matches of Internal RevenueService (IRS) and Social SecurityAdministration (SSA) Data (Joint SSA/

Treasury Department, Office of TaxAnalysis, Statistics DevelopmentProject), 60–0149 (47 FR 45589, dated10/13/82),

(15) Continuous Work History Sample(Statistics), 60–0159 (47 FR 45589,dated 10/13/82),

(16) Disability Studies, Surveys,Records and Extracts (Statistics), 60–0196 (47 FR 45589, dated 10/13/82),

(17) Extramural Surveys (Statistics),60–0199 (47 FR 45589, dated 10/13/82),

(18) Retirement and SurvivorsStudies, Surveys, Records and Extracts(Statistics), 60–0200 (47 FR 45589,dated 10/13/82),

(19) Old Age, Survivors and DisabilityBeneficiary and Worker Records andExtracts (Statistics), 60–0202 (47 FR45589, dated 10/13/82),

(20) Supplemental Security IncomeStudies, Surveys, Records and Extracts(Statistics), 60–0203 (47 FR 45589,dated 10/13/82),

(21) Beneficiary, Family andHousehold Surveys, Records andExtracts System (Statistics), 60–0211 (47FR 45589, dated 10/13/82),

(22) Quality Review of Hearing/Appellate Process, 60–0213 (59 FR46439, dated 09/08/94),

(23) Disability Insurance andSupplemental Security IncomeDemonstration Projects andExperiments System, 60–0218 (59 FR46439, dated 09/08/94),

(24) Vocational RehabilitationReimbursement Case Processing System,60–0221 (59 FR 46439, dated 09/08/94),

(25) Plans for Achieving Self-Support(PASS), Management InformationSystem, 60–0255 (formerly 05–009) (61FR 46675, dated 09/04/96),

(26) Vocational Rehabilitation; StateVocational Rehabilitation AgencyInformation (VR SVRA) File, 60–0253(formerly 05–007) (63 FR 7034, dated02/11/98),

(27) Vocational Rehabilitation; SSADisability Beneficiaries/RecipientsEligible for Re-referral to an AlternateVocational Rehabilitation ServiceProvider (VR Re-referral), 60–0254(formerly 05–008) (63 FR 7034, dated02/11/98), and

(28) Social Security Title VIII SpecialVeterans Benefits Claims Developmentand Management Information System,60–0273 (65 FR 13803, dated 03/14/00)

We will amend SSA’s disclosureregulation (20 CFR part 401) to includethe revised special procedure. Pendingamendment of the regulations, we areannouncing the revised specialprocedure via this publication.

II. Effect of Revisions on IndividualRights

The proposed changes will:



(1) Revise SSA’s special proceduresfor access to medical records inaccordance with Bavido v. Apfel;

(2) Clarify that an individual is notrequired to designate a representative inwriting unless the Agency firstdetermines that direct access to thoserecords would adversely affect him; and

(3) Indicate that a designatedrepresentative does not have discretionto withhold the records from theindividual.

Dated: July 26, 2000.Darrell Blevins,SSA Privacy Officer.[FR Doc. 00–19336 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4190–29–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of European Affairs, Office ofEuropean Security and Political Affairs(EUR/RPM)

[Public Notice 3376]

Agency Information CollectionActivities: Proposed Collection;Comment Request

AGENCY: Department of State.ACTION: 60-Day Notice of proposedinformation collection; election observerquestionnaire.

SUMMARY: The Department of State isseeking Office of Management andBudget (OMB) approval for theinformation collection described below.The purpose of this notice is to allow 60days for public comment in the FederalRegister preceding submission to OMB.This process is conducted in accordancewith the Paperwork Reduction Act of1995.

The following summarizes theinformation collection proposalsubmitted to OMB:

Type of Request: Data Collection fromElection Observers

Originating Office: Bureau ofEuropean Affairs, Office of EuropeanSecurity and Political Affairs (EUR/RPM)

Title of Information Collection:Election Observer Questionnaire.

Frequency: Occasionally, linked toelections in certain OSCE ParticipatingStates.

Form Number: None.Respondents: U.S. citizens selected

and funded by the U.S. Department ofState to serve as election observers aspart of OSCE Election ObservationMissions.

Estimated Number of Respondents:100 per year.

Average Hours Per Response: 10minutes per response.

Total Estimated Burden: 1000minutes = 16 hrs 40 minutes.

Public comments are being solicitedto permit the agency to:

• Evaluate whether the proposedinformation collection is necessary forthe proper performance of the functionsof the agency.

• Evaluate the accuracy of theagency’s estimate of the burden of theproposed collection, including thevalidity of the methodology andassumptions used.

• Enhance the quality, utility, andclarity of the information to becollected.

• Minimize the reporting burden onthose who are to respond, includingthrough the use of automated collectiontechniques or other forms of technology.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Public comments, or requests foradditional information, regarding thecollection listed in this notice should bedirected to the OSCE Coordinator,Bureau of European Affairs, Room 6227,U.S. Department of State, Washington,DC 20520 (telephone number 202–736–7290).

Dated: July 19, 2000.Walter E. Andrusyszyn,Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureauof European Affairs, Department of State.[FR Doc. 00–19364 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4710–23–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 3371]

United States-Egypt Science andTechnology Joint Board; Science andTechnology Program for CompetitiveGrants To Support International,Collaborative Projects in Science andTechnology Between U.S. andEgyptian Cooperators

August 1, 2000.AGENCY: U.S. Department of State.ACTION: Notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 1, 2000.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:Vickie Alexander, ProgramAdministrator, U.S.-Egypt Science andTechnology Grants Program, U.S.Embassy, Cairo/ECPO, Unit 64900, Box6, APO AE 09839–4900; phone: 011–(20–2) 797–2925; fax: 011–(20–2) 797–3150; E-mail: [email protected] INFORMATION:

Authority: This program is establishedunder 22 U.S.C. 2656d and the Agreement forScientific and Technological Cooperationbetween the Government of the United Statesof America and the Government of the ArabRepublic of Egypt.

A solicitation for this program willbegin August 1, 2000. This program willprovide modest grants for successfullycompetitive proposals for binationalcollaborative projects and otheractivities submitted by U.S. andEgyptian experts. Projects must help theUnited States and Egypt utilize scienceand apply technology by providingopportunities to exchange ideas,information, skills, and techniques, andto collaborate on scientific andtechnological endeavors of mutualinterest and benefit. Proposals whichfully meet the submission requirementsas outlined in the ProgramAnnouncement will receive peerreviews. Proposals considered forfunding in Fiscal Year 2001 must bepostmarked by November 1, 2000. Allproposals will be considered; however,special consideration will be given toproposals that address priority areasdefined/approved by the Joint Board.These include priorities in the areas ofinformation technology, environmentaltechnologies, biotechnology, standardsand metrology, and manufacturingtechnologies. More information on thesepriorities and copies of the ProgramAnnouncement/Application may beobtained by request.

William R. Gaines,Director, Office of Science and TechnologyCooperation, Bureau of Oceans andInternational Environmental and ScientificAffairs, Department of State, and Chair, U.S.-Egypt S&T Joint Board.[FR Doc. 00–18784 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4710–09–P

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATESTRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/DS–176]

WTO Dispute Settlement ProceedingRegarding United States of America—Section 211 of the Department ofCommerce Appropriations Act, 1999

AGENCY: Office of the United StatesTrade Representative.ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Office of the UnitedStates Trade Representative (‘‘USTR’’) isproviding notice of a request for theestablishment of a dispute settlementpanel under the Marrakesh AgreementEstablishing the World TradeOrganization (‘‘WTO’’), requested by theEuropean Communities and theirMember States (the ‘‘EC’’). The EC hasasked that a panel examine whethersection 211 of the ‘‘OmnibusAppropriations Act of 1998’’ [sic] isconsistent with U.S. obligations under



the WTO Agreement on Trade-RelatedAspects of Intellectual Property Rights(‘‘TRIPs Agreement’’). The statutoryprovision to which the EC refers issection 211 of the Department ofCommerce Appropriations Act, 1999, asincluded in Pub. L. 105–277 (‘‘Section211’’). Section 211 concerns theregistration or enforcement, by Cubanentities or their successors in interest, oftrademarks, trade-names, or commercialnames that are substantially similar totrademarks, trade-names, or commercialnames associated with businessesconfiscated without compensation bythe Cuban government, without theconsent of the previous owners of thetrademarks, trade-names or commercialnames.DATES: Although USTR will accept anycomments received during the course ofthe dispute settlement proceedings,comments should be submitted bySeptember 1, 2000, to be assured oftimely consideration by USTR inpreparing its first written submission tothe panel.ADDRESSES: Comments may besubmitted to Sandy McKinzy, LitigationAssistant, Office of Monitoring andEnforcement, Room 122, Attn: Section211, Office of the United States TradeRepresentative, 600 17th Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C., 20508.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L.Daniel Mullaney, Associate GeneralCounsel, at (202) 395–3581.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuantto section 127(b) of the Uruguay RoundAgreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C.3537(b)(1)), USTR is providing noticethat, on June 30, 2000, the EC submitteda request for the establishment of aWTO dispute settlement panel toexamine the consistency of Section 211with the WTO TRIPs Agreement. Undernormal circumstances, the panel, whichwill hold its meetings in Geneva,Switzerland, is expected to issue areport detailing its findings andrecommendations within six to ninemonths after it is established.

Major Issues Raised and Legal Basis ofthe Complaint

In its request for the establishment ofa panel, the EC alleges that threesubstantive provisions of section 211 areinconsistent with the TRIPs Agreement:

1. The EC alleges that Section211(a)(1) limits the right to register orrenew trademarks, trade-names orcommercial names at the United StatesPatent and Trademark Office, inviolation of TRIPs Article 2.1, inconjunction with Article 6 quinquiesA(1) of the Paris Convention for the

Protection of Industrial Property (1967)(‘‘Paris Convention’’), and TRIPs Article15.1. The EC alleges that Section211(a)(1) does this by, in the case oftrademarks, trade-names andcommercial names that are substantiallysimilar to trademarks, trade-names, orcommercial names associated withbusinesses confiscated withoutcompensation by the Cubangovernment, requiring the consent of theoriginal owner or his successor-in-interest of the trademark, trade-name, orcommercial name.

2. The EC alleges that Section211(a)(2)—by providing that U.S. courtsshall not recognize, enforce, orotherwise validate common law orregistration rights asserted bydesignated nationals or their successorsin interest in trademarks, trade-namesand commercial names that aresubstantially similar to trademarks,trade-names and commercial namesassociated with businesses confiscatedwithout compensation by the Cubangovernment—violates TRIPs Art. 2.1, inconjunction with Articles 6 bis (1) and8 of the Paris Convention, and TRIPsArticle 16.1 (which require WTOMembers to provide protection for well-known trademarks and for trade-names).The EC also alleges that Section211(a)(2) violates the TRIPs enforcementprovisions, such as TRIPs Article 42,and the most favored nation andnational treatment provisions of theTRIPs Agreement (TRIPs Articles 3.1,2.1 (in conjunction with Article 2(1) ofthe Paris Convention), and 4).

3. Finally, the EC alleges that Section211(b)—by providing that U.S. courtsshall not recognize, enforce, orotherwise validate treaty rights assertedby designated nationals or theirsuccessors in interest in trademarks,trade-names and commercial names thatare substantially similar to trademarks,trade-names, or commercial namesassociated with businesses confiscatedwithout compensation by the Cubangovernment (unless the original ownerconsents)—violates TRIPs Art. 2.1, inconjunction with Articles 6 bis (1) and8 of the Paris Convention (requiringprotection of well-known trademarksand trade-names) and TRIPs Articles3.1, 4, 16.1, and 42 (provisionsconcerning most favored nationtreatment, national treatment, trademarkrights conferred, and fair and equitableenforcement procedures).

Public Comment: Requirements forSubmissions

Interested persons are invited tosubmit written comments concerningthe issues raised in this dispute.

Comments must be in English andprovided in fifteen copies to SandyMcKinzy at the addressed providedabove. A person requesting thatinformation contained in a commentsubmitted by that person be treated asconfidential business information mustcertify that such information is businessconfidential and would not customarilybe released to the public by thesubmitting person. Confidentialbusiness information must be clearlymarked ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’in a contrasting color ink at the top ofeach page of each copy.

Information or advice contained in acomment submitted, other than businessconfidential information, may bedetermined by USTR to be confidentialin accordance with section 135(g)(2) ofthe Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.2155(g)(2)). If the submitting personbelieves that information or advice mayqualify as such, the submitting person—

(1) Must so designate the informationor advice;

(2) Must clearly mark the material as‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ in acontrasting color ink at the top of eachpage of each copy; and

(3) Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of theinformation of advice. Pursuant tosection 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C.3537(e)), USTR will maintain a file onthis dispute settlement proceeding,accessible to the public, in the USTRReading Room: Room 101, Office of theUnited States Trade Representative, 60017th Street, NW., Washington, DC20508. The public file will include alisting of any comments received byUSTR from the public with respect tothe proceeding, the U.S. submissions tothe panel in the proceeding, thesubmissions, or non-confidentialsummaries of submissions, to the panelreceived from other parties in thedispute, as well as the report of thedispute settlement panel, and, ifapplicable, the report of the AppellateBody. An appointment to review thepublic file (Docket WTO/DS–176,‘‘Section 211’’) made be made by callingBrenda Webb, (202) 395–6186. TheReading Room is open to the publicfrom 9:30 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m.to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

A. Jane Bradley,

Assistant U.S. Trade Representative forMonitoring and Enforcement.[FR Doc. 00–19367 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]




1 On December 31, 1994, CORP leased the Linefrom Southern Pacific Transportation Company(SP). See Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc.—Lease, Operation, and Acquisition Exemption—Southern Pacific Transportation Company, FinanceDocket No. 32567 (ICC notice served Jan. 19, 1995),(STB decision served Feb. 13, 1996). UP acquiredthe Line on February 1, 1998, when SP was mergedinto UP. See Union Pacific Corporation, UnionPacific Railroad Company, and Missouri PacificRailroad Company—Control and Merger—SouthernPacific Rail Corporation, Southern PacificTransportation Company, St. Louis SouthwesternRailway Company, SPCSL Corp., and The Denverand Rio Grande Western Railroad Company, STBFinance Docket No. 32760, Decision No. 44 (STBserved Aug. 12, 1996).



Aviation Rulemaking AdvisoryCommittee Meeting on Air CarrierOperations

AGENCY: Federal AviationAdministration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this noticeto advise the public of a meeting of theFederal Aviation AdministrationAviation Rulemaking AdvisoryCommittee to discuss air carrieroperations issues.

DATES: The meeting will be held onAugust 15, 2000, at 2 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held inConference Rooms 8A and B, FederalOffice Building 10A (the ‘‘FAABuilding’’), 800 Independence Ave.,SW, Washington, DC, 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mark Lawyer, Office of Rulemaking, 800Independence Avenue, SW,Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202)493–4531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuantto section 10(a)(2) of the FederalAdvisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 5 U.S.C. App II), notice is herebygiven of a meeting of the AviationRulemaking Advisory Committee to beheld on August 15, 2000. The agenda forthis meeting will include a report fromthe Airplane Performance WorkingGroup and presentation and request forapproval of work plan by the ExtendedRange Operations of Airplanes (ETOPS)Working Group. Attendance is open tothe interested public but may be limitedby the space available. Members of thepublic must make arrangements inadvance to present oral statements at themeeting or may present writtenstatements to the committee at any time.Arrangements may be made bycontacting the person listed under theheading FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT.

Sign and oral interpretation can bemade available at the meeting, as wellas an assistive listening device, ifrequested 10 calendar days before themeeting.

If you are in need of assistance orrequire a reasonable accommodation forthis event, please contact the personlisted under FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT.

Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on July25, 2000.Gregory L. Michael,Assistant Executive Director for Air CarrierOperations, Aviation Rulemaking AdvisoryCommittee.[FR Doc. 00–19399 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4910–13–M


Surface Transportation Board

[STB Docket Nos. AB–33 (Sub-No. 148X)and AB–515 (Sub-No. 1X)]

Union Pacific Railroad Company—Abandonment Exemption—In CoosCounty, OR and Central Oregon &Pacific Railroad, Inc.—DiscontinuanceExemption—in Coos County, OR

On July 12, 2000, Union PacificRailroad Company (UP) and CentralOregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc. (CORP),jointly filed with the SurfaceTransportation Board a petition under49 U.S.C. 10502 for exemption from theprovisions of 49 U.S.C. 10903. UP seeksto abandon and CORP seeks todiscontinue service over a line ofrailroad extending between milepost785.50 and milepost 786.50 at Coquille,OR, a distance of 1 mile in Coos County,OR (the Line).1 There are no stations onthe Line, which traverses U.S. PostalService Zip Code 97423.

The Line does not contain federallygranted rights-of-way. Anydocumentation in UP’s or CORP’spossession will be made availablepromptly to those requesting it.

The interests of railroad employeeswill be protected by the conditions setforth in Oregon Short Line R. Co.—Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91(1979).

By issuance of this notice, the Boardis instituting an exemption proceedingpursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A finaldecision will be issued by October 30,2000.

Any offer of financial assistanceunder 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due

no later than 10 days after service of adecision granting the petition forexemption. Each offer of financialassistance must be accompanied by a$1,000 filing fee. See 49 CFR1002.2(f)(25).

All interested persons should beaware that following abandonment ofrail service and salvage of the Line, theLine may be suitable for other publicuse, including interim trail use. Anyrequest for a public use condition under49 CFR 1152.28 and any request for trailuse/rail banking under 49 CFR 1152.29will be due no later than 20 days afternotice of the filing of the petition forexemption is published in the FederalRegister. Each trail use request must beaccompanied by a $150 filing fee. See 49CFR 1002.2(f)(27).

All filings in response to this noticemust refer to STB Docket Nos. AB–33(Sub-No. 148X) and AB–515 (Sub-No.1X) and must be sent to: (1) SurfaceTransportation Board, Office of theSecretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 KStreet, N.W., Washington, DC 20423–0001, (2) Karl Morell, Of Counsel, BallJanik LLP, 1455 F Street, N.W., Suite225, Washington, DC 20005, and (3)James P. Gatlin, 1416 Dodge Street #830,Omaha, NE 68179.

Persons seeking further informationconcerning abandonment proceduresmay contact the Board’s Office of PublicServices at (202) 565–1592 or refer tothe full abandonment or discontinuanceregulations at 49 CFR part 1152.Questions concerning environmentalissues may be directed to the Board’sSection of Environmental Analysis(SEA) at (202) 565–1545. [TDD for thehearing impaired is available at 1–800–877–8339.]

An environmental assessment (EA) (orenvironmental impact statement (EIS), ifnecessary) prepared by SEA will beserved upon all parties of record andupon any agencies or other persons whocommented during its preparation. Anyother persons who would like to obtaina copy of the EA (or EIS) may contactSEA. EAs in these abandonmentproceedings normally will be availablewithin 60 days of the filing of thepetition. The deadline for submission ofcomments on the EA will generally bewithin 30 days of its service.

Board decisions and notices areavailable on our website at‘‘WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.’’

Decided: July 24, 2000.By the Board, David M. Konschnik,

Director, Office of Proceedings.Vernon A. Williams,Secretary.[FR Doc. 00–19274 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4915–00–P



DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

Quarterly IRS Interest Rates Used inCalculating Interest on OverdueAccounts and Refunds on CustomsDuties

AGENCY: Customs Service, Treasury.ACTION: General notice.

SUMMARY: This notice advises the publicof the quarterly Internal RevenueService interest rates used to calculateinterest on overdue accounts(underpayments) and refunds(overpayments) of Customs duties. Forthe quarter beginning July 1, 2000, theinterest rates for overpayments will be8 percent for corporations and 9 percentfor non-corporations, and the interestrate for underpayments will be 9percent. This notice is published for theconvenience of the importing publicand Customs personnel.EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2000.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Ronald Wyman, Accounting ServicesDivision, Accounts Receivable Group,6026 Lakeside Boulevard, Indianapolis,

Indiana 46278, (317) 298–1200,extension 1349.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1505 andTreasury Decision 85–93, published inthe Federal Register on May 29, 1985(50 FR 21832), the interest rate paid onapplicable overpayments orunderpayments of Customs duties shallbe in accordance with the InternalRevenue Code rate established under 26U.S.C. 6621 and 6622. Section 6621 wasamended (at paragraph (a)(1)(B) by theInternal Revenue Service Restructuringand Reform Act of 1998, Pub.L. 105–206, 112 Stat. 685) to provide differentinterest rates applicable tooverpayments: one for corporations andone for non-corporations. The interestrate applicable to underpayments is notso bifurcated.

The interest rates are based on theshort-term Federal rate and determinedby the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) onbehalf of the Secretary of the Treasuryon a quarterly basis. The rates effectivefor a quarter are determined during thefirst-month period of the previousquarter.

In Revenue Ruling 2000–30 (see,2000–25 IRB 1262, dated June 19, 2000),the IRS determined the rates of interestfor the fourth quarter of fiscal year (FY)2000 (the period of July 1–September30, 2000). The interest rate paid to theTreasury for underpayments will be theshort-term Federal rate (6%) plus threepercentage points (3%) for a total ofnine percent (9%). For corporateoverpayments, the rate is the Federalshort-term rate (6%) plus twopercentage points (2%) for a total ofeight percent (8%). For overpaymentsmade by non-corporations, the rate isthe Federal short-term rate (6%) plusthree percentage points (3%) for a totalof nine percent (9%). These interestrates are subject to change the firstquarter of FY–2001 (the period ofOctober 1–December 31, 2000).

For the convenience of the importingpublic and Customs personnel thefollowing list of IRS interest rates used,covering the period from before July of1974 to date, to calculate interest onoverdue accounts and refunds ofCustoms duties, is published insummary format.

Beginning date Ending dateUnderpay-

ments(percent)

Overpay-ments

(percent)

Corporate over-payments

(Eff. 1–1–99(percent)

Prior to:070174 .............................................................................................................. 063075 6 6 ............................070175 .............................................................................................................. 013176 9 9 ............................020176 .............................................................................................................. 013178 7 7 ............................020178 .............................................................................................................. 013180 6 6 ............................020180 .............................................................................................................. 013182 12 12 ............................020182 .............................................................................................................. 123182 20 20 ............................010183 .............................................................................................................. 063083 16 16 ............................070183 .............................................................................................................. 123184 11 11 ............................010185 .............................................................................................................. 063085 13 13 ............................070185 .............................................................................................................. 123185 11 11 ............................010186 .............................................................................................................. 063086 10 10 ............................070186 .............................................................................................................. 123186 9 9 ............................010187 .............................................................................................................. 093087 9 8 ............................100187 .............................................................................................................. 123187 10 9 ............................010188 .............................................................................................................. 033188 11 10 ............................040188 .............................................................................................................. 093088 10 9 ............................100188 .............................................................................................................. 033189 11 10 ............................040189 .............................................................................................................. 093089 12 11 ............................100189 .............................................................................................................. 033191 11 10 ............................040191 .............................................................................................................. 123191 10 9 ............................010192 .............................................................................................................. 033192 9 8 ............................040192 .............................................................................................................. 093092 8 7 ............................100192 .............................................................................................................. 063094 7 6 ............................070194 .............................................................................................................. 093094 8 7 ............................100194 .............................................................................................................. 033195 9 8 ............................040195 .............................................................................................................. 063095 10 9 ............................070195 .............................................................................................................. 033196 9 8 ............................040196 .............................................................................................................. 063096 8 7 ............................070196 .............................................................................................................. 033198 9 8 ............................

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 00:09 Aug 01, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 01AUN1


Beginning date Ending dateUnderpay-

ments(percent)

Overpay-ments

(percent)

Corporate over-payments

(Eff. 1–1–99(percent)

040198 .............................................................................................................. 123198 8 7 ............................010199 .............................................................................................................. 033199 7 7 6040199 .............................................................................................................. 033100 8 8 7040100 .............................................................................................................. 093000 9 9 8

Dated: July 27, 2000.Raymond W. Kelly,Commissioner of Customs.[FR Doc. 00–19400 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4820–02–P


Internal Revenue Service

Proposed Collection; CommentRequest for Revenue Procedure 97–33

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),Treasury.ACTION: Notice and request forcomments.

SUMMARY: The Department of theTreasury, as part of its continuing effortto reduce paperwork and respondentburden, invites the general public andother Federal agencies to take thisopportunity to comment on proposedand/or continuing informationcollections, as required by thePaperwork Reduction Act of 1995,Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS issoliciting comments concerningRevenue Procedure 97–33, ElectronicFederal Tax Payment System (EFTPS).DATES: Written comments should bereceived on or before October 2, 2000 tobe assured of consideration.ADDRESSES: Direct all written commentsto Garrick R. Shear, Internal RevenueService, room 5244, 1111 ConstitutionAvenue NW., Washington, DC 20224.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Requests for additional information orcopies of the revenue procedure shouldbe directed to Carol Savage, (202) 622–3945, Internal Revenue Service, room5242, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW.,Washington, DC 20224.SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Electronic Federal Tax PaymentSystem (EFTPS).

OMB Number: 1545–1546.Revenue Procedure Number: Revenue

Procedure 97–33.

Abstract: The Electronic Federal TaxPayment System (EFTPS) is anelectronic remittance processing systemfor making federal tax deposits (FTDs)and federal tax payments (FTPs).Revenue Procedure 97–33 providestaxpayers with information andprocedures that will help them toelectronically make FTDs and taxpayments through EFTPS.

Current Actions: There are no changesbeing made to the revenue procedure atthis time.

Type of Review: Extension of acurrently approved collection.

Affected Public: Individuals orhouseholds, business or other for-profitorganizations, not-for-profit institutions,farms, and Federal, state, local or tribalgovernments.


Estimated Time Per Respondent: 30minutes.

Estimated Total Annual BurdenHours: 278,622.

The following paragraph applies to allof the collections of information coveredby this notice:

An agency may not conduct orsponsor, and a person is not required torespond to, a collection of informationunless the collection of informationdisplays a valid OMB control number.Books or records relating to a collectionof information must be retained as longas their contents may become materialin the administration of any internalrevenue law. Generally, tax returns andtax return information are confidential,as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.

Request for Comments: Commentssubmitted in response to this notice willbe summarized and/or included in therequest for OMB approval. Allcomments will become a matter ofpublic record. Comments are invited on:(a) Whether the collection ofinformation is necessary for the properperformance of the functions of theagency, including whether theinformation shall have practical utility;(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate

of the burden of the collection ofinformation; (c) ways to enhance thequality, utility, and clarity of theinformation to be collected; (d) ways tominimize the burden of the collection ofinformation on respondents, includingthrough the use of automated collectiontechniques or other forms of informationtechnology; and (e) estimates of capitalor start-up costs and costs of operation,maintenance, and purchase of servicesto provide information.

Approved: July 26, 2000.Garrick R. Shear,IRS Reports Clearance Officer.[FR Doc. 00–19394 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4830–01–U



Approved Motor Fuel DistributionTerminals

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, (IRS),Treasury

ACTION: Notice of Issuance of TerminalControl Numbers for Approved MotorFuel Terminals

SUMMARY: Internal Revenue Service(IRS) developed and is publishing inthis issue of the Federal Register,Terminal Control Numbers (TCN) toclearly communicate to the motor fuelindustry and other interested partiessuch as state excise taxing authorities,the motor fuel terminal facilities thatmeet the definitions of Internal RevenueCode Section 4081 and the regulationsthereunder. The IRS intends to use theterminal numbers to coordinate dyedfuel compliance activities and excisefuel information reporting systems. IRSencourages states to adopt and use thenumbers for motor fuel informationreporting where appropriate. This list ispublished under the authority ofInternal Revenue Code Section6103(k)(7).

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 00:09 Aug 01, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01AUN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 01AUN1


What Is a Terminal Control Number(TCN)?

A terminal control number is anumber that identifies an approvedterminal in the bulk transfer/terminalsystem. A taxable fuel registrant (Letterof Registration for Tax Free Transactionswith a suffix code -S-) will be issued aTCN for each physical location. Onlyone TCN will be assigned per terminallocation per terminal operator.

What Is An Approved Terminal?

Approved motor fuel terminals, asdefined by Internal Revenue CodeSection 4081 and the regulationsthereunder, receive taxable fuel via apipeline, ship, or barge, deliver taxablefuel across a rack or other non-bulkdelivery system and are operated by aterminal operator who is properlyregistered in good standing with theIRS. Only those taxpayers, who are

registered with the IRS on registrationfor Tax-Free Transactions Form 637(637 Registration) with a suffix code of‘‘S’’ may operate an approved terminal.Each TCN identifies a unique physicallocation in the bulk transport/deliverysystem and is therefore independent ofthe registered operator.

When Does a Terminal Operator Needto Notify IRS of Changes?

A terminal operator must notify theIRS for any of the following changes:

—Terminal ownership or operator changes;or

—a new terminal is opened; or—a terminal ceases operation.

How Should Notification be Made?Notify the IRS District Office where

the Form 637 is issued of the changeand by FAX the IRS TCN Coordinator at:Internal Revenue Service OP:E:Ex Unit 35Attn: TCN Coordinator (859) 292-7128 FAX.

Changes to the terminal status orother information will be published bythe Excise Program Office in the IRSHeadquarters Office. Notification isrequired in order to retain approvedstatus of the terminal and 637Registration. Failure to notify of changesmay lead to suspension or revocation ofthe approved status of the terminal or637 Registration of the terminaloperator. Changes or suspensions ofapproved status will be published asneeded.

If you have any questions regardingthe approved terminals or the listing,you may contact: Terminal ControlNumber Coordinator—Barbara Rugglesat (859) 292-2758 or Mary Burwell at(202) 622-4379 (not toll-free numbers).


W. Ricky Stiff,Acting National Director, Specialty Taxes.

Terminal Number Terminal Name Terminal Address City State Zip Code

T-92-AK-4500 ..... Chevron Anchorage ........................ 459 W Bluff Rd ............................... Anchorage ..................... AK 99501T-92-AK-4501 ..... MAPCO Alaska Anchorage ............ 1076 Ocean Dock Road ................. Anchorage ..................... AK 99501T-92-AK-4502 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1601 Tidewater ............................... Anchorage ..................... AK 99501T-92-AK-4503 ..... MAPCO Alaska North Pole ............ 1150 H & H Lane ............................ North Pole ...................... AK 99705T-92-AK-4504 ..... Tesoro-Anchorage .......................... 1522 Anchorage Port Rd ................ Anchorage ..................... AK 99501T-92-AK-4505 ..... Tesoro Alaska Petroleum Co .......... Mile 22.5 Kenai Spur Road ............ Kenai .............................. AK 99611T-63-AL-2300 ...... Amoco Oil Birmingham ................... 1600 Mims Ave. Southwest ............ Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2301 ...... Chevron Birmingham ...................... 2400 28th St Southwest ................. Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2302 ...... CITGO Birmingham ........................ 2200 25th St Southwest ................. Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2303 ...... Crown Central Birmingham ............ 2500 Nabors Road ......................... Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2304 ...... Southeast Terminal Montgomery ... Hwy 31 North .................................. Montgomery ................... AL 36108T-63-AL-2305 ...... B P Oil Co Birmingham .................. 1600 Mims Ave SW ........................ Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2306 ...... MAPLLC Birmingham ..................... 2704 28th St Southwest ................. Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2307 ...... Phillips 66 Birmingham ................... 2635 Balsam Avenue ..................... Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2308 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 2601 Wilson Road .......................... Birmingham .................... AL 35221T-63-AL-2309 ...... Southern Facilities Birmingham ...... 2400 Nabors Road ......................... Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2310 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 2529 28th Street SW ...................... Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2312 ...... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 1600 Mims Ave SW ........................ Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-63-AL-2314 ...... Amoco Oil Mobile ........................... Hwy. 90 and 98 .............................. Mobile ............................ AL 36601T-63-AL-2315 ...... Coastal Fuels Mobile ...................... Highway 98, Blakely Island ............ Mobile ............................ AL 36652T-63-AL-2316 ...... Coastal Mobile Chickasaw ............. 200 Viaduct Rd ............................... Chickasaw ..................... AL 36611T-63-AL-2322 ...... Amoco Oil Montgomery .................. 3560 Well Rd .................................. Montgomery ................... AL 36108T-63-AL-2323 ...... Chevron USA Montgomery ............. 200 Hunter Loop Road ................... Montgomery ................... AL 31608T-63-AL-2324 ...... B P Oil Mongtomery ....................... Access Highway 31 North .............. Montgomery ................... AL 36108T-63-AL-2325 ...... MAPLLC Montgomery .................... 320 Hunter Loop Rural Rt 6 ........... Montgomery ................... AL 36125T-63-AL-2326 ...... S T Services Montgomery .............. 520 Hunter Loop Road ................... Montgomery ................... AL 36108T-63-AL-2327 ...... Southern Facilities Montgomery ..... 420 Hunter Loop Road ................... Montgomery ................... AL 36108T-63-AL-2329 ...... Hunt Refining Co ............................ 1855 Fairlawn RD ........................... Tuscaloosa .................... AL 35401T-63-AL-2330 ...... S T Services Moundville ................. 872 Second Ave. ............................ Moundville ...................... AL 35474T-63-AL-2333 ...... Murphy Oil USA—Oxford ............... 2625 Highway 78 East ................... Anniston ......................... AL 36201T-63-AL-2334 ...... Shell Chemical Co.—Saraland ....... 400 Industrial Parkway ................... Saraland ........................ AL 36571T-63-AL-2335 ...... Murphy Sheffield ............................. 136 Blackwell Road ........................ Sheffield ......................... AL 35660T-63-AL-2336 ...... BP OIL MOBILE ............................. 101 Bay Bridge Rd ......................... Mobile ............................ AL 36610T-72-AL-2338 ...... EOTT Energy Corp—Mobile ........... Magazine Point ............................... Mobile ............................ AL 36610T-72-AL-2339 ...... Midstream Fuel Service-Mobile ...... Hwy 90/98 Blakeley Island ............. Mobile ............................ AL 36618T-72-AL-2340 ...... Radcliff Economy Marine-Mobile .... 5 South Water St Extension ........... Mobile ............................ AL 36652T-72-AL-2341 ...... SouthEast Terminals ...................... Highway 31 North ........................... Montgomery ................... AL 36108T-72-AL-2343 ...... Allied Energy Corporation ............... 2700 Ishkooda Wenonah Rd. ......... Birmingham .................... AL 35211T-72-AL-2344 ...... Goodway Refining, LLC .................. 315 Belleville Av. ............................ Brewton .......................... AL 36427T-71-AR-2451 ..... Lion Oil El Dorado .......................... 1000 McHenry ................................ El Dorado ....................... AR 71730T-71-AR-2453 ..... Williams Pipe Line Fort Smith ........ 8101 Hwy 71 ................................... Fort Smith ...................... AR 72903T-71-AR-2454 ..... TEPPCO Helena ............................. 826 Old Highway ............................ Helena ........................... AR 72342T-71-AR-2456 ..... Transmontaigne N. Little Rock ....... 2725 Central Airport Rd .................. North Little Rock ............ AR 72117T-71-AR-2457 ..... Exxon USA North Little Rock ......... 2724 Central Airport Rd .................. North Little Rock ............ AR 72117T-71-AR-2458 ..... La Gloria Oil N Little Rock .............. 2626 Central Airport Road .............. North Little Rock ............ AR 72117




T-71-AR-2459 ..... Transmontaigne Little Rock ............ 3222 Central Airport Rd .................. North Little Rock ............ AR 72117T-71-AR-2460 ..... Cross Oil Refining& Mktg. Inc. ....... 484 E. 6th Street ............................ Smackover ..................... AR 71762T-71-AR-2463 ..... Truman Arnold West Memphis ....... South of 8th Street ......................... West Memphis ............... AR 72303T-71-AR-2464 ..... Arkansas Terminaling & Trading .... 2207 Central Airport Rd. ................. North Little Rock ............ AR 72117T-71-AR-2467 ..... Razorback Terminaling ................... 2801 West Hwy 102 Rt 2 ............... Rogers ........................... AR 72756T-86-AZ-4300 ..... Caljet Phoenix ................................. 125 N 53rd Ave .............................. Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4301 ..... Chevron USA Phoenix .................... 5110 West Madison ........................ Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4303 ..... Pro Petroleum Phoenix ................... 408 S 43rd Avenue ......................... Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4304 ..... SFPP LP Phoenix ........................... 49 North 53rd Ave Van Buren ........ Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4305 ..... Mobil Oil Phoenix ............................ 24 South 51st Ave .......................... Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4306 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 5525 West Van Buren .................... Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4307 ..... Tosco Corporation .......................... 10 South 51st Avenue .................... Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-86-AZ-4308 ..... Chevron Products—Tucson ............ 3865 East Refinery Way ................. Tucson ........................... AZ 85713T-86-AZ-4309 ..... S T Services Tucson ...................... 3605 South Dodge .......................... Tucson ........................... AZ 85713T-86-AZ-4310 ..... SFPP LP Tucson ............................ 3841 East Refinery Way ................. Tucson ........................... AZ 85713T-86-AZ-4312 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 3735 South Dodge Boulevard ........ Tucson ........................... AZ 85713T-86-AZ-4313 ..... ARCO Phoenix ............................... 5333 W Van Buren St .................... Phoenix .......................... AZ 85043T-33-CA-4750 ..... Mobil Oil Atwood ............................. 1477 Jefferson ................................ Anaheim ......................... CA 92807T-33-CA-4751 ..... GATX Tank Storage ....................... 2000 East Sepulveda Blvd. ............ Carson ........................... CA 90810T-33-CA-4752 ..... Tosco Corporation Wilmington ....... 1660 W Anaheim St ....................... Wilmington ..................... CA 90744T-33-CA-4753 ..... ARCO Colton .................................. 2395 S Riverside Avenue ............... Bloomington ................... CA 92316T-33-CA-4754 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners #4 2305 S Riverside Avenue ............... Bloomington ................... CA 92316T-33-CA-4756 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners #2 2297 South Riverside Avenue ........ Bloomington ................... CA 92316T-33-CA-4757 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners #1 2359 S. Riverside Avenue .............. Bloomington ................... CA 92316T-33-CA-4758 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2307 S. Riverside Ave. ................... Colton ............................ CA 92316T-33-CA-4759 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2237 S. Riverside Avenue .............. Bloomington ................... CA 92316T-33-CA-4760 ..... Tosco Refining Colton .................... 271 E Slover Avenue ...................... Rialto .............................. CA 92376T-33-CA-4761 ..... Calnev Pipe Line Daggett ............... 34277 Daggett-Yermo Road ........... Robert Brown ................. CA 92327T-33-CA-4763 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners ..... 345 W Aten Road ........................... Imperial .......................... CA 92251T-33-CA-4764 ..... ARCO Long Beach ......................... 5905 Paramount Blvd. .................... Long Beach ................... CA 90805T-33-CA-4765 ..... Edington Oil Co. ............................. 2400 E. Artesia Bl. .......................... Long Beach ................... CA 90805T-33-CA-4766 ..... Tosco Corporation Bloomington ..... 2301 S. Riverside ........................... Bloomington ................... CA 92316T-33-CA-4767 ..... Petro-Diamond Terminal Company 1920 Lugger Way ........................... Long Beach ................... CA 90813T-33-CA-4768 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1926 E. Pacific Coast Hwy ............. Wilmington ..................... CA 90744T-33-CA-4769 ..... ARCO Carson ................................. 2149 E. Sepulreda Blvd. ................. Carson ........................... CA 90749T-33-CA-4770 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2101 E. Pacific Coast Hwy ............. Wilmington ..................... CA 90744T-33-CA-4771 ..... Chevron USA Huntington Beach .... 17881 Gothard St. .......................... Huntington Beach .......... CA 92647T-33-CA-4772 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners

LLP.1350 North Main Street .................. Orange ........................... CA 92667

T-33-CA-4773 ..... Chevron USA San Diego ................ 2351 E. Harbor Drive ...................... San Diego ...................... CA 92113T-33-CA-4776 ..... SFPP, LP ........................................ 9950 San Diego Mission Road ....... San Diego ...................... CA 92108T-33-CA-4777 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 9950 San Diego Mission Blvd. ....... San Diego ...................... CA 92108T-33-CA-4778 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 9966 San Diego Mission Rd. .......... San Diego ...................... CA 92108T-33-CA-4779 ..... Chemoil Long Beach ...................... 2365 E. Sepulveda Blvd. ................ Long Beach ................... CA 90810T-33-CA-4780 ..... Westway Terminal—San Pedro ...... Port of LA Berths 70-71 .................. San Pedro ...................... CA 90733T-33-CA-4782 ..... ARCO San Diego ........................... 2295 E. Harbor Drive ...................... San Diego ...................... CA 92113T-33-CA-4783 ..... Mobil Oil San Diego ........................ 9950 San Diego Mission Rd ........... San Diego ...................... CA 92108T-33-CA-4784 ..... ARCO Signal Hill ............................ 2350 Hathaway Drive ..................... Signal Hill ....................... CA 90806T-33-CA-4785 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2457 Redondo Ave. ........................ Signal Hill ....................... CA 90806T-33-CA-4786 ..... Mobil Oil Torrance .......................... 3700 West 190th Street .................. Torrance ........................ CA 90509T-33-CA-4789 ..... Ultramar Inc. Wilmington ................ 2402 E Anaheim St ........................ Wilmington ..................... CA 90744T-68-CA-4600 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners ..... 2570 Hegan Lane ........................... Chico .............................. CA 95927T-68-CA-4601 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners ..... 2590 Hegan Lane ........................... Chico .............................. CA 95928T-68-CA-4603 ..... Valero Refining Company ............... 3410 East Second Street ............... Benicia ........................... CA 94510T-68-CA-4604 ..... Chevron USA Banta ....................... 22888 S. Kasson Rd. ..................... Tracy .............................. CA 95376T-68-CA-4605 ..... Shore Terminals LLC ...................... 90 San Pablo Ave ........................... Crockett ......................... CA 94525T-68-CA-4606 ..... Chevron USA Eureka ..................... 3400 Christie Street ........................ Eureka ........................... CA 95501T-68-CA-4607 ..... Chevron USA Avon ........................ 611 Solano Way ............................. Martinez ......................... CA 94553T-68-CA-4609 ..... ARCO Stockton Terminal ............... 2700 West Washington St .............. Stockton ......................... CA 95203T-68-CA-4610 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1801 Marina Vista ........................... Martinez ......................... CA 94553T-68-CA-4611 ..... Tosco Refining Martinez ................. Solano Way & Waterfront Rd. ........ Martinez ......................... CA 94553T-68-CA-4612 ..... ARCO Sacramento ......................... 1701 S. River Rd ............................ West Sacramento .......... CA 95691T-68-CA-4613 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners ..... 2901 Bradshaw Rd ......................... Rancho Cordova ............ CA 95741T-68-CA-4614 ..... ARCO Richmond ............................ 1306 Canal Blvd ............................. Richmond ....................... CA 94807T-68-CA-4616 ..... Chevron Richmond ......................... 155 Castro St .................................. Richmond ....................... CA 94802T-68-CA-4617 ..... Tosco Corporation Richmond ......... 1300 Canal Blvd ............................. Richmond ....................... CA 94804T-68-CA-4619 ..... IMTT Richmond-CA ........................ 100 Cutting Blvd. ............................ Richmond ....................... CA 94804T-68-CA-4621 ..... Chevron USA Sacramento ............. 2420 Front Street ............................ Sacramento ................... CA 95818T-68-CA-4622 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1509 South River Road .................. West Sacramento .......... CA 95691T-68-CA-4626 ..... S T Services Stockton .................... 2941 Navy Drive ............................. Stockton ......................... CA 95206T-68-CA-4628 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 3515 Navy Dirve ............................. Stockton ......................... CA 95203T-68-CA-4629 ..... Tesoro Refining Mktg Stockton ...... 3003 Navy Drive ............................. Stockton ......................... CA 95205




T-77-CA-4650 ..... Chevron Products Co. .................... 1020 Berryessa Road ..................... San Jose ........................ CA 95133T-77-CA-4651 ..... Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP 4149 South Maple Avenue ............. Fresno ............................ CA 93725T-77-CA-4652 ..... Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP 2150 Kruse Avenue ........................ San Jose ........................ CA 95131T-77-CA-4653 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2165 O’Toole Ave. .......................... San Jose ........................ CA 95131T-77-CA-4654 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 3284 North Ventura Ave. ................ Ventura .......................... CA 93001T-77-CA-4655 ..... Kern Oil & Refining Co. .................. 7724 East Panama Lane ................ Bakersfield ..................... CA 93307T-77-CA-4657 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2436 Fruitvale Avenue .................... Bakersfield ..................... CA 93302T-77-CA-4658 ..... Tesoro Marine Services, Inc. .......... 141 West Hueneme Road .............. Pt. Hueneme .................. CA 93041T-77-CA-4659 ..... Occidental of Elk Hills, Inc. ............. 28590 Hwy. 119 .............................. Tupman .......................... CA 93276T-77-CA-4661 ..... Golden Bear Oil Specialties ........... 1134 Manor ..................................... Oildale ............................ CA 93308T-77-CA-4664 ..... San Joaquin Refining Co., Inc. ....... 3542 Shell St. ................................. Bakersfield ..................... CA 93308T-94-CA-4700 ..... Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners, LP 950 Tunnel Av. ............................... Brisbane ......................... CA 94005T-94-CA-4703 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 135 North Access Road ................. So. San Francisco ......... CA 94080T-94-CA-4705 ..... Shore Terminals LLC ...................... 488 Wright Ave. .............................. Richmond ....................... CA 94802T-95-CA-4800 ..... Chevron USA El Segundo .............. 324 West El Segundo Blvd ............ El Segundo .................... CA 90245T-95-CA-4803 ..... Tosco S. Broadway Los Angeles ... 13500 South Broadway .................. Los Angeles ................... CA 90061T-95-CA-4804 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 8100 Haskell Ave. ........................... Van Nuys ....................... CA 91406T-95-CA-4805 ..... Mobil Oil—Vernon ........................... 2709 East 37th Street ..................... Vernon ........................... CA 90058T-95-CA-4807 ..... ARCO South Gate .......................... 8601 S. Garfield Ave. ..................... South Gate .................... CA 90280T-95-CA-4808 ..... Paramount Petroleum ..................... 8835 Sommerset Blvd. ................... Paramount ..................... CA 90746T-95-CA-4809 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2015 Long Beach Ave. ................... Los Angeles ................... CA 90058T-95-CA-4810 ..... Chevron USA Van Nuys ................. 15359 Oxnard Street ...................... Van Nuys ....................... CA 91411T-95-CA-4811 ..... Chevron USA Montebella ............... 601 South Vail Avenue ................... Montebella ..................... CA 90640T-84-CO-4100 ..... Chase Pipeline Aurora .................... 15000 E. Smith Rd. ........................ Aurora ............................ CO 80011T-84-CO-4101 ..... Colorado Refining Denver .............. 5800 Brighton Boulevard ................ Commerce City .............. CO 80022T-84-CO-4102 ..... Conoco Denver ............................... 5575 Brighton Boulevard ................ Commerce City .............. CO 80022T-84-CO-4103 ..... Diamond Shamrock Denver ........... 3601 East 56th Street ..................... Commerce City .............. CO 80022T-84-CO-4104 ..... Phillips 66 Commerce City ............. 3960 East 56th Avenue .................. Commerce City .............. CO 80022T-84-CO-4105 ..... Kaneb PipeLine Dupont .................. 8160 Krameria ................................ DuPont ........................... CO 80024T-84-CO-4106 ..... Kaneb PipeLine Fountain ............... 1004 S. Sante Fe ........................... Fountain ......................... CO 80817T-84-CO-4107 ..... Landmark Petroleum Fruita ............ 1493 Hwy 6 & 50 ............................ Fruita .............................. CO 81521T-84-CO-4108 ..... Diamond Colorado Springs ............ 7810 Drennan ................................. Colorado Springs ........... CO 80925T-84-CO-4109 ..... Sinclair Pipeline Henderson ........... 8581 East 96th Ave ........................ Henderson ..................... CO 80640T-84-CO-4110 ..... Phillips Pipeline Co.—LaJunta Ter-

minal.31610 East Hwy 50 ........................ LaJunta .......................... CO 81050

T-06-CT-1250 ..... Hoffman Fuel Co. of Bridgeport ..... 156 East Washington Ave .............. Bridgeport ...................... CT 06604T-06-CT-1251 ..... Sprague Energy Stamford .............. 10 Water St ..................................... Stamford ........................ CT 06902T-06-CT-1252 ..... CITGO Rocky Hill ........................... 109 Dividend Road ......................... Rocky Hill ....................... CT 06067T-06-CT-1253 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 211 Riverside Drive ........................ East Hartford ................. CT 06108T-06-CT-1254 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 481 East Shore Parkway ................ New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1255 ..... Amerada Hess—Groton ................. 443 Eastern Point Road ................. Groton ............................ CT 06340T-06-CT-1256 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 250 Eagles Nest Rd. ...................... Bridgeport ...................... CT 06607T-06-CT-1257 ..... Amerada Hess—New Haven .......... 100 River Street .............................. New Haven .................... CT 06513T-06-CT-1258 ..... New Haven Terminal Inc ................ 100 Waterfront St ........................... New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1259 ..... Amerada Hess—Wethersfield ........ 50 Burbank Road ............................ Wethersfield ................... CT 06109T-06-CT-1261 ..... Getty Terminal New Haven ............ 85 Forbes Avenue .......................... New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1262 ..... Gulf Oil LP—New Haven ................ 500 Waterfront Street ..................... New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1263 ..... Wyatt Energy, Inc. .......................... 134 Forbes Avenue ........................ New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1264 ..... Gateway Terminal New Haven ....... 400 Waterfront St ........................... New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1265 ..... Wyatt Energy, Inc. .......................... 85 East Street ................................. New Haven .................... CT 06536T-06-CT-1266 ..... Hi- Ho Petroleum ............................ 85 Harbor Street ............................. Bridgeport ...................... CT 06605T-06-CT-1267 ..... Consumer Petroleum Wholesaler ... One Eagles Nest Rd ....................... Bridgeport ...................... CT 06605T-06-CT-1269 ..... 38 Duffy Ave., LLC ......................... 56 Brownstone Ave. ....................... Portland ......................... CT 06480T-06-CT-1270 ..... Northeast Petroleum—Wethersfield 80 Burbank Road ............................ Wethersfield ................... CT 06109T-06-CT-1271 ..... Signature Flight Support ................. 100 Signature Way ......................... East Granby ................... CT 06026T-06-CT-1272 ..... Devine Bros. Inc.—Norwalk ............ 38 Commerce St ............................. Norwalk .......................... CT 06850T-06-CT-1274 ..... Wyatt Energy Incorporated ............. 280 Waterfront St ........................... New Haven .................... CT 06512T-06-CT-1277 ..... Sprague Energy .............................. 247 Riverside Dr. ............................ East Hartford ................. CT 06902T-06-CT-1279 ..... Inland Fuel Terminal ....................... 154 Admiral St. ............................... Bridgeport ...................... CT 06605T-06-CT-1280 ..... B & B Petroleum Inc. ...................... 32 Brownstone Ave ........................ Portland ......................... CT 06480T-06-CT-1281 ..... Hall & Muska, Inc. .......................... 152 Broad Brook Rd ....................... Broad Brook ................... CT 06016T-06-CT-1282 ..... Anthony Troisno & Sons, Inc. ......... 777 Enfield St. ................................ Enfield ............................ CT 06082T-06-CT-1284 ..... Port Oil ............................................ 248 Brownstone Ave. ..................... Portland ......................... CT 06480T-06-CT-1285 ..... Heating Oil Partners LP .................. 410 Bank St. ................................... New London .................. CT 06320T-06-CT-1286 ..... NORAA Enterprises, Inc. ................ 1351 Main Street ............................ East Hartford ................. CT 06109T-52-MD-1564 .... S T Services Washington (M St) .... 1333 M St SE ................................. Washington .................... DC 20003T-54-VA-1686 ..... Ogden Aviation Fueling Co., Inc. ... 11 Air Cargo Rd. ............................. Washington .................... DC 20001T-51-DE-1600 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. River Rd and J Street ..................... Delaware City ................ DE 19706T-51-DE-1601 ..... Blades Terminal-Peninsula Oil ....... Blades Causeway ........................... Blades ............................ DE 19973T-51-DE-1603 ..... Wilco Inc, Peninsula Oil Co ............ Blades Causeway ........................... Seaford .......................... DE 19973T-52-MD-1572 .... The Sico Company ......................... 1050 Christiana Ave. ...................... Wilmington ..................... DE 19801T-59-FL-2100 ...... Murphy Oil USA Tampa ................. 1306 Ingram Ave ............................ Tampa ............................ FL 33605




T-59-FL-2101 ...... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 1523 Port Avenue ........................... Tampa ............................ FL 33605T-59-FL-2102 ...... Amerada Hess—Jacksonville ......... 2617 Heckscher Drive .................... Jacksonville ................... FL 32226T-59-FL-2103 ...... Williams Energy Services, Inc. ....... 2054 Heckscher Drive .................... Jacksonville ................... FL 32226T-59-FL-2104 ...... Chevron Products Company .......... 3117 Talleyrand Avenue ................. Jacksonville ................... FL 32206T-59-FL-2105 ...... Coastal Fuels Jacksonville ............. 3425 Talleyrand Avenue ................. Jacksonville ................... FL 32206T-59-FL-2106 ...... B P-Amoco Oil Jacksonville ........... 12101 Heckscher Dr ....................... Jacksonville ................... FL 32218T-59-FL-2107 ...... Amerada Hess—Tampa ................. 504 N 19th Street ........................... Tampa ............................ FL 33605T-59-FL-2109 ...... Petroleum Fuel Jacksonville ........... 1961 E Adams St ........................... Jacksonville ................... FL 32202T-59-FL-2112 ...... S T Services Jacksonville ............... 6531 Evergreen Avenue ................. Jacksonville ................... FL 32208T-59-FL-2114 ...... CITGO—Niceville ............................ 904 Bayshore Drive ........................ Niceville ......................... FL 32578T-59-FL-2115 ...... Murphy Oil Freeport ........................ 424 Madison St ............................... Freeport ......................... FL 32439T-59-FL-2116 ...... Chevron USA Product Co .............. 525 West Beach Drive .................... Panama City .................. FL 32402T-59-FL-2117 ...... CITGO Panama City ....................... 122 S Center Ave ........................... Panama City .................. FL 32401T-59-FL-2118 ...... Coastal Fuels Pensacola ................ 640 S Barracks St .......................... Pensacola ...................... FL 32501T-59-FL-2119 ...... Radcliff/Economy-Pensacola .......... 3100 Barrancas Avenue ................. Pensacola ...................... FL 32507T-59-FL-2120 ...... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 511 South Clubb St ........................ Pensacola ...................... FL 32501T-59-FL-2122 ...... Coastal Fuels Port Manatee ........... 804 N Dock St ................................ Palmetto ......................... FL 34220T-59-FL-2123 ...... GATX Terminals Port Tampa ......... 2101 GATX Drive ........................... Tampa ............................ FL 33605T-59-FL-2124 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 6500 Commerce St ......................... Port Tampa .................... FL 33616T-59-FL-2125 ...... Murphy Oil St Marks ....................... 585 Port Leon Drive ....................... St Marks ........................ FL 32355T-59-FL-2127 ...... TOC Terminals St Marks ................ 815 Port Leon Drive ....................... St. Marks ....................... FL 32355T-59-FL-2129 ...... GATX Terminal Taft (CFPL) ........... 9919 Orange Avenue ..................... Orlando .......................... FL 32824T-59-FL-2130 ...... Amoco Oil Tampa ........................... 848 McCloskey Boulevard .............. Tampa ............................ FL 33605T-59-FL-2131 ...... Chevron USA Tampa ..................... 5500 Commerce Street .................. Tampa ............................ FL 33616T-59-FL-2133 ...... CITGO Tampa ................................ 801 McCloskey Blvd ....................... Tampa ............................ FL 33605T-59-FL-2136 ...... MAPLLC Oil Tampa ........................ 425 South 20th Street .................... Tampa ............................ FL 33605T-59-FL-2138 ...... Coastal Fuels Cape Canaveral ...... 10 Tanker Turn Rd. ........................ Cape Canaveral ............. FL 32920T-65-FL-2150 ...... Coastal Fuels Port Everglades ....... 2401 Eisenhower Blvd .................... Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2151 ...... S T Services Homestead ................ 13195 S W 288th Street ................. Homestead .................... FL 33033T-65-FL-2152 ...... Amoco Oil Port Everglades ............ 1180 Spangler Road ....................... Port Everglades ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2153 ...... Chevron USA Port Everglades ....... 1400 SE 24th St ............................. Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33335T-65-FL-2154 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 1500 SE 26 St ................................ Ft. Lauderdale ............... FL 33316T-65-FL-2155 ...... Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc. 4350 NW 20 St., Bldg. 3100 .......... Miami ............................. FL 33359T-65-FL-2156 ...... Amerada Hess—Port Everglades ... 1501 SE 20th St. ............................ Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2157 ...... CITGO Port Everglades .................. 800 SE 28th Street ......................... Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2160 ...... MAPLLC Oil Port Everglades ......... 1601 SE 20th St ............................. Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2161 ...... Mobil Oil Port Everglades ............... 1150 Spangler Blvd ........................ Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2163 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 909 S.E. 24 St. ............................... Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2164 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 1200 SE 28th St ............................. Port Everglades ............. FL 33316T-65-FL-2165 ...... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 2701 SE 14th Ave .......................... Fort Lauderdale ............. FL 33316T-75-TX-2677 ..... Martin Gas Sales, Inc. .................... 4118 Pendola Point Rd. ................. Tampa ............................ FL 33617T-58-GA-2500 ..... Phillips Pipeline Albany .................. 1603 W Oakridge Dr ....................... Albany ............................ GA 31707T-58-GA-2501 ..... Williams Energy Ventures-Alban .... 1722 W Oakridge Dr ....................... Albany ............................ GA 31707T-58-GA-2502 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 1162 Gillionville Rd ......................... Albany ............................ GA 31707T-58-GA-2504 ..... S T Services Augusta ..................... 209 Sand Bar Ferry Road .............. Augusta .......................... GA 30901T-58-GA-2505 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. Plains Road Highway 280 West ..... Americus ........................ GA 31709T-58-GA-2506 ..... Charter—TRIAD Terminals LLC ..... 3460 Jefferson Road ...................... Athens ............................ GA 30607T-58-GA-2507 ..... S T Services, West Terminal .......... 2 Walstrom Rd. ............................... Savannah ....................... GA 31404T-58-GA-2508 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 3450 Jefferson Road ...................... Athens ............................ GA 30607T-58-GA-2510 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 4127 Winter Chapel Rd. ................. Doraville ......................... GA 30360T-58-GA-2511 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 3132 Parrott Avenue Northwest ..... Atlanta ............................ GA 30318T-58-GA-2514 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 803 East Shotwell St. ..................... Bainbridge ...................... GA 31717T-58-GA-2515 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 1909 East Shotwell Street .............. Bainbridge ...................... GA 31717T-58-GA-2516 ..... Stratus Petroleum Blakely .............. Hwy 62 W & Chattahoochee Rd .... Blakely ........................... GA 31723T-58-GA-2517 ..... S T Services Bremen ..................... 870 Alabama Avenue ..................... Bremen .......................... GA 30110T-58-GA-2518 ..... S T Services Brunswick .................. 211 Newcastle Street NW .............. Brunswick ...................... GA 31520T-58-GA-2519 ..... Fina Oil & Chemical Atlanta ........... 2970 Parrott Avenue ....................... Atlanta ............................ GA 30318T-58-GA-2520 ..... Chevron USA Columbus ................ 5131 Miller Road ............................ Columbus ....................... GA 31908T-58-GA-2521 ..... Crown Central Columbus ............... 4840 Miller Rd ................................ Columbus ....................... GA 31904T-58-GA-2522 ..... ITAPCO Inc Columbus ................... 5225 Miller Road ............................ Columbus ....................... GA 31904T-58-GA-2523 ..... MAPLLC Oil Columbus ................... 5030 Miller Road ............................ Columbus ....................... GA 31909T-58-GA-2524 ..... S T Services Columbus .................. 800 Lumpkin Boulevard .................. Columbus ....................... GA 31901T-58-GA-2525 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 2836 Woodwin Road ...................... Doraville ......................... GA 30362T-58-GA-2526 ..... Amoco Doraville Peachtree ............ 6430 New Peachtree Road ............ Doraville ......................... GA 30340T-58-GA-2527 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 4201 Winters Chappel Rd. ............. Doraville ......................... GA 30340T-58-GA-2528 ..... Chevron USA Doraville ................... 4026 Winters Chapel Road ............ Doraville ......................... GA 30362T-58-GA-2529 ..... CITGO Doraville ............................. 3877 Flowers Drive ......................... Doraville ......................... GA 30362T-58-GA-2531 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 4143 Winters Chapel Rd ................ Doraville ......................... GA 30360T-58-GA-2532 ..... MAPLLC Oil Doraville ..................... 6293 New Peachtree Road ............ Doraville ......................... GA 30341T-58-GA-2533 ..... William Energy Ventures, Inc. ........ 4149 Winters Chapel Road ............ Doraville ......................... GA 30360T-58-GA-2534 ..... Amoco Doraville Chapel ................. 4064 Winters Chapel Rd ................ Doraville ......................... GA 30340T-58-GA-2535 ..... Southern Facilities Doraville ........... 2797 Woodwin Road ...................... Doraville ......................... GA 30360




T-58-GA-2537 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 643B East McIntosh Road .............. Griffin ............................. GA 30223T-58-GA-2538 ..... Chevron USA Macon ...................... 2476 Allen Road ............................. Macon ............................ GA 31206T-58-GA-2541 ..... MAPLLC Oil Macon ........................ 2445 Allen Road ............................. Macon ............................ GA 31206T-58-GA-2542 ..... S T Services Macon ....................... 6225 Hawkinsville Road ................. Macon ............................ GA 31216T-58-GA-2543 ..... Southern Facilities Macon .............. 2505 Allen Road ............................. Macon ............................ GA 31206T-58-GA-2544 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 5041 Forsyth Rd. ............................ Macon ............................ GA 31210T-58-GA-2545 ..... MAPLLC Oil Powder Springs ......... 3895 Anderson Farm Road NW ..... Powder Springs ............. GA 30073T-58-GA-2547 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 2671 Calhoun Road ........................ Rome ............................. GA 30161T-58-GA-2550 ..... Colonial Terminal, Inc. .................... 101 North Lathrop Ave ................... Savannah ....................... GA 31415T-58-GA-2551 ..... Paktank Corp Savannah Term ....... Georgia Ports Garden City ............. Savannah ....................... GA 31418T-99-HI-4550 ...... Tesoro Hawaii Corp. Refinery ........ 91-325 Komohana St. ..................... Kapolei ........................... HI 96707T-99-HI-4551 ...... Aloha Petroleum Ltd. ...................... 91-119 Hanua Street ...................... Kapolei ........................... HI 96706T-99-HI-4552 ...... Chevron USA Hilo .......................... 666 Kalanianaole Avenue ............... Hilo ................................. HI 96720T-99-HI-4553 ...... Chevron USA Honolulu .................. 933 North Nimitz Highway .............. Honolulu ......................... HI 96817T-99-HI-4554 ...... Chevron USA Kahului ..................... 100 A Hobron Avenue .................... Kahului ........................... HI 96732T-99-HI-4555 ...... Chevron USA Port Allen ................. A & B Road, Port Allen ................... Eleele ............................. HI 96705T-99-HI-4556 ...... Tosco Refining Co. ......................... 411 Pacific St .................................. Honolulu ......................... HI 96814T-99-HI-4557 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 789 N. Nimitz Hwy. ......................... Honolulu ......................... HI 96817T-99-HI-4558 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 661 Kalanianaole Ave. .................... Hilo ................................. HI 96720T-99-HI-4559 ...... Tesoro Hawaii Corporation ............. 607 Kalanianaole Ave. .................... Hilo ................................. HI 96720T-99-HI-4560 ...... Aloha Petroleum Ltd. ...................... 999 Kalanianaole Ave. .................... Hilo ................................. HI 96720T-99-HI-4561 ...... Tesoro Hawaii Corporation ............. 701 Kalanianaole Street ................. Hilo ................................. HI 96720T-99-HI-4562 ...... Shell Oil Nawiliwili ........................... 3145 Waapa Rd. ............................. Lihue .............................. HI 96766T-99-HI-4563 ...... Tesoro Hawaii Corporation ............. 140 H Hobron Ave .......................... Kahului ........................... HI 96732T-99-HI-4566 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 60 Hobron Ave. ............................... Kahului ........................... HI 96732T-99-HI-4567 ...... Tosco Kawaihae ............................. No. 1 Kawaihae Road .................... Kamuela ......................... HI 96743T-99-HI-4568 ...... Tesoro Hawaii Corporation ............. 2 Sand Island Access Rd. .............. Honolulu ......................... HI 96819T-99-HI-4569 ...... Tesoro Hawaii Corporation ............. Pier 34 ............................................ Honolulu ......................... HI 96817T-39-IA-3475 ...... Sinclair Terminal ............................. 2506 260th St. ................................ Montrose ........................ IA 52639T-42-IA-3450 ...... Amoco Oil Bettendorf ..................... 75 South 31st Street ....................... Bettendorf ...................... IA 52722T-42-IA-3451 ...... Koch Petroleum Group-Bettendorf 4100 Elm St .................................... Bettendorf ...................... IA 52722T-42-IA-3452 ...... Phillips Pipeline Company .............. 2925 Depot Street .......................... Bettendorf ...................... IA 52722T-42-IA-3453 ...... Williams Pipe Line Sioux South ...... 3701 South Lewis Blvd ................... Sioux City ...................... IA 51106T-42-IA-3454 ...... Amoco Oil Council Bluffs ................ 829 East South Bridge Rd .............. Council Bluffs ................. IA 51501T-42-IA-3455 ...... National Coop. Council Bluffs ......... 825 East South Omaha Bridge Rd Council Bluffs ................. IA 51502T-42-IA-3456 ...... Amoco Oil Des Moines ................... 1501 Northwest 86th Street ............ Des Moines .................... IA 50325T-42-IA-3457 ...... Williams Pipe Line Des Moines ...... 2503 Southeast 43rd Street ........... Des Moines .................... IA 50317T-42-IA-3458 ...... Amoco Oil Dubuque ....................... 15437 Olde Highway Rd. ............... Dubuque ........................ IA 52001T-42-IA-3460 ...... Williams Pipe Line Dubuque .......... 8038 St Joe’s Prairie Rd ................ Dubuque ........................ IA 52003T-42-IA-3461 ...... Williams Pipe Line Fort Dodge ....... 6 miles from Ft Dodge .................... Duncombe ..................... IA 50532T-42-IA-3463 ...... Williams Pipe Line Iowa City .......... 912 First Avenue ............................ Coralville ........................ IA 52241T-42-IA-3464 ...... Kaneb Pipe Line Le Mars ............... US Hwy 75/7 Miles N of LeMars .... Le Mars .......................... IA 51031T-42-IA-3465 ...... Williams Pipe Line Mason City ....... 2810 East Main ............................... Clear Lake ..................... IA 50428T-42-IA-3466 ...... Kaneb Pipe Line Milford ................. 1 mile W of Milford & Hwy 71 ......... Milford ............................ IA 51351T-42-IA-3467 ...... Williams Pipe Line Milford .............. RT #1 .............................................. Milford ............................ IA 51351T-42-IA-3468 ...... Amoco Oil North Liberty ................. 2092 Hwy. 965 NE ......................... North Liberty .................. IA 52317T-42-IA-3469 ...... Amoco Oil Ottumwa ........................ Three miles west on US 34 ............ Ottumwa ........................ IA 52501T-42-IA-3470 ...... Conoco Pipeline Co. ....................... 4500 Vandalia ................................. Pleasant Hill ................... IA 50317T-42-IA-3471 ...... CITGO—Bettendorf ........................ 312 South Bellingham Street .......... Bettendorf ...................... IA 52722T-42-IA-3472 ...... Kaneb Pipeline Rock Rapids .......... State Hwy 9 .................................... Rock Rapids .................. IA 51246T-42-IA-3473 ...... Williams Pipe Line Sioux City ......... 4300 41st Street ............................. Sioux City ...................... IA 51108T-42-IA-3474 ...... Williams Pipe Line Waterloo ........... 5360 Eldora Rd ............................... Waterloo ........................ IA 50701T-82-ID-4150 ...... Boise Idaho Terminal ...................... 321 North Curtis Road .................... Boise .............................. ID 83707T-82-ID-4151 ...... Northwest Terminaling Boise .......... 201 N. Phillips Rd. .......................... Boise .............................. ID 83704T-82-ID-4152 ...... United Products Terminal ............... 70 North Philipi Road ..................... Boise .............................. ID 83706T-82-ID-4155 ...... Amoco Oil Burley ............................ 421 East Highway 81 ..................... Burley ............................. ID 83318T-82-ID-4157 ...... Burley Products Terminal ............... 425 East Hwy 81 PO Box 233 ....... Burley ............................. ID 83318T-82-ID-4159 ...... Chevron Pipeline Pocatello ............ 1189 Tank Farm Rd. ...................... Pocatello ........................ ID 83201T-36-IL-3300 ....... Clark Refining and Marketing Inc. .. 131st & Homan Avenue ................. Blue Island ..................... IL 60406T-36-IL-3301 ....... Amoco Oil Des Plaines ................... 2201 South Elmhurst Rd ................ Des Plaines ................... IL 60018T-36-IL-3302 ....... Amoco Oil Forest View ................... 4811 South Harlem Avenue ........... Forest View .................... IL 60402T-36-IL-3303 ....... Amoco Oil Company—Rochelle ..... 100 East Standard Oil Road .......... Rochelle ......................... IL 61068T-36-IL-3304 ....... CITGO Mt Prospect ........................ 2316 Terminal Drive ....................... Arlington Heights ........... IL 60005T-36-IL-3305 ....... GATX Terminals Argo .................... 8500 West 68th Street .................... Argo ............................... IL 60501T-36-IL-3306 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1511 South Meridian Rd ................. Rockford ........................ IL 61102T-36-IL-3307 ....... Marathon Mt Prospect .................... 3231 Busse Road ........................... Arlington Heights ........... IL 60005T-36-IL-3308 ....... MAPLLC Oil Rockford .................... 7312 Cunningham Road ................. Rockford ........................ IL 61102T-36-IL-3309 ....... MAPLLC Willow Springs ................. 7600 LaGrange Road ..................... Willow Springs ............... IL 60480T-36-IL-3310 ....... S T Services—Blue Island .............. 3210 West 131st Street .................. Blue Island ..................... IL 60406T-36-IL-3311 ....... Mobil Oil Des Plaines ..................... 2312 Terminal Drive ....................... Des Plaines ................... IL 60005T-36-IL-3312 ....... Petroleum Fuel Forest View ........... 4801 South Harlem ......................... Forest View .................... IL 60402T-36-IL-3313 ....... Phillips Pipeline Company—Kan-

kakee.275 North 2760 West Road ............ Kankakee ....................... IL 60901




T-36-IL-3314 ....... S T Services—Peru ........................ 2830 West Market Street ................ Peru ............................... IL 61354T-36-IL-3315 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 8600 West 71st. Street ................... Bedford Park .................. IL 60501T-36-IL-3316 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1605 E. Algonquin Road ................ Des Plaines ................... IL 60005T-36-IL-3317 ....... CITGO Petroleum Corp.—Lemont .. 135th & New Avenue ...................... Lemont ........................... IL 60439T-36-IL-3318 ....... CITGO—Des Plaines ...................... 2304 Terminal Drive ....................... Des Plaines ................... IL 60056T-36-IL-3319 ....... Williams Pipe Line—Amboy ........... 1222 U S Route 30 ......................... Amboy ............................ IL 61310T-36-IL-3320 ....... Williams Pipeline Franklin ............... 10601 Franklin Avenue ................... Franklin Park ................. IL 60131T-36-IL-3322 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC—Des

Plaines.1000 Terminal Drive ....................... Arlington Heights ........... IL 60005

T-36-IL-3323 ....... TransMontaign Terminaling, Inc. .... 14410 North Old Galena Rd. .......... Chillicothe ...................... IL 61523T-36-IL-3324 ....... Kinder Morgan Morris Complex ...... 4755 E. Route 6 ............................. Morris ............................. IL 60450T-36-IL-3373 ....... Clark Refining & Marketing Co.—

Blue Is.Kedzie Ave. & 131st ....................... Blue Island ..................... IL 60406

T-36-IL-3375 ....... Mobil Oil Corporation—Lockport ..... 1290 High Road .............................. Lockport ......................... IL 60441T-37-IL-3351 ....... Amoco Oil Wood River ................... 335 South Old St Louis Rd ............ Wood River .................... IL 62095T-37-IL-3352 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 7022 South Cilco Lane ................... Bartonville ...................... IL 61607T-37-IL-3353 ....... Conoco Wood River ....................... Route 3 ........................................... Hartford .......................... IL 62048T-37-IL-3354 ....... Hartford Wood River ....................... 900 North Delmar ........................... Hartford .......................... IL 62048T-37-IL-3355 ....... Hicks OIls & Hicks Gas Inc ............ 1118 Wesley Road ......................... Creve Coeur .................. IL 61610T-37-IL-3356 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. South Side Hawthorne .................... Hartford .......................... IL 62048T-37-IL-3358 ....... MAPLLC Champaign ...................... 511 S. Staley Road ........................ Champaign .................... IL 61821T-37-IL-3360 ....... MAPLLC Robinson ......................... Rural Route One ............................. Robinson ........................ IL 62454T-37-IL-3361 ....... La Gloria Oil Norris City .................. Rural Route 2 ................................. Norris City ...................... IL 62869T-37-IL-3362 ....... Petroleum Fuel Granite City ........... 2801 Rock Road ............................. Granite City .................... IL 62040T-37-IL-3364 ....... Meioco Terminal ............................. Rt 49 South ..................................... Ashkum .......................... IL 60911T-37-IL-3365 ....... Phillips 66 Decatur .......................... 266 E Shafer ................................... Forsyth ........................... IL 62535T-37-IL-3366 ....... Phillips Petroleum E St Louis ......... 3300 Mississippi Ave ...................... Cahokia .......................... IL 62206T-37-IL-3367 ....... S T Services—Chillicothe ............... 20206 North State Rd, Rt 29 .......... Chillicothe ...................... IL 61523T-37-IL-3368 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. Route 45 N. R.R. 3 ......................... Effingham ....................... IL 62401T-37-IL-3369 ....... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 600 E. Lincoln Memorial Pky .......... Harristown ...................... IL 62537T-37-IL-3371 ....... Williams Pipe Line Heyworth .......... Rural Route Two ............................. Heyworth ........................ IL 61745T-37-IL-3372 ....... Williams Pipe Line Menard Cty ...... Rural Route Three .......................... Petersburg ..................... IL 62675T-43-IL-3729 ....... Center Terminal Co—Hartford ........ 1402 S Delmare .............................. Hartford .......................... IL 62048T-35-IN-3201 ...... Amoco Oil Brookston ...................... 11555 South IN 43 ......................... Brookston ....................... IN 47923T-35-IN-3202 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1020 141st St ................................. Hammond ...................... IN 46320T-35-IN-3203 ...... Amoco Oil Granger ......................... 12694 Adams Rd ............................ Granger .......................... IN 46530T-35-IN-3204 ...... Amoco Oil Indianpolis ..................... 2500 N Tibbs Avenue ..................... Indianapolis .................... IN 46222T-35-IN-3205 ...... Amoco Oil Whiting .......................... 2530 Indianapolis Blvd. .................. Whiting ........................... IN 46394T-35-IN-3206 ...... MAPLLC Clarksvile ......................... 214 Center Street ........................... Clarksville ...................... IN 47124T-35-IN-3207 ...... MAPLLC Evansville ........................ 2500 Broadway ............................... Evansville ....................... IN 47712T-35-IN-3208 ...... MAPLLC Huntington ....................... 4648 N. Meridian Road .................. Huntington ..................... IN 46750T-35-IN-3209 ...... CITGO East Chicago ...................... 2500 East Chicago Ave .................. East Chicago ................. IN 46312T-35-IN-3210 ...... CITGO Huntington .......................... 4393 N Meridian Rd US 24 ............ Huntington ..................... IN 46750T-35-IN-3211 ...... Gladieux T & M Huntington ............ 4757 US 24 E ................................. Huntington ..................... IN 46750T-35-IN-3212 ...... Kentuckiana Terminal ..................... 20 Jackson St ................................. New Albany ................... IN 47150T-35-IN-3213 ...... Transmontaigne Terminaling Inc .... 2630 Broadway ............................... Evansville ....................... IN 47712T-35-IN-3214 ...... CountryMark—Mount Vernon ......... 1200 Refinery Road ........................ Mount Vernon ................ IN 47620T-35-IN-3215 ...... Crown Central Petro—Clermont ..... 9323 West 30th .............................. Clermont ........................ IN 46234T-35-IN-3216 ...... Crown Central Petro—Seymour ..... 9780 N US Hwy 31 ......................... Seymour ........................ IN 47274T-35-IN-3217 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 10470 E County Rd, 300 North ...... Clermont ........................ IN 46234T-35-IN-3218 ...... MAPLLC Hammond ........................ 4206 Columbia Avenue .................. Hammond ...................... IN 46327T-35-IN-3219 ...... MAPLLC Indianapolis ..................... 4955 Robison Rd ............................ Indianapolis .................... IN 46268T-35-IN-3220 ...... MAPLLC Mount Vernon .................. Old State Rd #69 South ................. Mount Vernon ................ IN 47620T-35-IN-3221 ...... MAPLLC Muncie ............................. 2100 East State Road 28 ............... Muncie ........................... IN 47303T-35-IN-3222 ...... MAPLLC Speedway ........................ 1304 Olin Ave ................................. Indianapolis .................... IN 46222T-35-IN-3224 ...... Mobil Oil Hammond ........................ 1527 141th Street ........................... Hammond ...................... IN 46327T-35-IN-3225 ...... Phillips 66 East Chicago ................. 400 East Columbus Dr ................... East Chicago ................. IN 46312T-35-IN-3226 ...... Phillips 66 Clermont ........................ 3230 N Raceway Road .................. Indiapolis ........................ IN 46234T-35-IN-3227 ...... S T Services Clermont ................... 3350 N Raceway Rd ...................... Indianapolis .................... IN 46234T-35-IN-3228 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2400 Michigan St. ........................... Hammond ...................... IN 46320T-35-IN-3229 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2000 E. State Rd. 28 ...................... Muncie ........................... IN 47302T-35-IN-3230 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 5405 W. 9th St. ............................... Zionsville ........................ IN 46268T-35-IN-3231 ...... Sun Huntington ............................... 4691 N Meridian St ......................... Huntington ..................... IN 46750T-35-IN-3232 ...... TEPPCO Princeton ......................... Highway 64 West ............................ Oakland City .................. IN 47660T-35-IN-3233 ...... Center Terminal Co-Indianapoli ...... 10833 East County Rd 300 North .. Indianapolis .................... IN 46234T-35-IN-3234 ...... Lassus Bros Huntington ................. 4413 North Meridian Rd ................. Huntington ..................... IN 46750T-35-IN-3235 ...... CountryMark Jolietville .................... 17710 Mule Barn ............................ Westfield ........................ IN 46074T-35-IN-3236 ...... CountryMark—Peru ........................ Highway 24 West ............................ Peru ............................... IN 46970T-35-IN-3237 ...... CountryMark Switz City .................. State Road 54 East ........................ Switz City ....................... IN 47465T-35-IN-3238 ...... Transmontaigne Terminaling Inc. ... 10700 E County Rd 300N .............. Indianapolis (CL) ........... IN 46234T-35-IN-3242 ...... Safety-Kleen Oil Recovery Co. ....... 601 Riley Road ............................... East Chicago ................. IN 46312T-35-IN-3243 ...... Conrail Inc.-Avon Diesel Term ........ 491 S. County Road 800 E. ........... Plainfield ........................ IN 46168




T-35-IN-3244 ...... Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad .......... 2721—161st St. .............................. Hammond ...................... IN 46323T-35-IN-3245 ...... Conrail Inc.- Elkhart Terminal ......... 2600 W. Lusher Rd ........................ Elkhart ............................ IN 46516T-35-IN-3246 ...... Transmontaigne—South Bend ....... 20630 W. Ireland Rd. ..................... South Bend .................... IN 46614T-43-KS-3672 ..... Phillips Pipeline Co.—Kansas City 2029 Fairfax Trafficway .................. Kansas City ................... KS 66115T-48-KS-3651 ..... Farmland Ind. Coffeyville ................ North & Linden Streets ................... Coffeyville ...................... KS 67337T-48-KS-3652 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Concordia ............ Route 1 ........................................... Delphos .......................... KS 67436T-48-KS-3654 ..... Frontier El Dorado Refining Com-

pany.South Haverhill Road ...................... El Dorado ....................... KS 67042

T-48-KS-3655 ..... Chase Pipeline Great Bend ............ Hwys 56 & 156 4 mi east of GB ..... Great Bend .................... KS 67530T-48-KS-3656 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Hutchison ............ 3300 East Avenue G ...................... Hutchison ....................... KS 67501T-48-KS-3658 ..... Sinclair Pipeline Kansas City .......... 3401 Fairbanks Avenue .................. Kansas City ................... KS 66106T-48-KS-3659 ..... Williams Pipeline Kansas City ........ 401 East Donovan Road ................ Kansas City ................... KS 66115T-48-KS-3660 ..... National Coop. McPherson ............. 2000 South Main Street .................. McPherson ..................... KS 67460T-48-KS-3661 ..... Williams Pipe Line Olathe ............... 13745 W 135th St ........................... Olathe ............................ KS 66062T-48-KS-3662 ..... Farmland Coop. Phillipsburg .......... Hwy 183 N ...................................... Phillipsburg .................... KS 67661T-48-KS-3663 ..... S T Services Salina ........................ 2137 W Old Hwy 40 ....................... Salina ............................. KS 67401T-48-KS-3664 ..... Chase Pipeline Scott City ............... Junction Highways 83 & 4 .............. Scott City ....................... KS 67871T-48-KS-3665 ..... Williams Pipe Line Topeka ............. US Hwy 75 RFD 1 .......................... Wakarusa ....................... KS 66546T-48-KS-3666 ..... Center Terminal Co.—Wichita ........ 7452 N Meridian ............................. Valley Center ................. KS 67147T-48-KS-3667 ..... Williams Pipe Line Wathena ........... Rt. 2 Box 112 .................................. Wathena ........................ KS 66090T-48-KS-3669 ..... Williams Pipe Line-Wichita ............. 1100 East 21st Street ..................... Wichita ........................... KS 67214T-48-KS-3670 ..... Conoco Wichita ............................... 8001 Oak Knoll Road ..................... Wichita ........................... KS 67207T-48-KS-3671 ..... Phillips Pipeline Wichita .................. 2400 East 37th Street North ........... Wichita ........................... KS 67219T-61-KY-3261 ..... B P Oil Bromley .............................. 409 River Road ............................... Bromley .......................... KY 41016T-61-KY-3262 ..... MAPLLC Catlettsburg ..................... Old St Rt 23 .................................... Catlettsburg ................... KY 41129T-61-KY-3263 ..... MAPLLC Covington ........................ 230 East 33rd Street ...................... Covington ....................... KY 41015T-61-KY-3264 ..... Transmontaigne—Greater Cin-

cinnati.700 River Road ............................... Covington ....................... KY 41017

T-61-KY-3265 ..... Henderson Terminaling .................. 2321 Old Geneva Road .................. Henderson ..................... KY 42420T-61-KY-3266 ..... MAPLLC Lexington ......................... 1770 Old Frankfort Pike ................. Lexington ....................... KY 40504T-61-KY-3267 ..... Chevron USA Lexington ................. 1750 Old Frankfort Pike ................. Lexington ....................... KY 40504T-61-KY-3268 ..... MAPLLC Louisville .......................... 4510 Algonquin Parkway ................ Louisville ........................ KY 40211T-61-KY-3269 ..... B P Oil Louisville ............................ 1500 SW Parkway & Gibson Lane Louisville ........................ KY 40211T-61-KY-3270 ..... Chevron USA Louisville .................. 4401 Bells Lane .............................. Louisville ........................ KY 40211T-61-KY-3271 ..... TransMontaigne—Louisville ............ 4510 Bells Lane .............................. Louisville ........................ KY 40211T-61-KY-3272 ..... MAPLLC Oil Louisville .................... 3920 Kramers Lane ........................ Louisville ........................ KY 40216T-61-KY-3273 ..... Sun Louisville .................................. 7800 Cane Run Road ..................... Louisville ........................ KY 40258T-61-KY-3274 ..... CITGO—Louisville .......................... 4724 Camp Ground Road .............. Louisville ........................ KY 40216T-61-KY-3276 ..... MAPLLC Paducah .......................... Highway 62 & MAPLLC Rd. ........... Paducah ......................... KY 42003T-61-KY-3278 ..... TransMontaigne Terminal—Padu-

cah.233 Elizabeth St ............................. Paducah ......................... KY 42001

T-61-KY-3279 ..... Transmontaigne-Henderson. .......... 2633 Sunset Lane .......................... Henderson ..................... KY 42420T-61-KY-3280 ..... Southern States Coorperative ........ 150 Coast Guard Lane ................... Owensboro .................... KY 42302T-61-KY-3281 ..... Somerset Refinery—Somerset ....... 600 Monticello Street ...................... Somerset ....................... KY 42502T-61-KY-3283 ..... Transmontaigne—Owensboro ........ 900 Pleasant Valley Road .............. Owensboro .................... KY 42302T-61-KY-3284 ..... Transmontaigne—Riverway ............ 1350 South 3rd Street .................... Paducah ......................... KY 42003T-62-KY-2244 ..... Transmontainge—Paducah ............ 2000 So. 4th St. .............................. Paducah ......................... KY 42003T-62-KY-3285 ..... Catlettsburg Refining LLC .............. 8023 Crider Dr. ............................... Catlettsburg ................... KY 41129T-72-LA-2350 ...... B P Oil Alliance ............................... ......................................................... Alliance .......................... LA ....................T-72-LA-2351 ...... Chevron USA Arcadia .................... Highway 80 East ............................. Arcadia ........................... LA 71001T-72-LA-2353 ...... Exxon Co USA Arcadia .................. Highway 80 East ............................. Arcadia ........................... LA 71001T-72-LA-2355 ...... International Tank Terminals, Inc. .. 5450 River Rd. ................................ Avondale ........................ LA 70094T-72-LA-2357 ...... Chevron USA Baton Rouge ........... 1315 Mengel Road ......................... East Baton Rouge ......... LA 70807T-72-LA-2358 ...... Exxon USA Baton Rouge ............... 3329 Scenic Highway ..................... Baton Rouge .................. LA 70805T-72-LA-2359 ...... Petroleum Fuel Baton Rouge ......... 995 Earnest Wilson Road ............... Port Allen ....................... LA 70767T-72-LA-2360 ...... Mobil Oil Chalmette ........................ 1700 Paris Rd Gate 50 ................... Chalmette ...................... LA 70043T-72-LA-2361 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. Louisiana Street .............................. Covent ........................... LA 70723T-72-LA-2363 ...... MAPLLC Oil Garyville ..................... Highway 61 ..................................... Garyville ......................... LA 70051T-72-LA-2364 ...... IMTT—Gretna ................................. 1145 Fourth Street .......................... Gretna ............................ LA 70058T-72-LA-2365 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 143 Firehouse Dr. ........................... Kenner ........................... LA 70062T-72-LA-2366 ...... Valero Refining Co.—Louisiana ..... Highway 105 South ........................ Krotz Springs ................. LA 70750T-72-LA-2367 ...... Calcasieu Lake Charles .................. West End of Tank Farm Road ....... Lake Charles ................. LA 70606T-72-LA-2368 ...... CITGO Lake Charles ...................... Cities Serv Hwy & LA Hwy 108 ...... Lake Charles ................. LA 70601T-72-LA-2371 ...... Murphy Oil USA Meraux ................. 2501 East St Bernard Hwy ............. Meraux ........................... LA 70075T-72-LA-2372 ...... Mobil Oil Morgan City ..................... 1000 Young’s Road ........................ Morgan City ................... LA 70380T-72-LA-2373 ...... Motiva Enterprises, LLC ................. Marrero, Barataria & River Rd. ....... Marrero .......................... LA 70072T-72-LA-2374 ...... GATX Terminals Norco .................. 1601 River Road ............................. Norco ............................. LA 70079T-72-LA-2375 ...... Chevron USA Opelousas ............... Highway 182 South ........................ Opelousas ...................... LA 70571T-72-LA-2376 ...... Placid Refining Co Port Allen ......... 1940 Louisiana Hwy One North ..... Port Allen ....................... LA 70767T-72-LA-2377 ...... International Tank Terminals, Inc. .. 11842 River Rd. .............................. Saint Rose ..................... LA 70087T-72-LA-2378 ...... Pennzoil Product Co Shreveport .... 3333 Midway PO Box 3099 ............ Shreveport ..................... LA 71133T-72-LA-2381 ...... Conoco Westlake ............................ 1980 Old Spanish Trail ................... Westlake ........................ LA 70669




T-72-LA-2382 ...... Paktank Corp Westwego ................ 106 Bridge City Avenue .................. Bridge City ..................... LA 70094T-72-LA-2383 ...... Phibro Marine Fuels ....................... 7168 Shrimpers Row ...................... Dulac .............................. LA 70353T-72-LA-2384 ...... Phibro Marine Fuel Gretna ............. 1125 Fourth St ................................ Gretna ............................ LA 70058T-72-LA-2386 ...... Goldline Refinery ............................ 11499 Plant Road ........................... Jennings ........................ LA 70546T-72-LA-2388 ...... Calvmet Lubricants-Cotton Vall ...... U. S. Hwy 371 South ...................... Cotton Valley ................. LA 71018T-72-LA-2389 ...... Calvmet Lubricants-Princeton ......... 10234 Hwy 157 ............................... Princeton ........................ LA 71067T-72-LA-2390 ...... ST Services Westwego .................. 660 La Bauve Drive ........................ Westwego ...................... LA 70094T-72-LA-2391 ...... Petro-United Term Sunshine .......... 1725 Highway 75 ............................ Sunshine ........................ LA 70780T-72-LA-2392 ...... Petron, Inc. ..................................... R.T. 2, Box 238A ............................ Jonesville ....................... LA 71343T-72-LA-2393 ...... Sunshine Oil and Storage, Inc. ...... 486 Highway 165 ............................ Monroe ........................... LA 71202T-04-MA-1151 ..... L E Belcher Springfield ................... 615 St James Ave .......................... Springfield ...................... MA 01109T-04-MA-1152 ..... Chelsea Terminal L/P ..................... 11 Broadway ................................... Chelsea .......................... MA 02150T-04-MA-1153 ..... Gulf Oil Ltd Partnership Chelsea .... 123 Eastern Ave. ............................ Chelsea .......................... MA 02150T-04-MA-1154 ..... Mobil Oil East Boston ..................... 467 Chelsea Street ......................... East Boston ................... MA 02128T-04-MA-1155 ..... CITGO East Braintree .................... 385 Quincy Ave .............................. Braintree ........................ MA 02184T-04-MA-1156 ..... Exxon USA Everett ......................... 52 Beacham Street ......................... Everett ........................... MA 02149T-04-MA-1160 ..... Irving Oil Terminals, Inc. ................. 41 Lee Burbank Highway ............... Revere ........................... MA 02151T-04-MA-1161 ..... Global Petroleum Corp. .................. 222 Lee Burbank Hwy .................... Revere ........................... MA 02151T-04-MA-1162 ..... Global Petroleum Revere ............... 140 Lee Burbank Hwy .................... Revere ........................... MA 02151T-04-MA-1163 ..... Cargill, Inc. ...................................... 25 Derby Street .............................. Salem ............................. MA 01970T-04-MA-1164 ..... Cargill, Inc. ...................................... 3 Coast Guard Road ...................... Sandwich ....................... MA 02563T-04-MA-1165 ..... Coastal Oil NE South Boston ......... 900 E First Street ........................... South Boston ................. MA 02128T-04-MA-1166 ..... Global Petroleum ............................ 160 Rocus St. ................................. Springfield ...................... MA 01101T-04-MA-1168 ..... Mobil Oil Springfield ........................ 145 Albany Street ........................... Springfield ...................... MA 01105T-04-MA-1172 ..... Global Petroleum Corp ................... 30 Pine St. ...................................... Bedford .......................... MA 02740T-04-MA-1173 ..... Harbor Fuel Oil Corp ...................... 15 Sparks Ave ................................ Nantucket ....................... MA 02554T-04-MA-1175 ..... R M Packer Co. Inc ........................ Beach Rd. ....................................... Vineyard Haven ............. MA 02568T-04-MA-1176 ..... Sprague Energy Corp ..................... 728 Southern Artery ....................... Quincy ............................ MA 02169T-04-MA-1177 ..... Springfield Terminals Inc ................ 86 Robbins Road ............................ Springfield ...................... MA 01101T-04-MA-1179 ..... Wyatt Energy Inc ............................ 1053 Page Blvd .............................. Springfield ...................... MA 01104T-04-MA-1180 ..... Sprague Energy—Quincy ............... 740 Washington St. ........................ Quincy ............................ MA 02170T-04-MA-1181 ..... Ultlramar Energy, Inc. ..................... 60 Hannon St. ................................. Springfield ...................... MA 01101T-52-MD-1550 .... Amerada Hess—Baltimore ............. 6200 Pennington Avenue ............... Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1551 .... Amoco Oil Baltimore ....................... 801 East Ordance Rd ..................... Curtis Bay ...................... MD 21226T-52-MD-1552 .... Tosco/Bayway—Baltimore .............. 2155 Northbridge Ave ..................... Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1554 .... Petroleum Fuel & Terminal N ......... 5101 Erdman Avenue ..................... Baltimore ........................ MD 21205T-52-MD-1558 .... Shell Oil Co. West .......................... 3445 Fairfield Road ........................ Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1559 .... Petroleum Fuel and Terminal S ...... 1622 South Clinton Street .............. Baltimore ........................ MD 21224T-52-MD-1560 .... S T Services Baltimore ................... 1800 Frankfurst Avenue ................. Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1561 .... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 2400 Petrolia Ave. .......................... Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1562 .... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 2201 Southport Ave. ....................... Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1563 .... Stratus Petroleum Baltimore ........... 3100 Vera Street ............................ Baltimore ........................ MD 21226T-52-MD-1565 .... S T Services—Piney Point ............. 17877 Piney Point Road ................. Piney Point .................... MD 20674T-52-MD-1567 .... Cato Oil Salisbury ........................... 1030 Marine Road .......................... Salisbury ........................ MD 21801T-52-MD-1568 .... Support Terminals Operating LP .... 1134 Marine Road .......................... Salisbury ........................ MD 21801T-52-MD-1570 .... S T Services Andrews AFB ............ c/o 89th Supply Squadron/LGSS ... Andrews AFB ................. MD 20331T-52-MD-1571 .... Delmarva Oil Co. ............................ Fitzwater St. Extended ................... Salisbury ........................ MD 21803T-01-ME-1000 ..... Mobil Oil Bangor ............................. 730 Lower Main Street ................... Bangor ........................... ME 04401T-01-ME-1001 ..... Sprague Energy—South Portland .. 5 Central Avenue ............................ South Portland ............... ME 04106T-01-ME-1002 ..... Coldbrook Energy, Inc. ................... 809 Main Road No ......................... Hampden ....................... ME 04444T-01-ME-1003 ..... Sprague Energy So. Portland ......... 59 Main Street ................................ South Portland ............... ME 04106T-01-ME-1004 ..... Mobil Oil Portland ........................... 170 Lincoln Street ........................... South Portland ............... ME 04106T-01-ME-1006 ..... Irving Oil Searsport ......................... Station Ave ..................................... Searsport ....................... ME 04974T-01-ME-1008 ..... Gulf Oil South Portland ................... 175 Front St .................................... South Portland ............... ME 04106T-01-ME-1009 ..... Cargill Inc. ....................................... One Clarks Road ............................ South Portland ............... ME 04106T-01-ME-1010 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 102 Mechanic Street ....................... South Portland ............... ME 04106T-01-ME-1011 ..... Webber Oil Bangor ......................... 700 Main St .................................... Bangor ........................... ME 04401T-01-ME-1012 ..... Webber Tanks Buckport ................. Drawer CC River Road ................... Bucksport ....................... ME 04416T-01-ME-1013 ..... Webber Tanks Brewer .................... 225 South Main .............................. Brewer ........................... ME 04412T-38-MI-3001 ...... Amoco Oil Cheyboygan .................. 311 Coast Guard Drive ................... Cheyboygan ................... MI 49721T-38-MI-3004 ...... Amoco Oil Napoleon ....................... 6777 Brooklyn Road ....................... Napoleon ....................... MI 49261T-38-MI-3005 ...... Amoco Oil River Rouge .................. 205 Marion Street ........................... River Rouge ................... MI 48218T-38-MI-3006 ...... Amoco Oil Taylor ............................ 8625 South Inkster Rd. ................... Taylor ............................. MI 48180T-38-MI-3007 ...... B P Oil Taylor ................................. 24801 Ecorse Rd ............................ Taylor ............................. MI 48180T-38-MI-3008 ...... CITGO Ferrysburg .......................... 524 Third Street .............................. Ferrysburg ..................... MI 49409T-38-MI-3009 ...... CITGO Jackson .............................. 2001 Morrill Rd ............................... Jackson .......................... MI 49201T-38-MI-3010 ...... CITGO Niles ................................... 2233 South Third ............................ Niles ............................... MI 49120T-38-MI-3011 ...... MAPLLC Niles ................................ 2140 South Third St. ...................... Niles ............................... MI 49120T-38-MI-3012 ...... Cousins Petroleum Taylor .............. 7965 Holland ................................... Taylor ............................. MI 48180T-38-MI-3013 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 17806 North Shore Dr. ................... Ferrysburg ..................... MI 49409T-38-MI-3015 ...... MAPLLC Detroit .............................. 12700 Toronto St. ........................... Detroit ............................ MI 48217T-38-MI-3016 ...... MAPLLC Flint .................................. 6065 North Dort Highway ............... Mt. Morris ....................... MI 48458




T-38-MI-3017 ...... MAPLLC Jackson ........................... 2090 Morrill Rd ............................... Jackson .......................... MI 49201T-38-MI-3019 ...... MAPLLC Oil Niles ........................... 2216 South Third Street ................. Niles ............................... MI 49120T-38-MI-3020 ...... MAPLLC N. Muskegon ................... 3005 Holton Rd ............................... North Muskegon ............ MI 49445T-38-MI-3022 ...... Mobil Oil Flint .................................. G5340 North Dort Highway ............ Flint ................................ MI 48505T-38-MI-3023 ...... Mobil Oil Niles ................................. 2150 South Third Street ................. Niles ............................... MI 49120T-38-MI-3024 ...... Mobil Oil Woodhaven ..................... 20755 West Road ........................... Woodhaven .................... MI 48183T-38-MI-3025 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 700 Deacon .................................... Detroit ............................ MI 48217T-38-MI-3027 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2103 Morrill Rd. .............................. Jackson .......................... MI 49201T-38-MI-3028 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 325.5 Fulkerson Rd. ....................... Niles ............................... MI 49120T-38-MI-3029 ...... Sun Company Inc—Owosso .......... 4004 West Main Rd ........................ Owosso .......................... MI 48867T-38-MI-3030 ...... Sun River Rouge ............................ 500 South Dix Avenue .................... Detroit ............................ MI 48217T-38-MI-3031 ...... MAPLLC—Alma .............................. 1925 East Superior St .................... Alma ............................... MI 48802T-38-MI-3032 ...... MAPLLC-Bay City ........................... 1806 Marquette ............................... Bay City ......................... MI 48706T-38-MI-3033 ...... MAPLLC- Lansing ........................... 6300 West Grand River .................. Lansing .......................... MI 48906T-38-MI-3034 ...... MAPLLC-Romulus .......................... 28001 Citrin Drive ........................... Romulus ......................... MI 48174T-38-MI-3035 ...... MAPLLC-Traverse City ................... 13544 W Bayshore Dr .................... Traverse City ................. MI 49684T-38-MI-3036 ...... MAPLLC-Bay City ........................... 5011 Wilder Road ........................... Bay City ......................... MI 48706T-38-MI-3037 ...... Leemon Oil Co., Inc. ....................... 29120 Wick Road ........................... Romulus ......................... MI 48174T-38-MI-3039 ...... Delta Fuels Of Michigan ................. 40600 Grand River ......................... Novi ................................ MI 48374T-38-MI-3041 ...... Quality Oil Company ....................... 630 Ottawa Avenue ........................ Holland ........................... MI 49423T-38-MI-3042 ...... MAPLLC Detroit .............................. 22970 Ecorse Road ........................ Taylor ............................. MI 48180T-38-MI-3043 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 12451 Old US 27 ............................ Marshall ......................... MI 49068T-38-MI-3044 ...... Clark Refining and Marketing ......... 8000 S Beech Daly Rd ................... Taylor ............................. MI 48180T-41-MN-3400 .... Amoco Oil Moorhead ...................... 1101 Southeast Main ...................... Moorhead ....................... MN 56560T-41-MN-3401 .... Amoco Oil Sauk Centre .................. 1 Mile W on County Rd 72 ............. Sauk Centre ................... MN 56378T-41-MN-3402 .... Amoco Oil Spring Valley ................. 2 Miles East of U S 16 ................... Spring Valley ................. MN 55975T-41-MN-3403 .... Amoco Oil Twin Cities .................... 2288 West County Road C ............ Roseville ........................ MN 55113T-41-MN-3404 .... MAPLLC Refinery St. Paul ............. 100 West Third Street .................... St. Paul Park ................. MN 55071T-41-MN-3405 .... Conoco Wrenshall .......................... 10 Broadway Street ........................ Wrenshall ....................... MN 55797T-41-MN-3406 .... Erickson Petroleum Newport .......... 50 21st St ....................................... Newport ......................... MN 55055T-41-MN-3407 .... Koch Petroleum Group-Pine Bend Junction Highways 52 & 55 ............ St. Paul .......................... MN 55164T-41-MN-3410 .... Murphy Oil-Esko ............................. 5746 Old Hwy 61 ............................ Esko ............................... MN 55733T-41-MN-3412 .... Williams Pipe Line Alexandria ........ 709 3rd Ave W ................................ Alexandria ...................... MN 56308T-41-MN-3413 .... Williams Pipe Line Mankato ........... Rural Route Nine ............................ Mankato ......................... MN 56001T-41-MN-3414 .... Williams Pipe Line Marshall ........... Route Four ...................................... Marshall ......................... MN 56258T-41-MN-3415 .... Williams Pipe Line Roseville ........... 2451 W County Rd C ..................... Roseville ........................ MN 55113T-41-MN-3416 .... Williams Pipe Line Rochester ......... 1331 Hwy 42 SE ............................. Eyota .............................. MN 55934T-41-MN-3418 .... ST Services Winona ....................... 1020 E. 2nd St. ............................... Winona ........................... MN 55987T-43-MO-3700 .... Conoco Belle .................................. Highway 28 South .......................... Belle ............................... MO 65013T-43-MO-3701 .... JD Streett St Louis ......................... 3800 S. 1st St. ................................ St Louis .......................... MO 63118T-43-MO-3702 .... Texon LP ........................................ 19905 St. Hwy. 114 ........................ Dexter ............................ MO 63841T-43-MO-3703 .... Ayers Oil Company—Canton ......... Fourth & Grant ................................ Canton ........................... MO 63435T-43-MO-3704 .... Transmontaigne Terminaling Inc. ... 1400 S Giboney .............................. Cape Girardeau ............. MO 63701T-43-MO-3705 .... TEPPCO Cape Girardeau .............. Rural Route 2, Hwy N .................... Scott City ....................... MO 63780T-43-MO-3706 .... Sinclair Pipeline Carrollton ............. S Main & 24 Business Route ......... Carrollton ....................... MO 64633T-43-MO-3707 .... Williams Pipeline Carthage ............. 18195 County Rd. 138 ................... Jasper ............................ MO 64755T-43-MO-3708 .... Williams Pipeline Columbia ............ 5531 South Hwy 63 ........................ Columbia ........................ MO 65201T-43-MO-3709 .... Phillips 66 Jefferson City ................ 2116 Idlewood ................................ Jefferson City ................. MO 65109T-43-MO-3710 .... Conoco Kansas City ....................... 6699 NW Riverpark Drive ............... Parkville ......................... MO 64152T-43-MO-3712 .... Sinclair Pipeline Mexico .................. Highway 54 East ............................. Mexico ........................... MO 65265T-43-MO-3713 .... Conoco Mount Vernon .................... Rt. 2 Box 115 .................................. Mount Vernon ................ MO 65712T-43-MO-3714 .... Artco North ...................................... 3854 South 1st. St. ......................... St. Louis ......................... MO 63118T-43-MO-3715 .... Sinclair Pipeline New Madrid .......... 211 Water Street ............................ New Madrid ................... MO 63869T-43-MO-3716 .... Williams Pipeline Palmyra .............. 6 mi North on Highway 61 .............. Palmyra .......................... MO 63461T-43-MO-3718 .... Williams Pipeline Springfield .......... 3132 S. State Hwy MM .................. Brookline ........................ MO 65619T-43-MO-3719 .... J D Street River Plant ..................... 1 River Road ................................... St Louis .......................... MO 63125T-43-MO-3720 .... Amoco Oil Sugar Creek .................. 1000 North Sterling ......................... Sugar Creek .................. MO 64054T-43-MO-3721 .... Williams Pipeline St Charles ........... 4695 South Service Road .............. St Peter .......................... MO 63376T-43-MO-3722 .... Ogden Aviation Services ................ 10735 Lambert International ........... St. Louis ......................... MO 63145T-43-MO-3723 .... Ogden Aviation Service .................. 217 Burn ......................................... Kansas City ................... MO 64153T-43-MO-3725 .... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 239 E. Prairie St. ............................ St. Louis ......................... MO 63147T-43-MO-3726 .... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 4070 South First Street .................. St Louis .......................... MO 63118T-43-MO-3727 .... Transmontaign Terminaling Inc. ..... 15376 Hwy 96 ................................. Mount Vernon ................ MO 65712T-43-MO-3728 .... Sinclair Oil Corp—Carrollton ........... RR4, Box 48 ................................... Carrollton ....................... MO 64633T-64-MS-2400 ..... Munro Petroleum Biloxi .................. 540 Bayview Avenue ...................... Biloxi .............................. MS 39533T-64-MS-2401 ..... Chevron USA Collins ...................... Old Highway 49 South .................... Collins ............................ MS 39428T-64-MS-2402 ..... Exxon USA Collins ......................... 31 Kola Road .................................. Collins ............................ MS 39428T-64-MS-2403 ..... B P Oil Collins ................................ First Avenue South ......................... Collins ............................ MS 39428T-64-MS-2404 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 49 So. & Kola Rd. ........................... Collins ............................ MS 39428T-64-MS-2405 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. First Avenue South ......................... Collins ............................ MS 39428T-64-MS-2406 ..... Greenville Republic Terminal .......... 310 Walthall Street ......................... Greenville ....................... MS 38701T-64-MS-2408 ..... Transmontainge Terminaling—

Greenville.208 Short Clay Street ..................... Greenville ....................... MS 38701




T-64-MS-2409 ..... Southland Oil Lumberton ................ 5 Mi North of Lumberton Hwy 11 ... Lumberton ...................... MS 39455T-64-MS-2410 ..... Amoco Oil Meridan ......................... 181 65th Avenue ............................ Meridian ......................... MS 39307T-64-MS-2411 ..... MEG, Inc. ........................................ 101 65th Avenue ............................ Meridian ......................... MS 39301T-64-MS-2412 ..... CITGO Meridian .............................. 180 65th Avenue ............................ Meridian ......................... MS 39305T-64-MS-2413 ..... B P Oil Meridian ............................. 1401 65th Ave S ............................. Meridian ......................... MS 39307T-64-MS-2414 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 6540 N. Frontage Rd. ..................... Meridian ......................... MS 39301T-64-MS-2415 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 1401 65th Ave S ............................. Meridian ......................... MS 39307T-64-MS-2416 ..... Chevron USA Pascagola ................ Industrial Road State Hwy 611 ....... Pascagoula .................... MS 39568T-64-MS-2417 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. US Hwy. 11 ..................................... Purvis ............................. MS 39475T-64-MS-2418 ..... Southland Oil Sandersville ............. 2 mi N on Hwy 11 PO Drawer A .... Sandersville ................... MS 39477T-64-MS-2419 ..... CITGO Vicksburg ............................ 1585 Haining Rd ............................. Vicksburg ....................... MS 39180T-72-MS-2421 ..... Delta Terminal—Greenville ............. 2181 Harbor Front .......................... Greenville ....................... MS 38701T-72-MS-2422 ..... Meiko Terminal ............................... 20096 Norm Connell Drive ............. Aberdeen ....................... MS 39730T-81-MT-4000 ..... Conoco Billings ............................... 23rd & Fourth Ave South ................ Billings ........................... MT 59107T-81-MT-4001 ..... Conoco Bozeman ........................... 316 West Griffin Drive .................... Bozeman ........................ MT 59715T-81-MT-4002 ..... Conoco Great Falls ......................... 1401 52nd N ................................... Great Falls ..................... MT 59405T-81-MT-4003 ..... Conoco Helena ............................... 3180 Highway 12 East ................... Helena ........................... MT 59601T-81-MT-4004 ..... Conoco Missoula ............................ 3330 Raser Drive ............................ Missoula ......................... MT 59802T-81-MT-4005 ..... CENEX Laurel ................................ P O Box 909 ................................... Laurel ............................. MT 59044T-81-MT-4006 ..... CENEX Glendive ............................ P O Box 240 ................................... Glendive ......................... MT 59330T-81-MT-4007 ..... Exxon USA Billings ......................... Lockwood Frontage Rd .................. Billings ........................... MT 59101T-81-MT-4008 ..... Exxon USA Bozeman ..................... 220 West Griffin Drive .................... Bozeman ........................ MT 59715T-81-MT-4009 ..... Exxon USA Helena ......................... 3120 Highway 12 Eaast ................. Helena ........................... MT 59601T-81-MT-4010 ..... Exxon USA Missoula ...................... 3350 Raser Drive ............................ Missoula ......................... MT 59801T-81-MT-4011 ..... Montana Refining Great Falls ......... 1900 10th Street ............................. Great Falls ..................... MT 59403T-56-NC-2000 ..... Exxon Corporation .......................... 6801 Freedom Dr ........................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28208T-56-NC-2001 ..... CITGO Petroleum Corp. ................. 7600 Mount Holly Road .................. Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2002 ..... MAPLLC .......................................... 8035 Mt. Holly Rd. .......................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2003 ..... Crown Central Petroleum-Charlotte 7720 Mount Holly Rd. ..................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2004 ..... Phillips Pipeline Co. ........................ 502 Tom Sadler Rd. ....................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28130T-56-NC-2005 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 6851 Freedom Dr. .......................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2006 ..... Southern Facilities .......................... 7145 Mount Holly Road .................. Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2007 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 410 Tom Sadler Rd. ....................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28130T-56-NC-2008 ..... Southeast Terminal ......................... 7401 Old Mount Holly Road ........... Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2009 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 992 Shaw Mill Road ....................... Fayetteville ..................... NC 28303T-56-NC-2010 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. 6907B West Market Street ............. Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2011 ..... Williams Group 2 ............................ 7109 West Market Street ................ Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2012 ..... MAPLLC Greensboro ..................... 6311 Burnt Poplar Road ................. Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2013 ..... Triad Terminal II ............................. 2101 West Oak St. ......................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2014 ..... Exxon USA Greensboro ................. 6907 West Market Street ................ Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2015 ..... Triad Terminal ................................. 6376 Burnt Poplar Rd ..................... Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2016 ..... Atlantic Aero, Inc. ........................... 6423 Bryan Blvd. ............................ Greensboro .................... NC 27425T-56-NC-2018 ..... Triad Terminal Selma ..................... 2200 West Oak St. ......................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2019 ..... Apex Oil .......................................... 6900 West Market St ...................... Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2020 ..... Southern Facilities .......................... 115 Chimney Rock Road ............... Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2021 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 101 S. Chimney Rock Rd. .............. Greensboro .................... NC 27419T-56-NC-2022 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. 6801 West Market Street ................ Greensboro .................... NC 27409T-56-NC-2023 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. 7615 Old Mount Holly Road ........... Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2024 ..... Williams Energy .............................. 7924 Mt. Holly Rd ........................... Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2025 ..... Crown .............................................. 2999 W. Oak St. ............................. Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2026 ..... Valero Marketing ............................. 7325 Old Mount Holly Rd. .............. Charlotte ........................ NC 28214T-56-NC-2027 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 2232 Ten-Ten. Road ...................... Apex ............................... NC 27502T-56-NC-2028 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. West State Road 1929 ................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2029 ..... B P Oil ............................................ Buffalo Road ................................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2030 ..... CITGO ............................................. State Hwy 1003 and Oak St Ext .... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2031 ..... Exxon USA ..................................... 2555 West Oak Street .................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2032 ..... Airport Group Internaltional, Inc. .... 6502 Old Dowd Rd. ........................ Charlotte ........................ NC 28219T-56-NC-2033 ..... Valero Marketing ............................. 4383 Buffaloe Road ........................ Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2034 ..... Phillips ............................................. 4086 Buffalo Road .......................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2036 ..... Southern Facilities .......................... 4414 Buffalow Road ....................... Selma ............................. NC 27576T-56-NC-2037 ..... Amerada Hess ................................ 1312 S Front St. ............................. Wilmington ..................... NC 28401T-56-NC-2039 ..... CTI of North Carolina Inc ................ 1002 S. Front Street ....................... Wilmington ..................... NC 28402T-56-NC-2041 ..... Koch Petroleum .............................. 3325 River Road ............................. Wilmington ..................... NC 28412T-56-NC-2042 ..... Koch Petroleum .............................. 3334 River Rd. ................................ Wilmington ..................... NC 28412T-56-NC-2043 ..... Apex Oil .......................................... 3314 River Road ............................. Wilmington ..................... NC 28403T-45-ND-3500 ..... Williams Pipeline Grand Forks ....... 3930 Gateway Drive ....................... Grand Forks ................... ND 58203T-45-ND-3501 ..... Williams Pipe Line Fargo ................ 902 Main Avenue East ................... West Fargo .................... ND 58078T-45-ND-3502 ..... Amoco Oil Jamestown .................... 10 Mi West on I-94 Stand Spur ...... Jamestown ..................... ND 58401T-45-ND-3503 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Jamestown .......... 3790 Hwy 281 SE ........................... Jamestown ..................... ND 58401T-45-ND-3504 ..... CENEX Minot .................................. 700 Second Street SW ................... Minot .............................. ND 58701T-45-ND-3505 ..... Amoco Oil Mandan ......................... ......................................................... Mandan .......................... ND 58554T-47-NE-3600 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Columbus ............ Highway 30 ..................................... Columbus ....................... NE 68601




T-47-NE-3601 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Geneva ............... U S Highway 81 .............................. Geneva .......................... NE 68361T-47-NE-3602 ..... Williams Pipe Line Doniphan .......... 12275 South US Hwy 281 .............. Doniphan ....................... NE 68832T-47-NE-3603 ..... Conoco Lincoln Products ................ Route 1 ........................................... Roca .............................. NE 68430T-47-NE-3605 ..... Williams Pipe Line Lincoln .............. 2000 Saltillo Road .......................... Roca .............................. NE 68430T-47-NE-3606 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Norfolk ................. Highway 81 ..................................... Norfolk ........................... NE 68701T-47-NE-3607 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line North Platt ........... Rural Route Four ............................ North Platte .................... NE 69101T-47-NE-3608 ..... Williams Pipe Line Omaha ............. Seventh & Yates Street .................. Omaha ........................... NE 68103T-47-NE-3609 ..... Conoco Pipeline Sidney ................. Rural Route 1 ................................. Sidney ............................ NE 69162T-47-NE-3610 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Osceola ............... Rural Route 1 ................................. Osceola .......................... NE 68651T-02-NH-1050 ..... Sprague Energy Newington ............ Spaulding Tpk. River Rd. ............... Newington ...................... NH 03801T-02-NH-1054 ..... Sprague Energy Portsmouth .......... Gosseling Rd. ................................. Portsmouth .................... NH 03801T-02-NH-1056 ..... Irving Oil Corp. Mainway ................ 50 Preble Way ................................ Portsmouth .................... NH 03801T-04-NH-1057 ..... Sprague Energy Newington ............ Avery Lane ...................................... Newington ...................... NH 03801T-22-NJ-1500 ...... Amerada Hess—Bayonne .............. Lower Hook Road ........................... Bayonne ......................... NJ 07002T-22-NJ-1501 ...... Coastal Oil Bayonne ....................... Foot of East Fifth Street ................. Bayonne ......................... NJ 07002T-22-NJ-1502 ...... Amerada Hess—Newark Delanny .. 1111 Delanny St. ............................ Newark ........................... NJ 07105T-22-NJ-1505 ...... Amerada Hess—Bogota ................. 238 West Fort Lee Road ................ Bogota ........................... NJ 07503T-22-NJ-1506 ...... Amoco Oil Carteret Terminal .......... 760 Roosevelt Avenue ................... Carteret .......................... NJ 07008T-22-NJ-1508 ...... Amerada Hess—Edgewater ........... 615 River Road ............................... Edgewater ...................... NJ 07020T-22-NJ-1511 ...... Koch Petroleum Group-Gloucester Across Delaware River from PA ..... Gloucester City .............. NJ 08030T-22-NJ-1512 ...... Tosco Tremley PT .......................... Foot of Southwood Ave .................. Linden ............................ NJ 07036T-22-NJ-1513 ...... CITGO Linden ................................. 4801 South Wood Avenue ............. Linden ............................ NJ 07036T-22-NJ-1514 ...... Bayway Refining Co ....................... 1100 US Highway One ................... Linden ............................ NJ 07036T-22-NJ-1515 ...... Gulf Oil Linden ................................ 2600 Marshes Dock Road .............. Linden ............................ NJ 07036T-22-NJ-1516 ...... Mobil Oil Linden .............................. South Wood Avenue ....................... Linden ............................ NJ 07036T-22-NJ-1518 ...... Amerada Hess—Newark Doremus 148-182 Doremus Ave. ................... Newark ........................... NJ 07105T-22-NJ-1519 ...... B P Oil Newark ............................... Building 350 Coastel St .................. Port Newark ................... NJ 07114T-22-NJ-1520 ...... Getty Terminal Newark ................... 86 Doremus Rd .............................. Newark ........................... NJ 07105T-22-NJ-1521 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 909 Delaney Street ......................... Newark ........................... NJ 07105T-22-NJ-1522 ...... Stratus Petroleum Newark .............. 678 Doremus Ave ........................... Newark ........................... NJ 07105T-22-NJ-1523 ...... Sun Newark .................................... 436 Doremus Avenue ..................... Newark ........................... NJ 07105T-22-NJ-1524 ...... B P Oil Paulsboro ........................... 303 Mantua Avenue ....................... Paulsboro ....................... NJ 08066T-22-NJ-1525 ...... GATX Terminals Paulsboro ............ 3rd St & Billingsport Road .............. Paulsboro ....................... NJ 08066T-22-NJ-1526 ...... Valero Refining Company—New

Jersey.800 Billingsport ............................... Paulsboro ....................... NJ 08066

T-22-NJ-1528 ...... Amerada Hess—Pennsauken ........ One Derousse Avenue ................... Pennsauken ................... NJ 08110T-22-NJ-1530 ...... Amerada Hess—Perth Amboy ....... State Street ..................................... Perth Amboy .................. NJ 08861T-22-NJ-1531 ...... Chevron USA Perth Amboy ............ 1200 State St .................................. Perth Amboy .................. NJ 08861T-22-NJ-1533 ...... CITGO Petty’s Island ...................... Route 36 & Deleware River ............ Pennsauken ................... NJ 08110T-22-NJ-1534 ...... Sun Piscataway .............................. 1028 Stelton Road .......................... Piscataway ..................... NJ 08854T-22-NJ-1535 ...... Amerada Hess—Port Reading ....... Cliff Road ........................................ Port Reading .................. NJ 07064T-22-NJ-1536 ...... Amerada Hess—Secaucus ............. 35 Meadowlands Parkway .............. Secaucus ....................... NJ 07094T-22-NJ-1537 ...... Motiva Enterprises, LLC—Sewaren 115 State Street .............................. Sewaren ......................... NJ 07077T-22-NJ-1538 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC—Sewaren 111 State Street .............................. Sewaren ......................... NJ 07077T-22-NJ-1540 ...... Gulf Oil Thorofare ........................... 358 Kings Highway ......................... Thorofare ....................... NJ 08086T-22-NJ-1542 ...... Mobil Oil Trenton ............................ 2785 Lamberton Road .................... Trenton .......................... NJ 08611T-22-NJ-1544 ...... Coastal Eagle Point Westville ........ U S Route 130 ................................ South Westville .............. NJ 08093T-22-NJ-1545 ...... Amerada Hess—Woodbridge ......... Smith Street & Convery Blvd. ......... Perth Amboy .................. NJ 08861T-22-NJ-1547 ...... Duck Island Terminal Inc. ............... 1463 Lamberton Road .................... Trenton .......................... NJ 08677T-22-NJ-1548 ...... SLF, Inc. T/a Consumers Oil .......... 1473 Lamberton Road .................... Trenton .......................... NJ 08611T-85-NM-4251 .... Chevron USA Albuquerque ............ 3200 Broadway SE within city ........ Albuquerque .................. NM 87105T-85-NM-4252 .... Conoco Albuquerque ...................... 4036 Broadway Southeast ............. Albuquerque .................. NM 87105T-85-NM-4253 .... Diamond Albuquerque .................... 6348 State Road 303 SW .............. Albuquerque .................. NM 87105T-85-NM-4254 .... Phillips 66 Albuquerque .................. 6356 State Road 47 S W ............... Albuquerque .................. NM 87105T-85-NM-4255 .... Giant Industries—Albuquerque ....... 3209 Broadway Southeast ............. Albuquerque .................. NM 87105T-85-NM-4256 .... Navajo Refining Artesia .................. US Highway 82, Drawer 159 .......... Artesia ............................ NM 88210T-85-NM-4257 .... Giant Refining—Bloomfield ............. # 50 County Road 4990 ................. Bloomfield ...................... NM 87413T-85-NM-4258 .... Giant Refining—Ciniza ................... I-40 Exit 39 ..................................... Jamestown ..................... NM 87347T-85-NM-4259 .... S T Services Alamogordo ............... 6026 Hwy 54 South ........................ Alamogordo ................... NM 88310T-86-NM-4250 .... Navajo Refining Co. ........................ 170 Rd. 4980 .................................. Bloomfield ...................... NM 87413T-86-NM-4261 .... USA Petroleum Southwest Ter-

minal.U.S. 10 & NM St. Rd. 29 ................ Road Forks .................... NM 88045

T-86-NM-4262 .... Navajo Refining Company .............. 1001 E. Martinez ............................ Moriarty .......................... NM 87035T-88-NV-4350 ..... Calnev Pipe Line Las Vegas .......... 5049 N Sloan .................................. Las Vegas ...................... NV 89115T-88-NV-4353 ..... Kinder Morgan—Sparks ................. 301 Nugget Avenue ........................ Sparks ............................ NV 89431T-88-NV-4354 ..... Shore Terminals LLC ...................... 525 Nugget Avenue ........................ Sparks ............................ NV 89431T-88-NV-4358 ..... Berry-Hinckley Terminal, Inc. .......... 275 Nugget Ave .............................. Sparks ............................ NV 89431T-88-NV-4359 ..... Rebel Oil Las Vegas ....................... 5054 N Sloane Lane ....................... Las Vegas ...................... NV 89115T-88-NV-4360 ..... Berry Hinckley Terminal-Sparks ..... 147 South Stanford Way ................ Sparks ............................ NV 89431T-11-NY-1300 ..... Carbo Industries, Inc. ..................... 555 Doughty Blvd. .......................... Inwood ........................... NY 11696T-11-NY-1301 ..... Amoco Oil Brooklyn ........................ 125 Apollo St. ................................. Brooklyn ......................... NY 11222T-11-NY-1302 ..... Metro Terminals Brooklyn ............... 498 Kingsland Avenue .................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11222




T-11-NY-1303 ..... Tosco Pipeline Plainview ................ 150 Fairchild Avenue ...................... Plainview ........................ NY 11803T-11-NY-1304 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 25 Paidge Ave. ............................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11222T-11-NY-1305 ..... Mobil Oil Inwood ............................. 464 Doughty Blvd ........................... Inwood ........................... NY 11696T-11-NY-1306 ..... Lefferts Oil Terminal Inc. ................ 31-70 College Point Blvd ................ Flushing ......................... NY 11354T-11-NY-1307 ..... Castle Astoria ................................. 500 Mamaroneck Avenue ............... Harrison ......................... NY 10528T-11-NY-1308 ..... Amerada Hess—Brooklyn .............. 722 Court Street ............................. Brooklyn ......................... NY 11231T-11-NY-1309 ..... Mobil Oil Glenwood Landing .......... Shore & Glenwood Rd .................... Glenwood Landing ......... NY 11547T-11-NY-1310 ..... Tosco Pipeline Holtsville ................. 586 Union Ave ................................ Holtsville ........................ NY 11742T-11-NY-1311 ..... Getty Terminal-Long Island ............ 30-23 Greenpoint Ave. ................... Long Island City ............. NY 11101T-11-NY-1312 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 74 East Avenue .............................. Lawrence ....................... NY 11559T-11-NY-1313 ..... Bayside Fuel Oil Depot Corp. ......... One North 12th Street .................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11211T-11-NY-1315 ..... RAD Operating Oceanside ............. 7 Hampton Road ............................ Oceanside ...................... NY 11572T-11-NY-1316 ..... Bayside Fuel Oil Depot Corp .......... 510 Sackett Street .......................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11214T-11-NY-1317 ..... Lewis Oil Port Washington ............. 65 Shore Road ............................... Port Washington ............ NY 11050T-11-NY-1318 ..... Tosco—Riverhead .......................... 212 Sound Shore Road .................. Riverhead ...................... NY 11901T-11-NY-1319 ..... Tosco Pipeline East Setauket ........ 19 Bell Meade Road ....................... East Setauket ................ NY 11733T-11-NY-1323 ..... Ditmas Oil Associates Inc ............... 364 Maspeth Avenue ...................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11211T-11-NY-1324 ..... Carbo Industries Inc ....................... 1 Bay Blvd ...................................... Lawerence ..................... NY 11559T-11-NY-1325 ..... Bayside Fuel Oil Corp. ................... 1100 Grand Street .......................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11211T-11-NY-1326 ..... Bayside Fuel Oil Depot ................... 1776 Shore Parkway ...................... Brooklyn ......................... NY 11214T-11-NY-1329 ..... Bay Terminals of Rockaway, Inc. ... 75-02 Astel Blvd. ............................ Rockaway ...................... NY 11692T-11-NY-1330 ..... Lefferts Oil Terminal ....................... Bldg. 140 JFK Inter’l Airport ........... Jamaica ......................... NY 11430T-11-NY-1331 ..... A. R. Fuels, Inc. .............................. 2125 Mill Ave. ................................. Brooklyn ......................... NY 11234T-11-NY-1332 ..... Bayside Fuel Oil Corporation .......... 537 Smith Street ............................. Brooklyn ......................... NY 11231T-11-NY-1333 ..... The Energy Conservation Group

LLC.DBA Skaggs-Walsh ........................ College Point ................. NY 11356

T-11-NY-1460 ..... Mobil Oil Cold Spring Harbor .......... 95 Shore Road ............................... Cold Spring .................... NY 11724T-13-NY-1352 ..... Castle Port Morris Terminals .......... 290 Locust Avenue ......................... Bronx ............................. NY 10454T-13-NY-1353 ..... Stuyvesant Fuel Service-Bronx ...... 1040 East 149th Street ................... Bronx ............................. NY 10455T-13-NY-1354 ..... Getty Terminal Bronx ...................... 4301 Boston Post Road ................. Bronx ............................. NY 10466T-13-NY-1355 ..... Mobil Oil Port Mobil ........................ 4101 Arthur Kill Rd ......................... Staten Island .................. NY 10309T-13-NY-1356 ..... Amoco Oil Mount Vernon ............... 40 Canal St. .................................... Mount Vernon ................ NY 10550T-13-NY-1357 ..... Fred M Schildwachter & Sons ........ 1400 Ferris Place ........................... Bronx ............................. NY 10461T-13-NY-1358 ..... Meenan Peekskill ............................ Roa Hook rd ................................... Peekskill ......................... NY 10566T-13-NY-1359 ..... Panco Equipment Corp .................. Main St Box 659 ............................. Stoney Point .................. NY 10980T-13-NY-1360 ..... Westmore Fuel Co Inc .................... 2 Purdy Ave .................................... Port Chester .................. NY 10573T-13-NY-1361 ..... West Vernon Petroleum Corp ........ 701 S Columbus Ave ...................... Mount Vernon ................ NY 10550T-13-NY-1362 ..... GATX Staten Island ........................ 500 Western Ave ............................ Staten Island .................. NY 10302T-13-NY-1363 ..... A Tarricone Yonkers ....................... 91 Alexander St. ............................. Yonkers .......................... NY 10701T-13-NY-1364 ..... Commander Oil Corporation ........... 240 East Shore Road ..................... Great Neck .................... NY 11022T-13-NY-1365 ..... Castle North Terminals, Inc. ........... 11 River Street ................................ Sleepy Hollow ................ NY 10591T-14-NY-1400 ..... Agway Petroleum Albany ............... 184 Port Rd .................................... Albany ............................ NY 12202T-14-NY-1401 ..... Cibro Petroleum Prod Albany ......... Port of Albany ................................. Albany ............................ NY 12202T-14-NY-1402 ..... Citgo Petroleum Corp Glenmont .... 495 River Road ............................... Glenmont ....................... NY 12077T-14-NY-1403 ..... Mobil Oil Albany .............................. 50 Church Street ............................ Albany ............................ NY 12202T-14-NY-1404 ..... Petroleum Fuel Albany ................... 54 Riverside Avenue ...................... Rensselaer ..................... NY 12144T-14-NY-1405 ..... Sears Petroleum & Transport Co ... Route 144 552 River Road ............. Glenmont ....................... NY 12077T-14-NY-1406 ..... Stratus Petroleum Green Isle ......... 1 Osgood Ave. ................................ Green Island .................. NY 12183T-14-NY-1409 ..... Agway Petroleum Corp. Milton ....... Sands Ave. ..................................... Milton ............................. NY 12547T-14-NY-1411 ..... Coastal Oil Newburgh ..................... Hudson River .................................. Newburgh ...................... NY 12551T-14-NY-1413 ..... Mobil Oil Newburgh ........................ 20 River Road ................................. Newburgh ...................... NY 12551T-14-NY-1414 ..... Sun Refining New Windsor ............ 49 River Road ................................. New Windsor ................. NY 12553T-14-NY-1415 ..... Amerada Hess—Rensselaer .......... River Road E Greenbush ............... Rensselaer ..................... NY 12144T-14-NY-1416 ..... Bray Terminals Rensselaer ............ 50 Riverside Drive .......................... Rensselaer ..................... NY 12144T-14-NY-1417 ..... Sprague Energy Rensselaer .......... Riverside Avenue, PO Box 215 ...... Rensselaer ..................... NY 12144T-14-NY-1418 ..... Getty Terminal Rensselaer ............. 49 Riverside Avenue ...................... Rensselaer ..................... NY 12144T-14-NY-1420 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 58 Riverside Avenue ...................... Rensselaer ..................... NY 12144T-14-NY-1421 ..... Amerada Hess—Roseton ............... 590 River Road ............................... Newburgh ...................... NY 12550T-14-NY-1422 ..... Effron Fuel Oil Co ........................... 154 Garden St ................................ Poughkeepsie ................ NY 12601T-16-NY-1450 ..... Stratus Petro Baldwinsville ............. 7431 Hillside Road ......................... Baldwinsville .................. NY 13027T-16-NY-1451 ..... Mobil Oil Binghamton ..................... 3301 Old Vestal Rd ........................ Vestal ............................. NY 13850T-16-NY-1452 ..... Amerada Hess—Rochester—Cairn 22 Cairn St. ..................................... Rochester ...................... NY 14611T-16-NY-1453 ..... Coastal Oil New York, Inc. ............. 3121 Shippers Road ....................... Vestal ............................. NY 13851T-16-NY-1454 ..... CITGO Vestal ................................. 3212 Old Vestal Road .................... Vestal ............................. NY 13850T-16-NY-1455 ..... Sun Binghamton ............................. 4324 Watson Boulevard ................. Johnson City .................. NY 13790T-16-NY-1456 ..... Agway Petroleum Corp. Brewerton Rt. 37 River Road ........................... Brewerton ...................... NY 13029T-16-NY-1457 ..... United Refining Tonawanda ........... 4545 River Road ............................. Tonawanda .................... NY 14150T-16-NY-1458 ..... Mobil Oil Buffalo ............................. 625 Elk St. ...................................... Buffalo ............................ NY 14210T-16-NY-1459 ..... Noco Energy Corp .......................... 700 Grand Island Blvd .................... Tonawanda .................... NY 14151T-16-NY-1461 ..... IPT, LLC, INC. ................................ End of Riverside Extension ............ Rennselaer .................... NY 12144T-16-NY-1462 ..... Agway Petroleum Corp. Geneva .... West River Road ............................ Geneva .......................... NY 14456T-16-NY-1463 ..... Agway Petroleum Corp. Marcy ....... 9586 River Road ............................. Marcy ............................. NY 13403




T-16-NY-1464 ..... Amerada Hess—Marcy ................... 9570 River Rd. ................................ Marcy ............................. NY 13403T-16-NY-1465 ..... Bray Terminals Marcy ..................... 9660 River Rd ................................. Marcy ............................. NY 13403T-16-NY-1468 ..... Agway Petroleum Rochester .......... 754 Brooks Ave. ............................. Rochester ...................... NY 14619T-16-NY-1469 ..... Amerada Hess—Rochester Lyell .... 1975 Lyell Avenue .......................... Rochester ...................... NY 14606T-16-NY-1470 ..... Griffith Oil-Rochester ...................... 335 McKee Rd ................................ Rochester ...................... NY 14611T-16-NY-1471 ..... Griffith Oil Co., Inc. Big Flats .......... 3351 Rt. 352 ................................... Big Flats ......................... NY 14814T-16-NY-1472 ..... Mobil Oil Rochester ........................ 675 Brooks Avenue ........................ Rochester ...................... NY 14619T-16-NY-1473 ..... Sun Rochester ................................ 1840 Lyell Avenue .......................... Rochester ...................... NY 14606T-16-NY-1474 ..... United Refining Rochester .............. 1075 Chili Avenue .......................... Rochester ...................... NY 14624T-16-NY-1476 ..... Amerada Hess—Warners ............... 6700 Herman Rd. ........................... Warners ......................... NY 13164T-16-NY-1480 ..... Mobil Oil Syracuse .......................... 502 Solar Street .............................. Syracuse ........................ NY 13261T-16-NY-1482 ..... Sun Syracuse ................................. 540 Solar Street .............................. Syracuse ........................ NY 13204T-16-NY-1484 ..... Sun Tonawanda .............................. 3733 River Road ............................. Tonawanda .................... NY 14150T-16-NY-1486 ..... Mobil Oil Utica ................................ 37 Wurz Avenue ............................. Utica ............................... NY 13502T-16-NY-1487 ..... Sears Oil Marcy Terminal ............... 9788 River Road ............................. Marcy ............................. NY 13403T-16-NY-1488 ..... Agway Petroleum Corp. Vestal ...... 3113 Shippers Rd. .......................... Vestal ............................. NY 13851T-16-NY-1489 ..... Amerada Hess Corp. Vestal ........... 440 Prentice Road .......................... Vestal ............................. NY 13850T-16-NY-1492 ..... Alaskan Oil Co.—Baldwinsville ....... 7437 Hillside Road ......................... Baldwinsville .................. NY 13027T-16-NY-1493 ..... Mohawk Valley Oil Co. Marcy ........ 9678 River Road ............................. Marcy ............................. NY 13403T-16-NY-1494 ..... Alaskan Oil- Rochester ................... 1935 Lyell Avenue .......................... Rochester ...................... NY 14606T-16-NY-1495 ..... Kingston Oil Supply-Port Ewen ...... North Broadway .............................. Port Ewen ...................... NY 12166T-16-NY-1496 ..... Kingston Oil Supply- Catskill .......... End Lower Main St. ........................ Catskill ........................... NY 12414T-16-NY-1497 ..... Walter Davenport & Son ................. 625 Sawkill Rd. ............................... Kingston ......................... NY 12401T-16-NY-1498 ..... Riverstar—Highland ........................ 42 River Rd. .................................... Highland ......................... NY 12528T-16-NY-1499 ..... Warex Terminals Corp-Newburgh .. 1 South Water Street ...................... Newburgh ...................... NY 12550T-31-OH-3100 ..... MAPLLC Cincinnati ......................... 4015 River Road ............................. Cincinnati ....................... OH 45204T-31-OH-3101 ..... MAPLLC Columbus ........................ 3855 Fisher Road ........................... Columbus ....................... OH 43228T-31-OH-3102 ..... MAPLLC Heath ............................... 840 Heath Road ............................. Heath ............................. OH 43056T-31-OH-3103 ..... MAPLLC Marietta ........................... Old Rt 7 & Moores Junction ........... Marietta .......................... OH 45750T-31-OH-3104 ..... B P Oil Cincinnati ........................... 930 Tennessee Avenue .................. Cincinnati ....................... OH 45229T-31-OH-3105 ..... B P Oil Columbus ........................... 303 North Wilson Road .................. Columbus ....................... OH 43204T-31-OH-3106 ..... B P Oil Dayton ................................ 621 Brandt Pike .............................. Dayton ........................... OH 45404T-31-OH-3107 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 4033 Fisher Road ........................... Columbus ....................... OH 43228T-31-OH-3108 ..... B P Oil Sciotoville ........................... 106 Harding Ave ............................. Portsmouth .................... OH 45662T-31-OH-3110 ..... ITAPCO, Inc., Marietta ................... RT 7 & Milerun Road ...................... Marietta .......................... OH 45750T-31-OH-3111 ..... Midwest Terminal Columbus .......... 3866 Fisher Rd ............................... Columbus ....................... OH 43228T-31-OH-3112 ..... MAPLLC Columbus ........................ 4125 Fisher Rd ............................... Columbus ....................... OH 43228T-31-OH-3113 ..... MAPLLC Lebanon .......................... 999 West State Rt.122 ................... Lebanon ......................... OH 45036T-31-OH-3114 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 3651 Fisher Rd. .............................. Columbus ....................... OH 43228T-31-OH-3115 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 801 Brandt Pike .............................. Dayton ........................... OH 45404T-31-OH-3116 ..... Sun Columbus ................................ 3499 West Broad Street ................. Columbus ....................... OH 43204T-31-OH-3117 ..... Sun Dayton ..................................... 1708 Farr Drive ............................... Dayton ........................... OH 45404T-31-OH-3118 ..... TEPPCO Lebanon .......................... 2700 Hart Road .............................. Lebanon ......................... OH 45036T-31-OH-3119 ..... TEPPCO ......................................... 3590 Yankee Rd. ............................ Middletown ..................... OH 45043T-31-OH-3120 ..... CITGO—Dublin ............................... 6433 Cosgray Road ........................ Dublin ............................. OH 43016T-31-OH-3121 ..... CITGO—Dayton .............................. 1800 Farr Drive ............................... Dayton ........................... OH 45404T-31-OH-3122 ..... Boswell Oil Company ..................... 5 W 4th St Floor 2500 .................... Cincinnati ....................... OH 45202T-34-OH-3140 ..... MAPLLC Refinery Canton .............. 2408 Gamfrinus Rd SW ................. Canton ........................... OH 44706T-34-OH-3142 ..... Aurora Terminal & Trans ................ 1519 S Chillicothe Rd ..................... Aurora ............................ OH 44202T-34-OH-3143 ..... B P Oil Canton ................................ 807 Hartford Southeast .................. Canton ........................... OH 44707T-34-OH-3144 ..... B P Oil Cleveland ........................... 4850 E 49th Street ......................... Cuyahoga Hts ................ OH 44125T-34-OH-3145 ..... B P Oil Lorain ................................. 12545 S Avon Belden Rd ............... Grafton ........................... OH 44044T-34-OH-3146 ..... Equilon Enterprises ......................... 817 West Vine Street ..................... Lima ............................... OH 45804T-34-OH-3147 ..... B P Oil Tiffin ................................... 197 Wall Street ............................... Tiffin ............................... OH 44883T-34-OH-3148 ..... B P Oil Toledo ................................ 2450 Hill Avenue ............................ Toledo ............................ OH 43607T-34-OH-3149 ..... Delta Fuels Toledo ......................... 1820 South Front ............................ Toledo ............................ OH 43605T-34-OH-3150 ..... Fleet Supplies ................................. 250 Mahoning Ave .......................... Cleveland ....................... OH 44101T-34-OH-3151 ..... MAPLLC Brecksville ....................... 10439 Brecksville Road .................. Brecksville ...................... OH 44141T-34-OH-3152 ..... MAPLLC Lima ................................. 2990 South Dixie Highway ............. Lima ............................... OH 45804T-34-OH-3153 ..... MAPLLC Oregon ............................ 4131 Seaman Road ........................ Oregon ........................... OH 43616T-34-OH-3154 ..... MAPLLC Steubenville ..................... 28371 Kingsdale Road ................... Steubenville ................... OH 43952T-34-OH-3155 ..... MAPLLC Youngstown ..................... 1140 Bears Den Road .................... Youngstown ................... OH 44511T-34-OH-3157 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2201 W. Third Street ...................... Cleveland ....................... OH 44113T-34-OH-3158 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1500 W. Buckeye Rd. ..................... Lima ............................... OH 45804T-34-OH-3159 ..... Sun Akron ....................................... 999 Home Avenue .......................... Akron ............................. OH 44310T-34-OH-3160 ..... Sun Cleveland ................................ 3200 Independence Road .............. Cleveland ....................... OH 44105T-34-OH-3161 ..... Sun Toledo ..................................... 1601 Woodville Road ..................... Toledo ............................ OH 43605T-34-OH-3162 ..... Sun Company Youngstown ............ 6331 Southern Boulevard ............... Youngstown ................... OH 44512T-34-OH-3164 ..... CITGO—Tallmadge ........................ 1595 Southeast Avenue ................. Tallmadge ...................... OH 44278T-34-OH-3165 ..... CITGO—Oregon ............................. 1840 Otter Creek Road .................. Oregon ........................... OH 43616T-34-OH-3166 ..... MAPLLC Bellevue ........................... Rural Route 4 ................................. Bellevue ......................... OH 44811T-34-OH-3167 ..... B P Oil Niles ................................... 1001 Youngstown Warren Rd ........ Niles ............................... OH 41446




T-34-OH-3169 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2844 Summit St .............................. Toledo ............................ OH 43611T-34-OH-3170 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 10346 Brecksville Rd ...................... Brecksville ...................... OH 44141T-34-OH-3173 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling .......... 15982 U.S Rte 127 EW .................. Bryan ............................. OH 43506T-73-OK-2600 ..... Total Petroleum Ardmore ............... Hwy 142 Bypass ............................. Ardmore ......................... OK 73401T-73-OK-2606 ..... Williams Pipeline Enid .................... 1401 North 30th Street ................... Enid ................................ OK 73701T-73-OK-2608 ..... Conoco—Jenks ............................... Route Two ...................................... Jenks ............................. OK 74037T-73-OK-2609 ..... Phillips 66 Laverne ......................... U S 283 ........................................... Laverne .......................... OK 73848T-73-OK-2610 ..... Koch Hydrocarbon-Medford ............ US 81 .............................................. Medford .......................... OK 73759T-73-OK-2612 ..... Conoco Oklahoma City ................... 4700 NE Tenth ............................... Oklahoma City ............... OK 73111T-73-OK-2613 ..... Williams Pipeline Co Okla City ....... 251 N Sunny Lane .......................... Del City .......................... OK 73117T-73-OK-2614 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 951 N. Vickie .................................. Oklahoma City ............... OK 73117T-73-OK-2616 ..... Williams Pipeline Oklahoma Cty ..... 1250 S High St ............................... Oklahoma City ............... OK 73129T-73-OK-2617 ..... Conoco—Ponca City ...................... South Highway 60 .......................... Ponca City ..................... OK 74601T-73-OK-2618 ..... Sinclair Pipeline Shawnee .............. 39101 MacArthur Road .................. Shawnee ........................ OK 74802T-73-OK-2620 ..... Sinclair Pipeline Tulsa .................... 1307 W 35th St ............................... Tulsa .............................. OK 74107T-73-OK-2621 ..... Sun—Tulsa ..................................... 1700 South Union ........................... Tulsa .............................. OK 74102T-73-OK-2622 ..... Williams Pipeline Tulsa ................... 2120 S 33rd Ave ............................. Tulsa .............................. OK 74107T-73-OK-2623 ..... Diamond Shamrock Turpin ............. Hwy 64 & Junction Rt 2 .................. Turpin ............................. OK 73950T-73-OK-2624 ..... Gary Williams Energy Corp ............ 906 South Powell ............................ Wynnewood ................... OK 73098T-93-OR-4452 ..... Tidewater Terminal Umatilla ........... 535 Port Avenue ............................. Umatilla .......................... OR 97882T-93-OR-4453 ..... Tosco Coos Bay ............................. 2640 North Bayshore ...................... Coos Bay ....................... OR 97420T-93-OR-4454 ..... SFPP LP Eugene ........................... 1765 Prairie Road ........................... Eugene .......................... OR 97402T-93-OR-4455 ..... ARCO Portland Terminal ................ 9930 NW St Helens Rd .................. Portland ......................... OR 97231T-93-OR-4456 ..... Chevron USA Portland ................... 5531 Northwest Doane Street ........ Portland ......................... OR 97210T-93-OR-4457 ..... GATX Terminals Portland ............... 11400 NW St Helen’s Road ........... Portland ......................... OR 97283T-93-OR-4458 ..... McCall Oil Portland ......................... 5480 NW Front Ave ........................ Portland ......................... OR 97210T-93-OR-4459 ..... Mobil Portland ................................. 9420 Northwest St Helen’s Rd ....... Portland ......................... OR 97231T-93-OR-4460 ..... GATX Portland ................................ 5880 NW St Helen’s Road ............. Portland ......................... OR 97210T-93-OR-4461 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 3800 NW St. Helen’s Road ............ Portland ......................... OR 97210T-93-OR-4462 ..... Shore Terminals LLC ...................... 9100 NW St Helen’s Road ............. Portland ......................... OR 97231T-93-OR-4463 ..... Time Oil Portland Burgard .............. 12005 North Burgard Street ........... Portland ......................... OR 97203T-93-OR-4464 ..... Tosco Portland ................................ 5528 Northwest Doane ................... Portland ......................... OR 97210T-23-PA-1700 ..... Agway Petroleum Corp.—Macungie Buckeye Road ................................ Macungie ....................... PA 18062T-23-PA-1701 ..... Mobil Oil Allentown ......................... 1134 North Quebec Street ............. Allentown ....................... PA 18103T-23-PA-1702 ..... Farm & Home Oil Co.—Macungie .. Buckeye Road ................................ Macungie ....................... PA 18062T-23-PA-1703 ..... Gulf Oil—Dupont ............................. 674 Suscon Rd ............................... Pittston Township .......... PA 18641T-23-PA-1704 ..... Carlos R Leffler Inc Macungie ........ 5088 Shippers Lane ....................... Macungie ....................... PA 18062T-23-PA-1705 ..... Petron Oil Corporation .................... One Ward Street ............................. Chester .......................... PA 19013T-23-PA-1706 ..... Petroleum Products—Avoca ........... 801 Suscon Rd. .............................. Avoca ............................. PA 18641T-23-PA-1707 ..... Petroleum Products Du Pont .......... Suscon Road .................................. Avoca ............................. PA 18641T-23-PA-1708 ..... Carlos R Leffler Inc S Spring .......... Mountain Home Road ..................... Sinking Spring ............... PA 19608T-23-PA-1709 ..... Montour Oil Service ........................ 112 Broad St ................................... Montoursville .................. PA 17754T-23-PA-1710 ..... Sun Exton ....................................... 601 East Lincoln Hwy ..................... Exton .............................. PA 19341T-23-PA-1711 ..... Sun—Fullerton ................................ 2480 Main St .................................. Whitehall ........................ PA 18052T-23-PA-1713 ..... Mobil Oil Harrisburg ........................ 5140 Paxton Street ......................... Harrisburg ...................... PA 17111T-23-PA-1714 ..... Petroleum Products Harrisburg ...... 3300 Industrial Road ...................... Harrisburg ...................... PA 17110T-23-PA-1715 ..... Petroleum Products Harrisburg ...... RD #5 Texaco Drive ....................... Mechanicsburg .............. PA 17055T-23-PA-1716 ..... Petroleum Products Highspire ........ 900 Eisenhower Blvd ...................... Middletown ..................... PA 17057T-23-PA-1717 ..... Coastal Oil New York Inc ............... Sylvan Dell Rd ................................ South Williamsport ......... PA 17701T-23-PA-1718 ..... Mobil Oil Malvern ............................ 8 South Malin Rd ............................ Malvern .......................... PA 19406T-23-PA-1720 ..... Sun Kingston .................................. 60 S Wyoming Avenue ................... Edwardsville ................... PA 18704T-23-PA-1721 ..... Mobil Oil Lancaster ......................... 1360 Manheim Pike ........................ Lancaster ....................... PA 17604T-23-PA-1722 ..... Sun Malvern .................................... Lincoln Hwy & Malin Road ............. Malvern .......................... PA 19355T-23-PA-1724 ..... Petroleum Products-Mechanicsbu .. Sinclair Rd ...................................... Mechanicsburg .............. PA 17055T-23-PA-1725 ..... Gulf Oil Mechanicsburg .................. 5125 Simpson Ferry Rd ................. Mechanicsburg .............. PA 17055T-23-PA-1726 ..... Sun Mechanicsburg ........................ 5145 Simpson Ferry Road ............. Mechanicsburg .............. PA 17055T-23-PA-1727 ..... Sun Montello ................................... Fritztown Road ................................ Sinking Spring ............... PA 19608T-23-PA-1728 ..... Petroleum Prod Northumberland .... Rt 11 North RD 1 ............................ Northumberland ............. PA 17857T-23-PA-1729 ..... Sun Northumberland ....................... Rt 11 North Rd 1 ............................ Northumberland ............. PA 17857T-23-PA-1730 ..... Amerada Hess—Philadelphia ......... 1630 South 51st Street ................... Philadelphia ................... PA 19143T-23-PA-1731 ..... Amoco Oil Philadelphia .................. 63rd & Passyunk Avenue ............... Philadelphia ................... PA 19153T-23-PA-1732 ..... Bayway Refining Co.—Phila ........... G Street & Hunting Park Ave. ........ Philadelphia ................... PA 19124T-23-PA-1733 ..... Pipeline Petroleum-MaCungie ........ Shippers Lane ................................. Macungie ....................... PA 18062T-23-PA-1734 ..... Exxon USA Philadelphia ................. 6850 Essington Avenue .................. Philadelphia ................... PA 19153T-23-PA-1735 ..... Artex Inc .......................................... Rt 54 & Lakeview Rd ...................... Barnesville ..................... PA 18214T-23-PA-1736 ..... Sun Philadelphia ............................. 2700 W Passyunk Avenue ............. Philadelphia ................... PA 19145T-23-PA-1737 ..... Support Terminals Operating LP .... 67th & Schuylkill River .................... Philadalphia ................... PA 19153T-23-PA-1738 ..... Pickelner Fuel Company Inc ........... 210 Locust St .................................. Williamsport ................... PA 17701T-23-PA-1739 ..... TravelCenters of America, Inc. ....... Rt 11 & Cemetary Rd. .................... Beach Haven ................. PA 18601T-23-PA-1740 ..... Montour Oil Service-Harrisburg ...... 80 South 40th St. ............................ Harrisburg ...................... PA 17111T-23-PA-1741 ..... Montour Oil Service-Montoursville .. Rt I-180/Warrensville ...................... Montoursville .................. PA 17754T-23-PA-1742 ..... Petroleum Products-Sinking Spr ..... Mountain Home Rd ......................... Sinking Spring ............... PA 19608




T-23-PA-1743 ..... Carlos R Leffler Inc ......................... Sylvan Dell Road ............................ South Williamsport ......... PA 17701T-23-PA-1744 ..... Sun Tamaqua ................................. Tuscarora State Park Rd ................ Tamaqua ........................ PA 18252T-23-PA-1745 ..... C R Leffler Tuckerton ..................... 4030 Pottsville Pike ........................ Reading ......................... PA 19605T-23-PA-1746 ..... Sun Twin Oaks ............................... 4041 Market Street ......................... Aston .............................. PA 19014T-23-PA-1747 ..... Sun Company Inc (R&M) ................ 9th Green St ................................... Marcus Hook ................. PA 19061T-23-PA-1748 ..... Gulf Oil Whitehall ............................ 2451 Main Street ............................ Whitehall ........................ PA 18052T-23-PA-1749 ..... Gulf Oil Williamsport ....................... Sylvan Dell Rd ................................ Williamsport ................... PA 17703T-23-PA-1751 ..... Sun Willow Grove ........................... 3290 Sunset Lane .......................... Hatboro .......................... PA 19040T-23-PA-1752 ..... Berks Fuel Storage Inc-Reading .... 130 Whitman Road ......................... Reading ......................... PA 19605T-23-PA-1753 ..... Meenan Oil Co Tullytown ............... 113 Main Street .............................. Tullytown ........................ PA 19007T-23-PA-1754 ..... C R Leffler New Kingston ............... 236 Locust Pt Road ........................ New Kingston ................ PA 17702T-23-PA-1755 ..... Major Oil-Philadelphia ..................... 501 E. Hunting Park Ave. ............... Philadelphia ................... PA 19124T-23-PA-1756 ..... F C Haab Co Inc ............................ Schuylkill River & Morris Rd ........... Philadelphia ................... PA 19145T-23-PA-1757 ..... Sun Company Inc (R&M) ................ Hewes Ave & Philadelphia Pike ..... Marcus Hook ................. PA 19061T-23-PA-1758 ..... Getty Oil—Highspire ....................... 911 Eisenhower Blvd. ..................... Highspire ........................ PA 17034T-23-PA-1759 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 58th St. & Schuylkill River .............. Philadelphia ................... PA 19142T-23-PA-1763 ..... Two River Terminal-Duncannon ..... 27 Chevron Drive ............................ Duncannon .................... PA 17020T-23-PA-1764 ..... American Refining Bradford ........... 77 North Kendall Ave. .................... Bradford ......................... PA 16701T-25-PA-1760 ..... Buckeye Tank Term Coraopolis ..... 520 Narrows Run Road .................. Coraopolis ...................... PA 15108T-25-PA-1761 ..... Sun Delmont ................................... Route 66 North ............................... Delmont ......................... PA 15626T-25-PA-1762 ..... Boswell Oil Co Dravosburg ............. 702 Washington Avenue ................ Dravosburg .................... PA 15034T-25-PA-1765 ..... Petroleum Products-E. Freedom .... Old Rte US 220 .............................. East Freedom ................ PA 16637T-25-PA-1767 ..... Petroleum Products Eldorado ......... Burns Avenue ................................. Altoona ........................... PA 16602T-25-PA-1768 ..... MAPLLC Floreffe ............................ 204 Glass House Road .................. Floreffe ........................... PA 15025T-25-PA-1769 ..... B P Oil Greensburg ........................ Rural Delivery 6 .............................. Greensburg .................... PA 15601T-25-PA-1771 ..... American Refining Indianola ........... State Route 910 .............................. Indianola ........................ PA 15051T-25-PA-1773 ..... MAPLLC Petroleum-Midland .......... Rt. 68 .............................................. Midland .......................... PA 15059T-25-PA-1776 ..... Exxon USA Pittsburgh .................... 2760 Neville Road .......................... Pittsburgh ....................... PA 15225T-25-PA-1777 ..... Gulf Oil Pittsburgh .......................... 400 Grand Ave ............................... Pittsburgh ....................... PA 15225T-25-PA-1778 ..... Gulf Oil Pittsburgh/Delmont ............ Route 22 ......................................... Delmont ......................... PA 15626T-25-PA-1779 ..... Pennzoil Products Pittsburgh ......... 54th Street and AVRR .................... Pittsburgh ....................... PA 15201T-25-PA-1780 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. Nine Thorn Street ........................... Coraopolis ...................... PA 15108T-25-PA-1781 ..... Sun Pittsburgh ................................ 5733 Butler Street ........................... Pittsburgh ....................... PA 15201T-25-PA-1782 ..... Pennzoil Products Rouseville ......... Two Main Street ............................. Rouseville ...................... PA 16344T-25-PA-1783 ..... United Refining Warren .................. 15 Bradley St .................................. Warren ........................... PA 16365T-25-PA-1785 ..... Gulf Oil Altoona .............................. 6033 Sixth Avenue ......................... ALtoona ......................... PA 16602T-25-PA-1788 ..... Sun Altoona .................................... Route 764 Sugar Run Road ........... Altoona ........................... PA 16601T-25-PA-1789 ..... Sun Vanport .................................... Route 68 & Division Lane ............... Vanport .......................... PA 15009T-25-PA-1790 ..... Guttman Oil Belle Vernon ............... 200 Speers Road ............................ Belle Vernon .................. PA 15012T-25-PA-1791 ..... Sun Blawnox ................................... Freeport Road & Boyd Avenue ...... Pittsburgh ....................... PA 15238T-25-PA-1792 ..... B P Oil Coraopolis .......................... Access State Route 51 ................... Coraopolis ...................... PA 15108T-05-RI-1200 ...... Getty Terminal Providence ............. Dexter Rd & Massasoit Ave ........... East Providence ............ RI 02914T-05-RI-1201 ...... Sprague Energy Providence ........... 144 Allens Avenue .......................... Providence ..................... RI 02903T-05-RI-1203 ...... Capital Terminal Company ............. 100 Dexter Road ............................ East Providence ............ RI 02914T-05-RI-1205 ...... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 520 Allens Avenue .......................... Providence ..................... RI 02905T-05-RI-1207 ...... Mobil Oil East Providence .............. 1001 Wampanoag Trail .................. East Providence ............ RI 02915T-06-RI-1208 ...... Inland Fuel Terminal Inc. ................ 25 State Ave. .................................. Tiverton .......................... RI 02878T-57-SC-2050 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. Highway 20 North ........................... Belton ............................. SC 29627T-57-SC-2051 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. Hwy 20 North .................................. Belton ............................. SC 29627T-57-SC-2052 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. 680 Delmar Road ........................... Spartansburg ................. SC 29302T-57-SC-2053 ..... MAPLLC .......................................... 14315 State Rt. 20 ......................... Belton ............................. SC 29627T-57-SC-2054 ..... Allied Terminal ................................ 1500 Greenleaf St. ......................... Charleston ..................... SC 29405T-57-SC-2059 ..... Williams Energy .............................. Sweet Water Road ......................... North Augusta ................ SC 29841T-57-SC-2060 ..... Charter Terminal Co. ...................... 221 Laurel Lake Drive .................... North Augusta ................ SC 29841T-57-SC-2061 ..... B P Oil ............................................ 221 Sweetwater Rd. ....................... North Augusta ................ SC 29841T-57-SC-2062 ..... Phillips Pipeline ............................... Highway 36 & Sweetwater ............. North Augusta ................ SC 29841T-57-SC-2063 ..... Southern Facilities .......................... 1222 Sweetwater Road .................. North Augusta ................ SC 29841T-57-SC-2064 ..... Amerada Hess ................................ 5150 Virginia Ave. .......................... North Charleston ........... SC 29406T-57-SC-2066 ..... MAPLLC .......................................... 5165 Virginia Ave ........................... Charleston ..................... SC 29406T-57-SC-2067 ..... TransMontaigne .............................. Old Union Road .............................. Spartansburg ................. SC 29304T-57-SC-2068 ..... Williams Energy .............................. Old Union Rd Route 4 .................... Spartansburg ................. SC 29304T-57-SC-2071 ..... Crown Central ................................. 400 Delmar Rd ............................... Spartansburg ................. SC 29304T-57-SC-2074 ..... Phillips Pipeline ............................... 200 Nebo Street ............................. Spartansburg ................. SC 29302T-57-SC-2075 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 300 Delmar Road ........................... Spartansburg ................. SC 29302T-57-SC-2076 ..... Southern Facility ............................. 2430 Pine Street Ext ...................... Spartansburg ................. SC 29302T-57-SC-2077 ..... CITGO Petroleum ........................... 2590 Southport Road ..................... Spartansburg ................. SC 29302T-46-SD-3550 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Aberdeen ............ Hwy 281 .......................................... Aberdeen ....................... SD 57401T-46-SD-3551 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Mitchell ................ Hwy 38 ............................................ Mitchell ........................... SD 57301T-46-SD-3552 ..... Kaneb PipeLine Rapid City ............ 3225 Eglin Street ............................ Rapid City ...................... SD 57701T-46-SD-3553 ..... Amoco Oil Sioux Falls .................... 3751 S Grange ............................... Sioux Falls ..................... SD 57105T-46-SD-3554 ..... Williams Pipeline Sioux Falls .......... 5300 west 12th Street .................... Sioux Falls ..................... SD 57107T-46-SD-3555 ..... Williams Pipeline Watertown .......... 1000 17th Street S E ...................... Watertown ...................... SD 57201




T-46-SD-3556 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Wolsey ................ US Hwy 14 & 281 ........................... Wolsey ........................... SD 57384T-46-SD-3557 ..... Kaneb Pipe Line Yankton ............... Star Rte 50 ..................................... Yanton ........................... SD 57078T-46-SD-3558 ..... Williams Pipe Line Canton ............. RR #1 Box 12 A ............................. Canton ........................... SD 57013T-62-TN-2200 ..... Amoco Oil Chattanooga ................. 4235 Jersey Pike ............................ Chattanooga .................. TN 37416T-62-TN-2201 ..... Chevron USA Chattanooga ............ 4716 Bonny Oaks Drive ................. Chattanooga .................. TN 37416T-62-TN-2202 ..... CITGO Chattanooga ....................... 4233 Jersey Pike ............................ Chattanooga .................. TN 37416T-62-TN-2203 ..... Truman Arnold Memphis ................ 1237 Riverside ................................ Memphis ........................ TN 38106T-62-TN-2204 ..... Lion Oil Nashville ............................ 90 Van Buren St ............................. Nashville ........................ TN 37208T-62-TN-2205 ..... MAPLLC Chattanooga .................... 817 Pineville Road .......................... Chattanooga .................. TN 37405T-62-TN-2206 ..... Louis Dreyfus Chattanooga ............ 5800 St Elmo Avenue ..................... Chattanooga .................. TN 37409T-62-TN-2207 ..... Benton Oil Service, Inc. .................. 4211 Cromwell Rd. ......................... Chattanooga .................. TN 37421T-62-TN-2208 ..... Southern Facility Chattanooga ....... 4326 Jersey Pike ............................ Chattanooga .................. TN 37416T-62-TN-2209 ..... Amoco—Chattanooga ..................... 710 Manufacturers Road ................ Chattanooga .................. TN 37405T-62-TN-2211 ..... Amoco Oil Knoxville ........................ 5101 Middlebrook Pike NW ............ Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2213 ..... CITGO Knoxville ............................. 2409 Knott Road ............................. Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2214 ..... Cummins Terminals Knoxville ........ 4715 Middlebrook Pike ................... Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2215 ..... Exxon USA Knoxville ...................... 5009 Middlebrook Pike ................... Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2216 ..... B P Oil Knoxville ............................. 1908 Third Creek Road .................. Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2217 ..... MAPLLC Oil Knoxville .................... 2601 Knott Road ............................. Knoxville ........................ TN 37950T-62-TN-2218 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 5001 Middlebrook Pike NW ............ Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2219 ..... Southern Facility Knoxville ............. 4801 Middlebrook Pike ................... Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-62-TN-2221 ..... Louis Dreyfus Knoxville .................. 1720 Island Home Avenue ............. Knoxville ........................ TN 37920T-62-TN-2225 ..... Exxon USA Memphis ...................... 454 Wisconsin Avenue ................... Memphis ........................ TN 38106T-62-TN-2226 ..... Lion Oil Memphis ............................ 1023 Riverside ................................ Memphis ........................ TN 38106T-62-TN-2227 ..... MAPCO Petroleum Memphis ......... ......................................................... Memphis ........................ TN 38109T-62-TN-2228 ..... Petroleum Fuel Memphis ................ 1232 Riverside ................................ Memphis ........................ TN 38106T-62-TN-2231 ..... Amoco Oil Nashville ....................... 1441 51st Avenue North ................. Nashville ........................ TN 37209T-62-TN-2232 ..... MAPLLC Nashville .......................... Five Main Street ............................. Nashville ........................ TN 37213T-62-TN-2233 ..... CITGO Nashville ............................. 720 South Second Street ............... Nashville ........................ TN 37213T-62-TN-2234 ..... Cumberland Terminals Nashville .... 7260 Centennial Boulevard ............ Nashville ........................ TN 37209T-62-TN-2236 ..... Exxon USA Nashville ...................... 1741 Ed Temple Blvd ..................... Nashville ........................ TN 37208T-62-TN-2237 ..... B P Oil Nashville ............................. 1409 51st Ave ................................. Nashville ........................ TN 37209T-62-TN-2238 ..... MAPLLC Nashville .......................... 2920 Old Hydes Ferry Road .......... Nashville ........................ TN 37218T-62-TN-2240 ..... Williams Energy Ventures-Nashv ... 1609 63rd Avenue North ................ Nashvilleue North .......... TN 37209T-62-TN-2241 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 1717 61st & Centennial Bvld. ......... Nashville ........................ TN 37209T-62-TN-2242 ..... Kerr-McGee Nashville ..................... 180 Anthes Avenue ........................ Nashville ........................ TN 37210T-62-TN-2243 ..... Cummins Terminal-Knoxville .......... 5100 Middlebrook Pike ................... Knoxville ........................ TN 37921T-74-TX-2658 ..... Mobil Oil Hearne ............................. Highway 6 South ............................ Hearne ........................... TX 76705T-74-TX-2700 ..... Coastal Oil—Edinburg .................... 222 W. Ingle Rd. ............................. Edinburg ........................ TX 78359T-74-TX-2702 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. Highway 6 South ............................ Hearne ........................... TX 77859T-74-TX-2703 ..... CITGO Victoria ............................... 1708 North Ben Jordan Blvd .......... Victoria ........................... TX 77901T-74-TX-2705 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC Waco ........ 420 South Lacy drive ...................... Waco .............................. TX 76705T-74-TX-2706 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-Austin ........ 9011 Johnny Morris Rd .................. Austin ............................. TX 78724T-74-TX-2707 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-Waco ......... 2017 Kendall Lane .......................... Waco .............................. TX 76705T-74-TX-2709 ..... CITGO—Brownsville ....................... 11001 R.L. Ostos Rd. ..................... Brownsville ..................... TX 78521T-74-TX-2710 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 6767 Gateway West ....................... El Paso .......................... TX 79926T-74-TX-2711 ..... CITGO Oil Corpus Christi ............... 2505 N Port Ave ............................. Corpus Christi ................ TX 78401T-74-TX-2712 ..... Age Refining, Inc. ........................... 7811 S. Presa ................................. San Antonio ................... TX 78223T-74-TX-2713 ..... CITGO Bryan .................................. 1714 Finfeather Road ..................... Bryan ............................. TX 77801T-74-TX-2715 ..... Diamond Laredo ............................. 13380 S Unitec ............................... Laredo ............................ TX 78044T-74-TX-2716 ..... CITGO—Corpus Christi .................. 1308 Oak Park Street ..................... Corpus Christi ................ TX 78407T-74-TX-2718 ..... Coastal Oil Corpus Christi .............. 1300 Cantwell ................................. Corpus Christi ................ TX 78407T-74-TX-2719 ..... Diamond—Corpus Christi ............... 2700 Texaco Road ......................... Corpus Christi ................ TX 78403T-74-TX-2721 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-Corpus

Christi.2825 Suntide Road ......................... Corpus Christi ................ TX 78403

T-74-TX-2724 ..... Chevron USA El Paso .................... 6501 Trowbridge ............................. El Paso .......................... TX 79905T-74-TX-2726 ..... Navajo Refining El Paso ................. 1000 Eastside Road ....................... El Paso .......................... TX 79915T-74-TX-2729 ..... Diamond Harlingen ......................... 4.5 miles east on highway 106 ....... Harlingen ....................... TX 78550T-74-TX-2731 ..... Coastal Oil—Placedo ...................... 2 Mi S of Placedo Hwy 87 .............. Placedo .......................... TX 77977T-74-TX-2733 ..... Fina Oil Port Arthur Hwy 366 ......... Highway 366 and 32nd Street ........ Port Arthur ..................... TX 77640T-74-TX-2737 ..... CITGO—San Antonio ..................... 4851 Emil Road .............................. San Antonio ................... TX 78219T-74-TX-2738 ..... Coastal Oil San Antonio ................. 4719 Corner Parkway #2 ................ San Antonio ................... TX 78219T-74-TX-2739 ..... Diamond San Antonio ..................... 10619 Highway 281 South ............. San Antonio ................... TX 78221T-74-TX-2740 ..... Exxon USA San Antonio ................ 3214 North Pan Am Expressway ... San Antonio ................... TX 78219T-74-TX-2742 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-San Anto-

nio.498 and Pop Gun ........................... San Antonio ................... TX 78219

T-74-TX-2745 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 510 Petroleum Drive ....................... San Antonio ................... TX 78219T-74-TX-2747 ..... Diamond Three Rivers .................... 301 Leroy Street ............................. Three Rivers .................. TX 78071T-74-TX-2748 ..... Fina Oil and Chemical Co. ............. I-20 West Exit 278 .......................... Tye ................................. TX 79563T-74-TX-2749 ..... CITGO Waco .................................. 1600 South Loop Dr ....................... Waco .............................. TX 76705T-74-TX-2750 ..... Ultramar—Diamond Shamrock ....... 4200 J.C. Vera Montes ................... El Paso .......................... TX 79936T-75-TX-2650 ..... Diamond Abernathy ........................ Highway 54 ..................................... Abernathy ...................... TX 79311




T-75-TX-2651 ..... Fina Oil Abilene .............................. Highway 277 North ......................... Abilene ........................... TX 79604T-75-TX-2652 ..... Pride Abilene .................................. Hwy 277 N Industrial District .......... Abilene ........................... TX 79604T-75-TX-2653 ..... Diamond Amarillo ........................... 4200 West Cliffside ......................... Amarillo .......................... TX 79124T-75-TX-2654 ..... Phillips 66 Amarillo ......................... 4300 Cliffside Dr ............................. Amarillo .......................... TX 79142T-75-TX-2655 ..... Phillips Pipeline Company .............. 12401 Calloway Cemetery Road .... Euless ............................ TX 76040T-75-TX-2656 ..... Fina Oil Big Spring ......................... East IS-20 & Refinery Rd ............... Big Springs .................... TX 79721T-75-TX-2657 ..... Phillips 66 Borger ........................... Spur 119 N ..................................... Borger ............................ TX 79007T-75-TX-2659 ..... Truman Arnold Caddo Mills ............ ......................................................... Caddo Mills .................... TX 75505T-75-TX-2660 ..... Exxon USA Dallas .......................... 1201 East Airport Freeway ............. Irving .............................. TX 75062T-75-TX-2661 ..... Williams Energy .............................. 4200 Singleton Boulevard .............. Dallas ............................. TX 75212T-75-TX-2662 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 3900 Singleton Blvd. ....................... Dallas ............................. TX 75212T-75-TX-2663 ..... Ogden Aviation Co. of TX Love

Field.2734 Brookfield ............................... Dallas ............................. TX 75235

T-75-TX-2664 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-Fort Worth Highway 157 and Trinity Blvd ......... Euless ............................ TX 76040T-75-TX-2665 ..... Pride Aledo ..................................... 6000 IH20 ....................................... Aledo .............................. TX 76008T-75-TX-2666 ..... Chevron USA Fort Worth ............... 2525 Brennan Street ...................... Fort Worth ...................... TX 76106T-75-TX-2667 ..... CITGO Fort Worth .......................... 301 Terminal Road ......................... Fort Worth ...................... TX 76106T-75-TX-2668 ..... Mobil Oil Fort Worth ....................... 3600 North Sylvania ....................... Fort Worth ...................... TX 76111T-75-TX-2669 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 3200 N. Sylvania ............................ Fort Worth ...................... TX 76111T-75-TX-2671 ..... Conoco Southlake .......................... 3100 Highway 26 West .................. Grapevine ...................... TX 76051T-75-TX-2672 ..... Fina Oil Southlake .......................... 3000 Highway 26 West .................. Grapevine ...................... TX 76051T-75-TX-2673 ..... Ogden Aviation Services of TX

DFW.2001 W. Airfield Dr. ........................ DFW Airport ................... TX 75261

T-75-TX-2674 ..... Phillips 66 Lubbock ......................... Clovis Road and Flint Avenue ........ Lubbock ......................... TX 79408T-75-TX-2676 ..... Conoco Mount Pleasant ................. 1503 West Ferguson ...................... Mount Pleasant .............. TX 75455T-75-TX-2678 ..... Mobil—Center ................................. Hwy 87 South ................................. Center ............................ TX 75935T-75-TX-2680 ..... Diamond Southlake ........................ 1700 Hwy 26 ................................... Grapevine ...................... TX 76051T-75-TX-2681 ..... La Gloria Oil Tyler .......................... 425 McMurry Drive ......................... Tyler ............................... TX 75702T-75-TX-2682 ..... Diamond Sunray ............................. 9 Mi NE of Dumas TX on FM 119 .. Sunray ........................... TX 79086T-75-TX-2683 ..... Fina Oil Wichita Falls ...................... Old Charlie & Sinclair Blvd ............. Wichita Falls .................. TX 76307T-75-TX-2684 ..... Conoco—Wichita Falls ................... 1214 North Eastside ....................... Wichita Falls .................. TX 76304T-75-TX-2685 ..... Equilon Enterprises LLC—Odessa 2700 S. Grandview ......................... Odessa .......................... TX 79760T-75-TX-2686 ..... Pride San Angelo ............................ 4008 U S Hwy 67N ......................... San Angelo .................... TX 76905T-75-TX-2687 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. Farm Road 9 ................................... Waskom ......................... TX 75692T-75-TX-2688 ..... Mobil Oil Waskom ........................... 9 South ........................................... Waskom ......................... TX 75692T-75-TX-2690 ..... DFLP Terminal ................................ 12625 Calloway Cemetary Rd ........ Euless ............................ TX 76040T-76-TX-2780 ..... Petro-United Terminals Bayport ..... 11666 Port Road ............................ Seabrook ....................... TX 77586T-76-TX-2782 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 1320 West Shaw St. ....................... Pasadena ....................... TX 77501T-76-TX-2783 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 9406 West Port Arthur Rd .............. Beaumont ...................... TX 77705T-76-TX-2784 ..... Chevron USA Product Co. Big

Sandy.Highway 155 and Sabine River ...... Big Sandy ...................... TX 75755

T-76-TX-2785 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 401 West 19th Street ...................... Port Arthur ..................... TX 77640T-76-TX-2787 ..... UNOCAL Beaumont ....................... Hwy 366 .......................................... Nederland ...................... TX 77627T-76-TX-2788 ..... GATX Galena Park ......................... 906 Clinton Drive ............................ Galena Park ................... TX 77547T-76-TX-2789 ..... Chevron USA Galena Park ............ 12523 American Petroleum Rd ...... Galena Park ................... TX 77547T-76-TX-2791 ..... Specified Fuels and Chemicals LLC 1201 S Sheldon Rd ........................ Channelview .................. TX 77530T-76-TX-2792 ..... Amerada Hess—Galena Park ........ 12901 American Petroleum Rd ...... Galena Park ................... TX 77547T-76-TX-2793 ..... Coastal Refining & Marketing ......... 8376 Monroe ................................... Houston ......................... TX 77061T-76-TX-2794 ..... CITGO Houston .............................. 12325 North Fwy at Greens Rd ..... Houston ......................... TX 77060T-76-TX-2795 ..... Coastal Oil Houston ........................ 11650 Almeda Road Loop 610 ...... Houston ......................... TX 77045T-76-TX-2796 ..... Intercoastal Terminal, Inc. .............. 159 Levee Rd. ................................ Texas City ...................... TX 77590T-76-TX-2797 ..... J A M Distributing Co. .................... 7010 Myrawa .................................. Houston ......................... TX 77033T-76-TX-2798 ..... Mobil Oil Beaumont ........................ Route 4 ........................................... Beaumont ...................... TX 77705T-76-TX-2799 ..... Jetera Fuels Houston ..................... 17617 Aldine-Westfield Road ......... Houston ......................... TX 77073T-76-TX-2800 ..... Lyondell-CITGO Refining ................ 12000 Lawndale ............................. Houston ......................... TX 77002T-76-TX-2801 ..... Fina Oil Port Arthur 32nd ............... Hwy 366 & 32nd St ........................ Port Arthur ..................... TX 77642T-76-TX-2802 ..... Oil Tanking Houston, Inc. ............... 15602 Jacinto Port Blvd. ................ Houston ......................... TX 77015T-76-TX-2803 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 2661 Stevens Street ....................... Houston ......................... TX 77226T-76-TX-2805 ..... Petroleum Wholesale, Inc. .............. 1801 Collingsworth ......................... Houston ......................... TX 77099T-76-TX-2806 ..... Valero Refining Co.—Texas (Hous-

ton).9701 Manchester ............................ Houston ......................... TX 77262

T-76-TX-2808 ..... Exxon USA North Houston ............. 8700 North Freeway ....................... Houston ......................... TX 77037T-76-TX-2809 ..... GATX Pasadena ............................. 530 North Witter ............................. Pasadena ....................... TX 77506T-76-TX-2811 ..... Phillips Pipeline Pasadena ............. 100 Jefferson Street ....................... Pasadena ....................... TX 77501T-76-TX-2812 ..... Exxon USA South Houston ............ 10501 East Almeda ........................ Houston ......................... TX 77051T-76-TX-2813 ..... Phillips 66 Sweeny ......................... Hwys 35 & 36 at West Columbia ... Sweeny .......................... TX 77480T-76-TX-2814 ..... S T Services Texas City ................. 201 Dock Road ............................... Texas City ...................... TX 77590T-76-TX-2815 ..... Intercontinental Terminals Co. ........ 1943 Battleground Rd. .................... Deer Park ...................... TX 77536T-87-UT-4200 ..... Flying J North Salt Lake ................. 333 West Center St ........................ North Salt Lake .............. UT 84054T-87-UT-4202 ..... Amoco Oil Salt Lake City ............... 474 West 900 N .............................. Salt Lake City ................ UT 84103T-87-UT-4203 ..... Chevron USA Salt Lake City .......... 2351 North Tenth West .................. Salt Lake City ................ UT 84110T-87-UT-4204 ..... Conoco Pipeline Co. ....................... 245 East 1100 North ...................... North Salt Lake City ...... UT 84054




T-87-UT-4205 ..... Crysen Refining Woods Cross ....... 2355 South 1100 West ................... Woods Cross ................. UT 84087T-87-UT-4206 ..... Phillips 66 Woods Cross ................ 393 South 800 West ....................... Woods Cross ................. UT 84087T-54-VA-1650 ..... Amerada Hess Corporation ............ 4030 Buell Street ............................ Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1651 ..... Center Point Terminal Co. .............. 428 Barnes Road ............................ Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1652 ..... CITGO Petroleum Corporation ....... 110 Freeman Street ........................ Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1653 ..... Allied Terminals, Inc. ...................... 502 Hill Street ................................. Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1654 ..... Exxon USA ..................................... 4115 Buell Street ............................ Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1656 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 7600 Halifax Lane ........................... Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1657 ..... Kinder Morgan Operating LP A ...... 3302 Deepwater Terminal Rd ........ Richmond ....................... VA 23234T-54-VA-1658 ..... S T Services Dumfries .................... 18000 Cockpit Point Road .............. Dumfries ........................ VA 22026T-54-VA-1659 ..... Amoco Oil Fairfax ........................... 9601 Colonial Avenue .................... Fairfax ............................ VA 22031T-54-VA-1660 ..... Global Petro .................................... 3790 Pickett Road .......................... Fairfax ............................ VA 22031T-54-VA-1661 ..... CITGO Fairfax ................................ 9600 Colonial Avenue .................... Fairfax ............................ VA 22031T-54-VA-1662 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 3800 Pickett Road .......................... Fairfax ............................ VA 22030T-54-VA-1663 ..... Mobil Oil Manassas ........................ 10315 Ballsford Road ..................... Manassas ...................... VA 23109T-54-VA-1664 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. Route 460 ....................................... Montvale ........................ VA 24122T-54-VA-1665 ..... Amoco Petroleum—Montvale ......... 1070 Oil Terminal Rd ..................... Montvale ........................ VA 24122T-54-VA-1666 ..... Chevron Products Co—Montvale ... 1147 Oil Terminal Rd ..................... Montvale ........................ VA 24122T-54-VA-1667 ..... IMTT-Chesapeake .......................... 2801 S. Military Hwy. ...................... Chesapeake ................... VA 23323T-54-VA-1668 ..... Williams Energy Ventures, Inc. ...... U S Highway 460, PO Box 113 ...... Montvale ........................ VA 24122T-54-VA-1669 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-Newport

News.801 Terminal Ave ........................... Newport News ............... VA 23607

T-54-VA-1670 ..... Crown Central Newington ............... 8211 Terminal Road ....................... Newington ...................... VA 22122T-54-VA-1671 ..... Exxon USA Newington ................... 8200 Terminal Road ....................... Newington ...................... VA 22122T-54-VA-1672 ..... Kinder Morgan Operating LP A ...... 413 Bickerstaff Rd .......................... Richmond ....................... VA 23231T-54-VA-1673 ..... Crown Central Petroleum Corp. ..... 801 Butt Street ................................ Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1674 ..... Mobil Oil Norfolk ............................. Halifax Lane .................................... Chesapeake ................... VA 23324T-54-VA-1675 ..... Quarles Energy Services ................ 8219 Terminal Rd. .......................... Newington ...................... VA 22122T-54-VA-1676 ..... BP Air-Wash. Dulles Bulk Fuel

Storage.Rt. 28, Gate 4 ................................. Dulles ............................. VA 20166

T-54-VA-1677 ..... BP-Amoco Oil Richmond ................ 1636 Commerce Road ................... Richmond ....................... VA 23224T-54-VA-1678 ..... Chevron USA Richmond ................ 700 Goodes Street ......................... Richmond ....................... VA 23224T-54-VA-1679 ..... CITGO Richmond ........................... Third & Maury Street ...................... Richmond ....................... VA 23224T-54-VA-1680 ..... Crown Central Richmond ................ 4405 E Main ................................... Richmond ....................... VA 23231T-54-VA-1681 ..... Exxon-Mobile USA Richmond ........ 2000 Trenton Avenue ..................... Richmond ....................... VA 23234T-54-VA-1682 ..... First Energy Corporation ................ Second & Maury Streets ................ Richmond ....................... VA 23224T-54-VA-1683 ..... Koch Petroleum Group-Richmond .. 4110 Deepwater Terminal Road ..... Richmond ....................... VA 23234T-54-VA-1684 ..... Williams Energy Ventures-Richm ... 204 East First Avenue .................... Richmond ....................... VA 23224T-54-VA-1685 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 5801 Petersburg Pike ..................... Richmond ....................... VA 23234T-54-VA-1687 ..... TransMontaigne Terminaling, Inc. .. 1314 Commerce Road ................... Richmond ....................... VA 23224T-54-VA-1688 ..... Exxon USA Roanoke ...................... 835 Hollins Road Northeast ........... Roanoke ........................ VA 24012T-54-VA-1689 ..... MAPLLC Oil Roanoke .................... 5287 Terminal Road ....................... Roanoke ........................ VA 24014T-54-VA-1690 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 5280 Terminal Road SW ................ Roanoke ........................ VA 24014T-54-VA-1691 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. U.S. Highway 460 ........................... Montvale ........................ VA 24122T-54-VA-1692 ..... Motiva Enterprises LLC .................. 8206 Terminal Road ....................... Lorton ............................. VA 22079T-54-VA-1693 ..... S T Services Virginia Beach ........... 3925 North Landing Road .............. Virginia Beach ............... VA 23456T-54-VA-1694 ..... Amoco Oil Yorktown ....................... Route 73 East Entrance ................. Yorktown ........................ VA 23690T-54-VA-1696 ..... IMTT- Richmond, VA ...................... 5501 Old Osborne Turnpike ........... Richmond ....................... VA 23231T-91-WA-4400 .... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. Marches Point Five Miles ............... Anacortes ....................... WA 98221T-91-WA-4401 .... Conoco Pipeline Co. ....................... 3 miles north of Moses Lake .......... Moses Lake ................... WA 98837T-91-WA-4402 .... Northwest Terminaling Pasco ......... 3000 Sacajawea Park Road ........... Pasco ............................. WA 99301T-91-WA-4404 .... Tosco Northwest Renton ................ 2423 Lind Avenue Southwest ......... Renton ........................... WA 98055T-91-WA-4406 .... GATX Seattle .................................. 1733 Alaskan Way South ............... Seattle ............................ WA 98134T-91-WA-4408 .... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 2555 13th Ave. S W ....................... Seattle ............................ WA 98134T-91-WA-4409 .... Time Oil Seattle .............................. 2737 West Commodore Way ......... Seattle ............................ WA 98199T-91-WA-4410 .... Conoco Pipeline Co. ....................... 6317 East Sharp Avenue ............... Spokane ......................... WA 99206T-91-WA-4411 .... Exxon USA Spokane ...................... 6311 East Sharp Avenue ............... Spokane ......................... WA 99211T-91-WA-4412 .... Tosco Northwest Spokane ............. 3225 East Lincoln Road ................. Spokane ......................... WA 99207T-91-WA-4413 .... Tosco Northwest Tacoma ............... 520 E D Street ................................ Tacoma .......................... WA 98421T-91-WA-4414 .... Sound Refining Tacoma ................. 2628 Marine View Drive ................. Tacoma .......................... WA 98421T-91-WA-4415 .... Shore Terminals LLC ...................... 250 East D Street ........................... Tacoma .......................... WA 98401T-91-WA-4416 .... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 7370 Linderson Way SW ................ Tumwater ....................... WA 98501T-91-WA-4417 .... CENEX Vancouver ......................... 5420 Fruit Valley Road ................... Vancouver ...................... WA 98660T-91-WA-4418 .... ARCO Cherry Point Terminal ......... 4519 Grandview .............................. Blaine ............................. WA 98231T-91-WA-4419 .... Tesoro Alaska Petro Vancouver ..... 2211 West 26th Street Ext ............. Vancouver ...................... WA 98660T-91-WA-4420 .... Tidewater Snake River ................... Tank Farm Road ............................. Pasco ............................. WA 99301T-91-WA-4421 .... US Oil & Refining Co. ..................... 3001 Marshall Ave .......................... Tacoma .......................... WA 98421T-91-WA-4422 .... Tosco Tacoma ................................ 516 East D Street ........................... Tacoma .......................... WA 98421T-91-WA-4423 .... Tidewater Terminal Wilma .............. 2950 Wilma Drive ........................... North Clarkston .............. WA 99403T-91-WA-4424 .... Pacific Northern Oil Corp ................ Pier 91 Bldg 19 ............................... Seattle ............................ WA 98119T-91-WA-4425 .... ARCO Seattle Terminal .................. 1652 SW Lander St ........................ Seattle ............................ WA 95124T-91-WA-4427 .... Tosco Northwest Co.—Ferndale .... 3901 Unic Rd. ................................. Ferndale ......................... WA 98248




T-39-WI-3061 ...... Amoco Oil Green Bay ..................... 1124 North Broadway ..................... Green Bay ..................... WI 54303T-39-WI-3062 ...... Amoco Oil Milwaukee ..................... 9101 North 107th Street ................. Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3063 ...... Amoco Oil Superior ........................ 2904 Winter Street .......................... Superior ......................... WI 54880T-39-WI-3064 ...... CENEX Chippewa Falls .................. 2331 N Prairie View Rd .................. Chippewa Falls .............. WI 54729T-39-WI-3065 ...... CENEX McFarland ......................... 4103 Triangle St ............................. McFarland ...................... WI 53558T-39-WI-3066 ...... CITGO Green Bay .......................... 1391 Bylsby Avenue ....................... Green Bay ..................... WI 54303T-39-WI-3067 ...... CITGO McFarland .......................... 4606 Terminal Drive ....................... McFarland ...................... WI 53558T-39-WI-3068 ...... CITGO Milwaukee .......................... 9235 North 107th Street ................. Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3069 ...... Terminal Oil Group Ltd ................... 3910 Terminal Road ....................... Madison ......................... WI 53704T-39-WI-3070 ...... Halron Oil Company Inc ................. 2020 N Quincy St ........................... Green Bay ..................... WI 54306T-39-WI-3071 ...... Koch Petroleum Group-Junction

City.Junction US 10 & 34N .................... Junction City .................. WI 54443

T-39-WI-3072 ...... Koch Petroleum Group-Madison .... 4505 Terminal Drive ....................... McFarland ...................... WI 53558T-39-WI-3073 ...... Koch Petroleum Group-Milwaukee 9343 North 107th Street ................. Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3074 ...... Koch Petroleum Group-Waupun .... Route Two ...................................... Waupun ......................... WI 53963T-39-WI-3075 ...... Green Bay Terminal ....................... 1031 Hurlbut Street ........................ Green Bay ..................... WI 54303T-39-WI-3076 ...... MAPLLC Milwaukee ....................... 9125 North 107th St ....................... Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3077 ...... Mobil Oil Green Bay ....................... 410 Prairie Ave ............................... Green Bay ..................... WI 54303T-39-WI-3078 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 1445 Bylsby Ave ............................. Green Bay ..................... WI 54303T-39-WI-3079 ...... Mobil Oil Madison ........................... 4516 Sigglekow Road ..................... McFarland ...................... WI 53558T-39-WI-3080 ...... Murphy Oil Superior ........................ 2407 Stinson Ave ........................... Superior ......................... WI 54880T-39-WI-3081 ...... S T Services Milwaukee ................. 1626 South Harbor Drive ................ Milwaukee ...................... WI 53207T-39-WI-3082 ...... Transmontaigne—Chippewa Fall ... 2553 North Prairie View Rd ............ Chippewa Falls .............. WI 54729T-39-WI-3083 ...... Center Terminal Co—Madison ....... 4009 Triangle St Hwy 51 S ............ McFarland ...................... WI 53558T-39-WI-3084 ...... US Oil Milwaukee ........................... 9135 North 107th Street ................. Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3086 ...... U.S. Oil Milwaukee-North ............... 9521 North 107th Street ................. Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3087 ...... Williams Pipe Line Mosinee ........... 2007 Old Highway 51 ..................... Mosinee ......................... WI 54455T-39-WI-3088 ...... US Oil Madison ............................... 4402 Terminal Dr ............................ Madison ......................... WI 53558T-39-WI-3089 ...... U S Oil Green Bay West ................ 1075 Hurlbut Ct .............................. Green Bay ..................... WI 54303T-39-WI-3090 ...... Equilon Enterprises LLC ................. 9451 North 107th Street ................. Milwaukee ...................... WI 53224T-39-WI-3091 ...... U S Oil Green Bay East ................. 1910 N Quincy St ........................... Green Bay ..................... WI 54302T-54-WV-1697 .... MAPLLC Petro TriState-Kenova ..... 237 23rd Street ............................... Kenova ........................... WV 25530T-55-WV-3181 .... Exxon USA Charleston ................... Standard St & MacCorkle Ave ....... Charleston ..................... WV 25314T-55-WV-3182 .... Pennzoil Products Charleston ........ 1015 Barlow Dr ............................... Charleston ..................... WV 25333T-55-WV-3183 .... Ergon West Virginia Inc. ................. Rt 2 South ....................................... Newell ............................ WV 26050T-55-WV-3184 .... Go-Mart St Albans .......................... Oliver & Terminal Rd ...................... St Albans ....................... WV 25177T-55-WV-3185 .... St Marys Refining ........................... 201 Barkwill St ................................ St Mary’s ........................ WV 26170T-55-WV-3186 .... Guttman Oil Star City ..................... 437 Industrial Ave ........................... Star City ......................... WV 26505T-55-WV-3188 .... Baker Oil Co ................................... US 60 Hughes Creek Rd ................ Hugheston ..................... WV 25110T-83-WY-4050 .... Conoco Sheridan ............................ 3404 Highway 87 ............................ Sheridan ........................ WY 82801T-83-WY-4051 .... Conoco Rock Springs ..................... 90 Foot Hill Blvd ............................. Rock Springs ................. WY 82902T-83-WY-4052 .... Little America Refining Casper ....... 5100 E Hwy 20-26 .......................... Evansville ....................... WY 82636T-83-WY-4053 .... Kaneb Pipe Line Co—Cheyenne ... 1112 Parsley Blvd ........................... Cheyenne ...................... WY 82007T-83-WY-4054 .... Sinclair Oil ....................................... East Lincoln Highway ..................... Sinclair ........................... WY 82334T-83-WY-4055 .... Frontier Refining Cheyenne ............ 2700 East Fifth Street ..................... Cheyenne ...................... WY 82007T-83-WY-4056 .... Wyoming Refining Newcastle ......... 740 W Main .................................... Newcastle ...................... WY 82701T-84-WY-4057 .... Hawk Point Terminal ...................... 9397 Highway 59 South ................. Gillette ............................ WY 82717T-84-WY-4058 .... Silver Eagle Refining ...................... 2990 County Rd. #180 ................... Evanston ........................ WY 82930

[FR Doc. 00–19366 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4830–01–P ]



Tax Counseling for the Elderly (TCE)Program Availability of ApplicationPackages

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS),Treasury.

ACTION: Availability of TCE applicationpackages.

SUMMARY: This document providesnotice of the availability of Application

Packages for the 2001 Tax Counselingfor the Elderly (TCE) Program.DATES: Application Packages areavailable from the IRS at this time. Thedeadline for submitting an applicationpackage to the IRS for the 2001 TaxCounseling for the Elderly (TCE)Program is August 25, 2000.ADDRESSES: Application Packages maybe requested by contacting: InternalRevenue Service, 5000 Ellin Road,Lanham, MD, 20706, Attention: ProgramManager, Tax Counseling for the ElderlyProgram, OP:C:E:W:E, Building C–7,Room 185.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs.Lynn Tyler, OP:C:E:W:E, Building C–7,Room 185, Internal Revenue Service,

5000 Ellin Road, Lanham, MD 20706.The non-toll-free telephone number is(202) 283–0189.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authorityfor the Tax Counseling for the Elderly(TCE) Program is contained in Section163 of the Revenue Act of 1978, PublicLaw 95–600, (92 Stat. 12810), November6, 1978. Regulations were published inthe Federal Register at 44 FR 72113 onDecember 13, 1979. Section 163 givesthe IRS authority to enter intocooperative agreements with private orpubic non-profit agencies ororganizations to establish a network oftrained volunteers to provide free taxinformation and return preparationassistance to elderly individuals.



Elderly individuals are defined asindividuals age 60 and over at the closeof their taxable year.

Cooperative agreements will beentered into based upon competitionamong eligible agencies andorganizations. Because applications arebeing solicited before the FY 2001budget has been approved, cooperative

agreements will be entered into subjectto appropriation of funds. Once funded,sponsoring agencies and organizationswill receive a grant from IRS foradministrative expenses and toreimburse volunteers for expensesincurred in training and in providingtax return assistance. The TaxCounseling for the Elderly (TCE)

Program is referenced in the Catalog ofFederal Domestic Assitance in Section21.006.

Dated: July 27, 2000.John B. Gunner,National Director, Education, Walk-In, andCorrespondence Improvement Division.[FR Doc. 00–19365 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4830–01–M


Tuesday,

August 1, 2000

Part II

Department ofHealth and HumanServicesHealth Care Financing Administration

42 CFR Part 410, et al.Medicare Program; Provisions of theBalanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999;Hospital Inpatient Payments and Ratesand Costs of Graduate Medical Education;Final Rules




Health Care Financing Administration

42 CFR Parts 410, 412, 413, 482, and485

[HCFA–1131–IFC]

RIN 0938–AK20

Medicare Program; Provisions of theBalanced Budget Refinement Act of1999; Hospital Inpatient Payments andRates and Costs of Graduate MedicalEducation

AGENCY: Health Care FinancingAdministration (HCFA), HHS.ACTION: Interim final rule with commentperiod.

SUMMARY: This interim final rule withcomment period implements, orconforms the regulations to, certainstatutory provisions relating to Medicarepayments to hospitals for inpatientservices that are contained in theMedicare, Medicaid, and StateChildren’s Health Insurance ProgramBalanced Budget Refinement Act of1999 (Public Law 106–113). Theseprovisions relate to reclassification ofhospitals from urban to rural status,reclassification of certain hospitals forpurposes of payment during Federalfiscal year 2000, critical accesshospitals, payments to hospitalsexcluded from the hospital inpatientprospective payment system, andpayments for indirect and directgraduate medical education costs.

Many of the provisions of Public Law106–113 modify changes to the SocialSecurity Act made by the BalancedBudget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105–33). Theseprovisions are already in effect inaccordance with Public Law 106–113.DATES: Effective Date: This interim finalrule with comment period is effectiveon August 1, 2000.

Comment Period: Comments will beconsidered if received at the appropriateaddress, as provided below, no laterthan 5 p.m. on August 31, 2000.ADDRESSES: Mail written comments (anoriginal and three copies) to thefollowing address only: Health CareFinancing Administration, Departmentof Health and Human Services,Attention: HCFA–1131–IFC, P.O. Box8010, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850.

If you prefer, you may deliver bycourier your written comments (anoriginal and three copies) to one of thefollowing addresses:Room 443–G, Hubert H. Humphrey

Building, 200 Independence Avenue,SW, Washington, DC 20201, or

Room C5–14–03, Central Building, 7500Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD21244–1850.Comments mailed to the indicated

addresses may be delayed and could beconsidered late.

Because of staffing and resourcelimitations, we cannot accept commentsby facsimile (FAX) transmission. Incommenting, please refer to file codeHCFA–1131–IFC.

Comments received timely will beavailable for public inspection as theyare received, generally beginningapproximately 3 weeks after publicationof a document, in Room 443–G of theDepartment’s offices at 200Independence Avenue, SW,Washington, DC, on Monday throughFriday of each week from 8:30 a.m. to5 p.m. (phone: (202) 690–7890).

For comments that relate toinformation collection requirements,mail a copy of comments to thefollowing addresses:Health Care Financing Administration,

Office of Information Services,Security and Standards Group,Division of HCFA EnterpriseStandards, Room N2–14–26, 7500Security Boulevard, Baltimore,Maryland 21244–1850. Attn: JohnBurke HCFA–1131-IFC; and

Office of Information and RegulatoryAffairs, Office of Management andBudget, Room 3001, New ExecutiveOffice Building, Washington, DC20503, Attn: Allison Herron EydtHCFA–1131–IFC, HCFA Desk Officer

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Steve Phillips, (410) 786–4531,

Operating Prospective Payment, WageIndex, and Reclassifications

Tzvi Hefter, (410) 786–4487, ExcludedHospitals, Graduate MedicalEducation, and Critical AccessHospital Issues

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Copies and ElectronicAccess

Copies: To order copies of the FederalRegister containing this document, sendyour request to: New Orders,Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954.Specify the date of the issue requestedand enclose a check or money orderpayable to the Superintendent ofDocuments, or enclose your Visa orMaster Card number and expirationdate. Credit card orders can also beplaced by calling the order desk at (202)512–1800 or by faxing to (202) 512–2250. The cost for each copy is $8.00.As an alternative, you can view andphotocopy the Federal Registerdocument at most libraries designated

as Federal Depository Libraries and atmany other public and academiclibraries throughout the country thatreceive the Federal Register.

This Federal Register document isalso available from the Federal Registeronline database through GPO Access, aservice of the U.S. Government PrintingOffice. Free public access is available ona Wide Area Information Server (WAIS)through the Internet and viaasynchronous dial-in. Internet users canaccess the database by using the WorldWide Web; the Superintendent ofDocuments home page address is http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara_docs/, byusing local WAIS client software, or bytelnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, thenlogin as guest (no password required).Dial-in users should usecommunications software and modemto call (202) 512–1661; type swais, thenlogin as guest (no password required).

I. Background: Program Summary

Section 1886(d) of the Social SecurityAct (the Act) sets forth a system ofpayment for the operating costs of acutecare hospital inpatient stays underMedicare Part A (Hospital Insurance)based on prospectively set rates. Section1886(g) of the Act requires the Secretaryto pay for the capital-related costs ofhospital inpatient stays under aprospective payment system. Underthese prospective payment systems,Medicare payment for hospital inpatientoperating and capital-related costs ismade at predetermined, specific ratesfor each hospital discharge. Dischargesare classified according to a list ofdiagnosis-related groups (DRGs).Payment for cases within each DRG isweighted to account for the averageresources used to treat patients withinthat DRG. In addition, these paymentsare adjusted by a wage index (and ageographic adjustment factor derivedfrom the wage index in the case ofcapital payments) to account for thevarying costs of labor across areas, andby separate adjustment factors for theadditional operating costs associatedwith graduate medical education (GME)and for treating a disproportionate shareof low-income patients.

Certain specialty hospitals areexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem. Under section 1886(d)(1)(B) ofthe Act, the following classes ofhospitals and hospital units areexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem: psychiatric hospitals and units,rehabilitation hospitals and units,children’s hospitals, long-term carehospitals, and cancer hospitals. Forthese hospitals and units, Medicarepayment for operating costs is based on



reasonable costs subject to a hospital-specific annual limit.

Under sections 1814(l) and 1834(g) ofthe Act, payments are made to criticalaccess hospitals (CAHs) (that is, ruralnonprofit hospitals or facilities thatmeet certain statutory requirements) forinpatient and outpatient services on areasonable cost basis. Reasonable cost isdetermined under the provisions ofsection 1861(v)(i)(A) of the Act andexisting regulations under 42 CFR Parts413 and 415.

Under section 1886(a)(4) of the Act,costs of approved educational activitiesare excluded from the operating costs ofinpatient hospital services. Hospitalswith approved GME programs are paidfor the direct costs of GME inaccordance with section 1886(h) of theAct; the amount of payment for directGME costs for a cost reporting period isbased on the hospital’s costs perresident in a base year and the hospital’snumber of residents in that period.

The regulations governing thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem are located in 42 CFR Part 412.The regulations governing excludedhospitals and hospital units and theregulations governing direct GME arelocated in 42 CFR Part 413. Theregulations governing CAHs are locatedin 42 CFR Part 485.

II. Provisions of the Interim Final RuleWith Comment Period

On November 29, 1999, the Medicare,Medicaid, and State Children’s HealthInsurance Program (SCHIP) BalancedBudget Refinement Act of 1999 (Pub. L.106–113) was enacted. Public Law 106–113 made a number of changes to theAct affecting Medicare payments tohospitals for inpatient services. Many ofthe provisions of Public Law 106–113are modifications to provisions of theAct included in the Balanced BudgetAct of 1997 (Pub. L. 105–33). Some ofthe provisions of Public Law 106–113became effective prior to, or shortlyafter, its passage on November 29, 1999.Other provisions do not becomeeffective until Federal fiscal year (FY)2001 or later. The provisions of PublicLaw 106–113 that are effectivebeginning October 1, 2000, wereincluded in the proposed rule for FY2001 Medicare hospital inpatientprospective payment system publishedin the Federal Register on May 5, 2000(65 FR 26281) which is being finalizedin this issue of the Federal Register.

The following is a summary of thepolicy changes we are implementing inthis interim final rule with commentperiod as a result of Public Law 106–113:

A. Changes Relating to Payments forOperating Costs under the HospitalInpatient Prospective Payment System

• Reclassification of Certain Counties.We are implementing the provisions ofsection 152(a) of Public Law 106–113that reclassified hospitals in certaindesignated counties for purposes ofmaking payments to those hospitalsunder section 1886(d) of the Act for FY2000. The counties affected by thisprovision are identified under section IIIof this preamble.

• Wage Index. We are implementingsections 153 and 154 of Public Law106–113 that contain provisionsaffecting the wage indexes of specificMetropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA).Under section 153, the Hattiesburg,Mississippi FY 2000 wage index is to becalculated including wage data fromWesley Medical Center. Under section154, the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton,Pennsylvania MSA FY 2000 wage indexis to be calculated including wage datafor Lehigh Valley Hospital.

• Reclassification of Certain UrbanHospitals as Rural Hospitals. We areimplementing section 401 of Public Law106–113 which directed the Secretary totreat certain hospitals located in urbanareas as being located in the rural areaof their State if the hospital meetsstatutory criteria and files anapplication with HCFA. This provisionis effective on January 1, 2000.

• Indirect Medical Education (IME)Adjustment. We are implementingsection 111 of Public Law 106–113which provides for an additionalpayment to teaching hospitals equal tothe additional amount the hospitalswould have been paid for FY 2000 if theIME adjustment formula (which reflectsthe higher indirect operating costsassociated with GME) for FY 2000 hadremained the same as for FY 1999.

• Medicare-Dependent, Small RuralHospitals. We are implementing section404 of Public Law 106–113 whichextends the Medicare-dependent, smallrural hospital (MDH) program and itscurrent payment methodology for anadditional 5 years, from FY 2002through FY 2006.

B. Additional Changes Relating to DirectGME and Indirect Medical Education

• Initial Residency Period for ChildNeurology Residency Programs. We areimplementing section 312 of Public Law106–113 which provides that indetermining the number of residents forpurposes of GME and IME payments,the period of board eligibility and theinitial residency period for childneurology is the period of boardeligibility for pediatrics plus 2 years.

This provision applies on and after July1, 2000, to residency programs thatbegan before, on, or after November 29,1999.

• Residents on Approved Leave ofAbsences. We are implementing section407(a) of Public Law 106–113 whichprovides that, for purposes ofdetermining a hospital’s full-timeequivalent (FTE) cap for direct GMEpayments and the IME adjustment, ahospital may count an individual to theextent that the individual would havebeen counted as a primary care residentfor purposes of the FTE cap but for thefact that the individual was onmaternity or disability leave or a similarapproved leave of absence. Theprovision relating to direct GME iseffective with cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after November 29,1999. The provision relating to the IMEadjustment applies to dischargesoccurring in cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after November 29,1999.

• Expansion of Number ofUnweighted Residents in RuralHospitals. We are implementing section407(b) of Public Law 106–113 whichprovides that a rural hospital’s residentFTE count for direct GME and IME maynot exceed 130 percent of the number ofunweighted residents that the ruralhospital counted in its most recent costreporting period ending on or beforeDecember 31, 1996. The provisionrelating to direct GME applies to costreporting periods beginning on or afterApril 1, 2000. The provision relating tothe IME adjustment applies todischarges occurring on or after April 1,2000.

• Urban Hospitals with RuralTraining Tracks or Integrated RuralTracks. We are implementing section407(c) of Public Law 106–113 whichallows an urban hospital that establishesseparately accredited approved medicalresidency training programs (or ruraltraining tracks) in a rural area or has anaccredited training program with anintegrated rural track to receive an FTEcap adjustment for purposes of directGME and IME. The provision is effectivewith cost reporting periods beginningon or after April 1, 2000, for direct GME,and with discharges occurring on orafter April 1, 2000, for IME.

• Residents Training at CertainVeterans Affairs Hospitals. We areimplementing section 407(d) of PublicLaw 106–113 which provides that anon-Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital mayreceive a temporary adjustment to itsFTE cap to reflect residents who weretraining at a VA hospital and weretransferred on or after January 1, 1997,and before July 31, 1998, to the non-VA



hospital because the program at the VAhospital would lose its accreditation bythe Accreditation Council on GraduateMedical Education if the residentscontinued to train at the facility. Thisprovision applies as if it was includedin the enactment of Public Law 105–33,that is, for direct GME, with costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 1997, and for IME, fordischarges occurring on or after October1, 1997. If a hospital is owed paymentsas a result of this provision, paymentsmust be made immediately.

C. Payments for Nursing and AlliedHealth Education: Utilization ofMedicare+Choice Enrollees

We are implementing section 541 ofPublic Law 106–113 which provides anadditional payment to hospitals thatreceive payments under section 1861(v)of the Act for approved nursing andallied health education programs toreflect utilization of Medicare+Choiceenrollees. This provision is effective forportions of cost reporting periods in ayear beginning with calendar year 2000.

D. Changes Relating to Hospitals andHospital Units Excluded From theProspective Payment System

We are implementing section 121 ofPublic Law 106–113 which amendedsection 1886(b)(3)(H) of the Act to directthe Secretary to provide for anappropriate wage adjustment to the capson the target amounts for psychiatrichospitals and units, rehabilitationhospitals and units, and long-term carehospitals for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 1999.

E. Changes Relating to Critical AccessHospitals (CAHs)

We are implementing—• Section 401(b)(2) of Public Law

106–113, which contains a conformingchange to incorporate thereclassifications made by section 401(a)of Public Law 106–113 to the CAHcriteria (section 1820(c)(2)(B)(i) of theAct). This provision is effectivebeginning on January 1, 2000.

• Section 403(a) of Public Law 106–113, which deletes the 96-hour length ofstay restriction on inpatient care in aCAH and authorizes a period of stay thatdoes not exceed, on an annual, averagebasis, 96 hours per patient. Thisprovision is effective beginning onNovember 29, 1999.

• Section 403(b) of Public Law 106–113, which allows for-profit hospitals toqualify for CAH status. This provision iseffective beginning on November 29,1999.

• Section 403(c) of Public Law 106–113, which allows hospitals that haveclosed within 10 years prior toNovember 29, 1999, or hospitals thatdownsized to a health clinic or healthcenter, to be designated as CAHs if theysatisfy the established criteria fordesignation, other than the requirementfor existing hospital status.

• Section 403(e) of Public Law 106–113, which eliminates the Medicare PartB deductible and coinsurance forclinical diagnostic laboratory testsfurnished by a CAH on an outpatientbasis. This provision is effective withrespect to services furnished on or afterNovember 29, 1999.

• Section 403(f) of Public Law 106–113, entitled ‘‘Participation in SwingBed Program,’’ which amended sections1883(a)(1) and (c) of the Act.

F. Changes Relating to Hospital SwingBed Program

We are implementing section 408(a)of Public Law 106–113 whicheliminates the requirement for ahospital to obtain a certification of needto use acute care beds as swing beds forskilled nursing facility (SNF) level ofcare patients; and section 408(b) ofPublic Law 106–113 which eliminatesconstraints on the length of stay inswing beds for rural hospitals with 50to 100 beds. These provisions areeffective on the first day after theexpiration of the transition period forprospective payments for covered SNFservices under the Medicare program(that is, at the end of the transitionperiod for the SNF prospectivepayments system that began with thefacility’s first cost reporting periodbeginning on or after July 1, 1998 andextend through the end of the facility’sthird cost reporting period after thisdate).

III. Reclassification of Certain CountiesUnder section 152(a) of Public Law

106–113 hospitals in certain countiesare deemed to be located in specifiedareas for purposes of payment to thehospitals under the hospital inpatientprospective payment system, fordischarges occurring during FY 2000.For payment purposes, hospitals undersection 152(a) are to be treated as

though they were reclassified forpurposes of both the standardizedamount and the wage index. We havecalculated FY 2000 wage indexes forhospitals in the affected counties. Thesewage indexes are listed below. No otherhospitals’ FY 2000 wage indexes wereaffected, including those hospitals inthe areas to which these affectedhospitals were reclassified, as well asnonreclassified hospitals located in theareas from which these hospitals werereclassified.

Section 152(a) provides that, forpurposes of making payments undersection 1886(d) of the Act for FY 2000—

• To hospitals in Iredell County,North Carolina, Iredell County isdeemed to be located in the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina MSA;

• To hospitals in Orange County,New York, Orange County is deemed tobe located in the New York, New YorkMSA;

• To hospitals in Lake County,Indiana and Lee County, Illinois, LakeCounty and Lee County are deemed tobe located in the Chicago, Illinois MSA;

• To hospitals in Hamilton-Middletown, Ohio, Hamilton-Middletown is deemed to be located inthe Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky-IndianaMSA;

• To hospitals in Brazoria County,Texas, Brazoria County is deemed to belocated in the Houston, Texas MSA;

• To hospitals in Chittenden County,Vermont, Chittenden County is deemedto be located in the Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Lowell-Brockton,Massachusetts-New Hampshire MSA.

In accordance with section 153 ofPublic Law 106–113, for dischargesoccurring during FY 2000, theHattiesburg, Mississippi MSA wageindex was recalculated by including thewage data for Wesley Medical Center. Inaccordance with section 154(a), theAllentown-Bethlehem-Easton,Pennsylvania MSA FY 2000 wage indexwas recalculated by including the wagedata for Lehigh Valley Hospital.

The following table shows thechanges to the FY 2000 wage indexvalues and geographic adjustmentfactors for capital payments for thehospitals in the affected areas. Hospitalsaffected by section 152(a) of Public Law106–113 will now also be consideredreclassified for purposes of thestandardized amount.

County or MSANew MSA (for wageindex and standard-

ized amount)

New wageindex

New geo-graphic ad-

justment fac-tor (GAF)

Iredell County, NC ............................................................................................................... 1520 .......................... 0.9434 0.9609



County or MSANew MSA (for wageindex and standard-

ized amount)

New wageindex

New geo-graphic ad-

justment fac-tor (GAF)

Orange County, NY ............................................................................................................. 5600 .......................... 1.4342 1.2801Lake County, IN ................................................................................................................... 1600 .......................... 1.0750 1.0508Lee County, IL ..................................................................................................................... 1600 .......................... 1.0750 1.0508Hamilton-Middletown, OH .................................................................................................... 1640 .......................... 0.9419 0.9598Brazoria County, TX ............................................................................................................ 3360 .......................... 0.9388 0.9577Chittenden County, VT ........................................................................................................ 1123 .......................... 1.1359 1.0912Hattiesburg, MS MSA .......................................................................................................... MSA is not new ......... 0.7634 0.8312Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA MSA ............................................................................... MSA is not new ......... 1.0228 1.0156

IV. Reclassifications of Hospitals(Sections 401(a) and (b) of Public Law106–113 and 42 CFR 412.63(b),412.90(e), 412.102, and New 412.103)

A. Permitting Reclassification of CertainUrban Hospitals as Rural Hospitals

Under Medicare law, the location of ahospital can affect its paymentmethodology as well as whether thefacility qualifies for special treatmentboth for operating and for capitalpayments. Whether a facility is situatedin an urban or a rural area will, forexample, affect payments based on thewage index values and Federalstandardized amounts specific to thearea. Similarly, the percentage increasein payments made to hospitals that treata disproportionate share of low-incomepatients is based, in part, on its urban/rural status, as are determinationsregarding a hospital’s qualification as asole community hospital (SCH), ruralreferral center (RRC), CAH, or otherspecial category of facility. Section1886(d)(2)(D) of the Act defines an‘‘urban area’’ as an area within a MSAas defined by the Office of Managementand Budget. The same provision definesa ‘‘large urban area,’’ with respect to anyfiscal year, as an urban area that theSecretary determines (in thepublications described in section1886(e)(5) of the Act before the fiscalyear) has a population of more than 1million as determined based on themost recent available published CensusBureau data. Section 1886(d)(2)(D) ofthe Act further defines a ‘‘rural area’’ asan area that is outside of a ‘‘large’’ urbanarea or ‘‘other’’ urban area. Since FY1995, the average standardized amountfor hospitals located in rural areas and‘‘other’’ urban areas has been equal, asprovided for in section1886(b)(3)(B)(i)(X) of the Act.

Several provisions of the Act provideprocedures under which a hospital canapply for reclassification from onegeographic area to another: section1886(d)(8)(B) of the Act, which providesthat if certain conditions are met, theSecretary shall treat a hospital locatedin a rural county adjacent to one or

more urban areas as being located in theurban area to which the greatest numberof workers in the county commute; andsection 1886(d)(10) of the Act, whichestablishes the Medicare GeographicClassification Review Board (MGCRB)process to permit hospitals to bereclassified for purposes of thestandardized amount or the wage indexif they meet criteria established by theSecretary.

Section 401(a) of Public Law 106–113,which amended section 1886(d)(8) byadding a new paragraph (E), directs theSecretary to treat any subsection (d)hospital located in an urban area asbeing located in the rural area of theState in which the hospital is located ifthe hospital files an application (in theform and manner determined by theSecretary) and meets one of thefollowing criteria:

• The hospital is located in a ruralcensus tract of a MSA (as determinedunder the most recent modification ofthe Goldsmith Modification, originallypublished in the Federal Register onFebruary 27, 1992 (57 FR 6725));

• The hospital is located in an areadesignated by any law or regulation ofthe State as a rural area (or is designatedby the State as a rural hospital);

• The hospital would qualify as aRRC, or as a SCH if the hospital werelocated in a rural area; or

• The hospital meets any othercriteria specified by the Secretary.

The statutory effective date of thisprovision is January 1, 2000.

The Goldsmith Modification, one ofthe qualifying statutory criteria, evolvedfrom an outreach grant programsponsored by the Office of Rural HealthPolicy of the Health Resources andServices Administration (HRSA). Theprogram’s purpose was to establish anoperational definition of ruralpopulations lacking easy geographicaccess to health services. Using 1980Census Bureau data, Dr. Harold F.Goldsmith and his associates created amethodology for identification of censustracts that were located within a largemetropolitan county of at least 1,225square miles but were so isolated from

the metropolitan core by distance orphysical features as to be more ruralthan urban in character. The mostimportant criterion used to identifythese census tracts is the comparativelyfew residents in these areas, less than 15percent of the labor force, who commuteto work in the metropolitan core andsuburbs. Appendix A of this interimfinal rule with comment period lists theidentified urban counties with censustracts that may qualify as rural underthe most recent Goldsmith Modification(January 1, 2000). The amendmentsmade by section 401 of Public Law 106–113 enable a hospital located in one ofthese areas to be treated as if it weresituated in the rural area of the State inwhich it is located. In makingdeterminations under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act, we will utilizethe most recent Goldsmith Modificationwhich reflects data based on the 1990census.

Additionally, section 401(a) of PublicLaw 106–113 includes hospitals ‘‘* * *located in an area designated by any lawor regulation of such State as a ruralarea (or is designated by such State asa rural hospital).’’ We are requiring thata hospital’s designation as rural be inthe form of either State law or regulationif it is the basis for a hospital’s requestfor urban to rural reclassification undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act. Webelieve this will help ensure that theprovision is implemented consistentlyamong States.

Finally, a hospital also may seek toqualify for reclassification premised onthe fact that, had it been located in arural area, it would have qualified as anRRC or as an SCH. The hospital wouldneed to satisfy the criteria set forth insection 1886(d)(5)(C) of the Act (asimplemented in regulations at § 412.96)as a RRC, or the criteria set forth insection 1886(d)(5)(D) of the Act (asimplemented in regulations at § 412.92)as an SCH.

Although the statute authorizes theSecretary to specify further qualifyingcriteria for a section 1886(d)(8)(E)reclassification, we do not believe thatadditional criteria are warranted at this



time. However, we invite commentspecifically on whether the criteria inthis interim final rule are sufficient atthis time, and if not, what additionalcriteria should be incorporated.

Section IV.C. of this preamblecontains information on the applicationprocess for requesting reclassificationunder the section 401 provision.

A hospital that is reclassified as ruralunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act,as added by section 401(a) of PublicLaw 106–113, is treated as rural for allpurposes of payment under theMedicare inpatient hospital prospectivepayment system (section 1886(d) of theAct), including standardized amount(§§ 412.60 et seq.), wage index(§ 412.63), and disproportionate sharecalculations (§ 412.106) as of theeffective date of the reclassification.

B. Conforming Changes Under Section401(b) of Public Law 106–113

Section 401(b) of Public Law 106–113sets forth conforming statutory changesrelating to urban to ruralreclassifications under section 401(a) ofPublic Law 106–113:

• Section 401(b)(1) provides that if ahospital is being treated as being locatedin a rural area under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act (for purposes ofsection 1886(d) of the Act), the hospitalwill also be treated under section1833(t) of the Act as being located in arural area. This provision is beingaddressed in a separate document.

• Section 401(b)(2) amends section1820(c)(2)(B)(i) of the Act by extendingthe reclassification provisions of section401(a) to the CAH program. A hospitalthat otherwise would have fulfilled therequirements for designation as a CAHhad it been located in a rural area isnow eligible for consideration as a CAHif it is treated as being located in a ruralarea under section 1886(d)(8)(E) of theAct, as added by section 401(a) of PublicLaw 106–113. (A list of certain existinghospitals that have been identified asbeing located in Goldsmith areas isincluded in Appendix B of this interimfinal rule with comment period.) Amore detailed discussion of the effect onthe CAH program in light of thisprovision, as well as the additionalamendments to section 1820(c)(2)(B)(i)of the Act included in Public Law 106–113, is provided in section X.B. of thispreamble.

C. Application ProceduresThe statute provides that a hospital

seeking reclassification from urban torural under section 1886(d)(8)(E) of theAct must submit an application ‘‘in aform and manner determined by theSecretary.’’ We are providing that a

facility seeking reclassification undersection 401(a) or (b) of Public Law 106–113 must apply in writing to the HCFARegional Office and includedocumentation satisfying the criteria onwhich its request is based. Forinformation about where to submit anapplication, hospitals may contact theirfiscal intermediaries or utilize the HCFAwebsite at <www.hcfa.gov/medicare/regions/default.htm>. The applicationmust be mailed; facsimile or otherelectronic means are not acceptable.

1. Qualification Through the GoldsmithModification Criteria

We are specifying that hospitalsseeking reclassification through theGoldsmith Modification criteria mustinclude specific census tractinformation with their application thatcan be obtained through the followingsteps:

(a) The hospital must determinewhether it is located within one of theurban counties containing one or moreGoldsmith areas included in AppendixA of this interim final rule withcomment period.

(b) Since only certain census tractswithin these listed counties qualify asGoldsmith areas, a hospital thatidentifies its county in the listing mustfind the tract number assigned to itsspecific street location by the U.S.Census Bureau. One way to determinethis is through an interactive websiteprovided by the U.S. Census Bureau:<http:/tier2.census.gov/ctsl/ctsl.htm>.

(c) The hospital must include the 4-digit census tract number in itsapplication to the HCFA RegionalOffice. The HCFA Regional Office willutilize census tract data to determinewhether the census tract in which thehospital is located is situated in aGoldsmith area.

2. Qualification by State DesignationFor hospitals selecting reclassification

under qualification by State designation,we are providing that the hospital’sapplication must include a copy of theState law or regulation that verifieseither the requesting hospital is situatedin an area designated rural by the Stateor that the hospital has been designatedas a rural hospital. The application mustalso note the effective date of the ruraldesignation.

3. Qualification as an RRC or as an SCHFor hospitals seeking reclassification

under qualification as an RRC or as anSCH, we are providing that thehospital’s application must includedocumentation that supports thehospital’s assertion that, other than itsurban location, it satisfies the criteria set

forth in section 1886(d)(5)(C) of the Actas an RRC, as implemented inregulations at § 412.90; or as an SCH asset forth in section 1886(d)(5)(D) of theAct and implemented in regulations at§ 412.92. The HCFA Regional Office willreview the application in a mannerconsistent with its current procedures inthe case of a hospital in a rural area thatapplies for RRC or SCH status (exceptfor the requirement that the hospital belocated in a rural area).

D. Filing and Effective DatesWe are establishing the date of receipt

of the application by the HCFA RegionalOffice as the filing date. The HCFARegional Office will review theapplication and forward its approval ordisapproval to the hospital within 60calendar days from the filing date. TheHCFA Regional Office also will forwarda copy of its decision to the HCFACentral Office and the fiscalintermediary. A hospital that satisfiesany of the criteria for ruralreclassification under section 401(a) ofPublic Law 106–113 will be treated asbeing located in the rural area of theState in which it is located as of itsapplication filing date.

The statutory effective date of theamendments made by section 401 ofPublic Law 106–113 is January 1, 2000.To allow hospitals a grace period forfiling applications to accommodate thiseffective date, we are providing that aqualifying hospital whose application isreceived by HCFA on or beforeSeptember 1, 2000, will be consideredas being located in the rural area of itsState for purposes of section 1886(d) ofthe Act as of January 1, 2000. Followingthat grace period, a hospital’s filing dateis the date on which a completeapplication is received by HCFA. Aqualifying hospital that bases itsapplication for rural reclassificationunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Acton its satisfaction of either SCH or RRCcriteria, and that files on or beforeSeptember 1, 2000, will benefit from thegrace period and will be considered asbeing located in the rural area of itsState as of January 1, 2000, unless thehospital withdraws its request asdescribed in section IV.D.3 of thispreamble. Once the hospital is rural, itmay seek either an SCH or an RRCstatus by following a two-step processdescribed respectively, in sectionsIV.D.1 and IV.D.2 of this preamble. Theprocess for approval of the hospital aseither an SCH or an RRC must beconsistent with the processes currentlyin place for approving theseapplications. We note that whereas SCHdesignation is effective 30 days afterwritten notification of HCFA’s approval,



under § 412.92(b)(2)(i), the effective dateof RRC designation, under1886(d)(5)(C)(i) of the Act, is linked tothe beginning of a hospital’s reportingperiod.

1. A Hospital Reclassified as RuralSeeking Designation as an SCH

A hospital that bases its applicationfor rural reclassification on itssatisfaction of all SCH criteria set forthin § 412.92, except rural location, mayseek subsequent designation as an SCHif HCFA determines that it qualifies tobe treated as rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act. The hospitalmust indicate this intent on itsapplication for rural reclassification.Designation as an SCH for such hospital,therefore, would be a two-step process:(1) The hospital’s reclassification asrural for all payment purposes as of itsfiling date under section 1886(d)(8)(E) ofthe Act; and (2) the now-rural hospital’srequest for SCH status, which would beeffective 30 days following the date ofHCFA’s written notification of approval,as set forth in the regulations at§ 412.92(b)(2)(i).

In order to implement section 401(a)of Public Law 106–113 in the mostexpeditious and efficient manner,allowing for necessary payment systemmodifications, for the grace periodwhich extends from January 1, 2000 toSeptember 1, 2000, we are bundling theabove two operations: the ruralreclassification of a hospital, undersection 401(a) of Public Law 106–113,and the designation of the hospital as anSCH. A hospital that has applied forrural status based on its eligibility as anSCH and also is applying to become anSCH, will be granted SCH status as ofJanuary 1, 2000, if it satisfies theconditions for SCH designation in§ 412.92, except for rural location as ofJanuary 1, 2000, and its application isfiled by September 1, 2000.

2. Hospitals Reclassified as RuralSeeking Designation as a RRC

A hospital qualifying for ruralreclassification under section 401(a) ofPublic Law 106–113 because it satisfiesRRC criteria under § 412.96, except forrural location, will be considered ruralfor all payment purposes as of January1, 2000, if its application is received bySeptember 1, 2000. After September 1,2000, when the grace period expires, thefiling date is the date HCFA receives thehospital’s complete application. If thehospital seeks designation as a RRC, thehospital must state its intent to apply forRRC status on its application for ruralreclassification under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act. Designation asan RRC for such a hospital, therefore, is

a two-step process: (1) The hospital’sclassification as rural for all paymentpurposes as of its filing date undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act; and (2)the now rural hospital’s request for RRCstatus by way of a letter to the RegionalOffice during the quarter preceding thestart of a cost reporting period,referencing the data it previouslysubmitted for rural status. If approved,the hospital is designated an RRC at thestart of the hospital’s next cost reportingperiod under section 1886(d)(5)(C)(i) ofthe Act (55 FR 36059). Therefore,whereas the grace period would grantrural status under section 1886(d)(8)(E)of the Act to such a hospital filing onor before September 1, 2000, statutoryrequirements preclude us from grantingRRC status simultaneously as we areable to do in the case of SCHs describedabove.

3. Withdrawal of an Application forRural Reclassification

A hospital may withdraw anapplication for rural reclassification atany time prior to the date of HCFA’sdecision on whether or not the hospitalqualifies for rural reclassification undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act.

4. Cancellation of Rural ReclassificationWe are specifying that a hospital

seeking cancellation of rural statusestablished under section 1886(d)(8)(E)of the Act must submit its writtenrequest to HCFA not less than 120 daysprior to the end of its current costreporting period. With the beginning ofthe hospital’s next cost reporting period,the hospital will be treated as beinglocated in an urban area.

E. Changes in the RegulationsWe are adding a new § 412.103 to

incorporate the provisions on the urbanto rural reclassification options set forthin section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act, asadded by section 401(a) of Public Law106–113, and the applicationprocedures for requestingreclassification. A formula for transitionpayments to hospitals located in an areathat has undergone geographicreclassification from urban to rural is setforth in section 1886(d)(8)(A) of the Actand implemented in regulations at§§ 412.90 and 412.102. We are revisingexisting §§ 412.63(b)(1) and 412.90(e)and the title of § 412.102 to clarify thedistinction between hospitalreclassification from urban to rural andthe geographic reclassification (orredesignation) of an urban area to rural.

We are revising § 485.610 byredesignating paragraph (b)(4) asparagraph (b)(5) and adding a newparagraph (b)(4) to reflect the

conforming provision of section401(b)(2) of Public Law 106–113.

V. Medicare-Dependent, Small RuralHospitals (Section 404 of Public Law106–113 and 42 CFR 412.90(j) and412.108)

Section 404 of Public Law 106–113added a 5-year extension of theMedicare-dependent, small ruralhospital (MDH) program (FY 2002through FY 2006). This category ofhospitals was originally created bysection 6003(f) of the Omnibus BudgetReconciliation Act of 1989 (Public Law101–239), which added section1886(d)(5)(G) to the Act.

As set forth in section 1886(d)(5)(G) ofthe Act, in order to be classified as anMDH, a hospital must meet all of thefollowing criteria:

• The hospital is located in a ruralarea.

• The hospital has 100 or fewer beds.• The hospital is not classified as an

SCH (as defined at § 412.92).• In the hospital’s cost reporting

period that began during FY 1987, notless than 60 percent of its inpatient daysor discharges were attributable toinpatients entitled to Medicare Part Abenefits.

As provided by the law, MDHs wereeligible for a special paymentadjustment under the prospectivepayment system, effective for costreporting periods beginning on or afterApril 1, 1990 and ending on or beforeMarch 31, 1993. Hospitals classified asMDHs were paid using the samemethodology applicable to SCHs, that is,based on whichever of the followingrates yielded the greatest aggregatepayment for the cost reporting period:

• The national Federal rate applicableto the hospital.

• The updated hospital-specific rateusing FY 1982 cost per discharge.

• The updated hospital-specific rateusing FY 1987 cost per discharge.

Section 13501(e)(1) of the OmnibusBudget Reconciliation Act of 1993(Public Law 103–66) extended the MDHprovision through FY 1994 andprovided that, after the hospital’s firstthree 12-month cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after April 1, 1990, theadditional payment to an MDH whoseapplicable hospital-specific rateexceeded the Federal rate was limited to50 percent of the amount by which thehospital-specific rate exceeded theFederal rate.

Section 4204(a)(3) of Public Law 105–33 reinstated the MDH special paymentfor discharges occurring on or afterOctober 1, 1997 and before October 1,2001, but did not revise either the



qualifying criteria for these hospitals orthe payment methodology.

Section 404(a) of Public Law 106–113extended the MDH provision todischarges occurring on or after October1, 2002 and before October 1, 2006.

We are revising §§ 412.90(j) and412.108 to reflect the extension of theMDH program.

VI. Changes to the IME Adjustment(Section 111 of Public Law 106–113 and42 CFR 412.105(d)(3))

Section 1886(d)(5)(B) of the Actprovides that prospective paymenthospitals that have residents in anapproved GME program receive anadditional payment to reflect the higherindirect operating costs associated withGME. The regulations regarding thecalculation of this additional payment,known as the IME adjustment, arelocated at § 412.105.

Section 111(a) of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(d)(5)(B) of theAct by modifying the transition for theIME adjustment. The IME adjustmentfactor is calculated using a formulamultiplier that is represented as c in thefollowing equation: c × [(1 + r)..405¥1].The variable r represents the hospital’sresident-to-bed ratio.

Public Law 105–33 established theformula multiplier for dischargesoccurring during FY 2000 at 1.47.However, section 111(b) of Public Law106–113 provides for special paymentsto each hospital to reflect the amount ofIME payments if c equaled 1.6 fordischarges occurring during FY 2000,rather than 1.47. In accordance withsection 111(b)(2) of Public Law 106–113, these special payments will notaffect any other payments,determinations, or budget neutralityadjustments under section 1886(d) ofthe Act.

Under amendments enacted bysection 111(a) of Public Law 106–113,for discharges occurring during FY2001, the formula multiplier is 1.54.Changes to the factor for dischargesoccurring in FY 2001 were addressed inthe proposed rule on FY 2001 hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemrates and changes that was published inthe Federal Register on May 5, 2000 (65FR 26281) and that will be finalized byAugust 1, 2000. Changes to the factor fordischarges occurring in FY 2002 andthereafter are discussed in the final ruleto be published by August 1, 2000.

We are amending § 412.105(d)(3) toreflect the additional payment providedfor discharges occurring during FY 2000under section 111(b)(1) of Public Law106–113.

VII. Payment for Costs of GME

Under section 1886(h) of the Act,Medicare pays hospitals for the directcosts of GME. The payments are basedon the number of residents trained bythe hospital. Section 1886(h) of the Act,as revised by Public Law 105–33, capsthe number of residents a hospital maycount for direct GME and IME. Ingeneral, the total number of residents inthe fields of allopathic or osteopathicmedicine in a hospital may not exceedthe number of such FTE residents in thehospital with respect to the hospital’smost recent cost reporting period endingon or before December 31, 1996. In theregulations we published on August 29,1997 (62 FR 46003), May 12, 1998 (63FR 26327), July 31, 1998 (63 FR 40986),and July 30, 1999 (64 FR 41517), weestablished special rules for adjustingthe FTE resident caps for indirect anddirect GME for new medical residencyprograms. Public Law 106–113 furtherrevised sections 1886(d) and 1886(h) ofthe Act to allow a hospital’s caps to beadjusted if certain additional criteria aremet.

A. Counting Primary Care Residents onCertain Approved Leaves of Absence inBase-Year FTE Count (Section 407(a)(1)of Public Law 106–113 and new 42 CFR412.105(f)(1)(xi) and 413.86(g)(9))

The limit that was placed on thenumber of residents that a hospital maycount for purposes of direct GME andIME is based on the number of residentsin the hospital’s most recent costreporting period ending on or beforeDecember 31, 1996. In the situationwhere a primary care resident waspreviously training in a hospital’sresidency program, but was on anapproved leave of absence during thehospital’s most recent cost reportingperiod ending on or before December31, 1996, the hospital’s FTE cap may belower than it would have been had theresident not been on an approved leaveof absence. Section 407(a) of Public Law106–113 amended section 1886(h)(4)(F)of the Act to direct the Secretary tocount an individual for purposes ofdetermining a hospital’s FTE cap, to theextent that the individual would havebeen counted as a primary care residentfor purposes of the FTE cap but for thefact that the individual was onmaternity or disability leave or a similarapproved leave of absence.

The statute allows a hospital toreceive an adjustment for thoseresidents to its individual FTE cap of upto three additional FTE residents. Weare providing in this interim final rulewith comment period that, in order fora hospital to receive this adjustment, the

leave of absence must have beenapproved by the residency programdirector to allow the residents to beabsent from the program and return tothe program after the absence. We arerequiring that no later than 6 monthsafter the date of publication of thisinterim final rule, the hospital mustsubmit a request to the fiscalintermediary for an adjustment to itsFTE cap and must providecontemporaneous documentation of theapproval of the leave of absence by theresidency program director, specific toeach additional resident that is to becounted for purposes of the adjustment.For example, a letter to the resident bythe residency program director beforethe resident takes the leave would besufficient documentation of priorapproval of the leave of absence.

Under section 407(a)(3) of Public Law106–113, this provision is effective fordirect GME FTE counts with costreporting periods beginning on or afterNovember 29, 1999, and for IME FTEcounts, with discharges occurring incost reporting periods beginning on orafter November 29, 1999.

We are adding new§§ 412.105(f)(1)(xi) and 413.86(g)(9) toincorporate the provisions of section407(a) of Public Law 106–113.

B. Adjustments to the FTE Cap for RuralHospitals (Section 407(b)(1) of PublicLaw 106–113 and 42 CFR412.105(f)(l)(iv) and 413.86(g)(4))

Public Law 105–33 included severalprovisions with the intent ofencouraging physician training andpractice in rural areas. Section1886(h)(4)(H)(i) of the Act, as added bysection 4623 of Public Law 105–33,directed the Secretary, in promulgatingrules for the purpose of the FTE cap, togive special consideration to facilitiesthat meet the needs of underserved ruralareas. Consistent with the intent of thisprovision, section 407(b) of Public Law106–113 provides a 30-percentexpansion of a rural hospital’s directand indirect FTE count for purposes ofestablishing the hospital’s individualFTE cap. Specifically, section 407(b)provides that, effective for direct GMEwith cost reporting periods beginningon or after April 1, 2000, and for IME,with discharges occurring on or afterApril 1, 2000, the FTE count may notexceed 130 percent of the number ofunweighted residents the rural hospitalcounted in its most recent cost reportingperiod ending on or before December31, 1996.

For example, if a hospital located ina rural area had 10 unweighted FTEs forits count for both direct GME and IMEin its most recent cost reporting period



ending on or before December 31, 1996,under this new provision the hospitalwould have a FTE cap of 13 unweightedFTEs, instead of 10 unweighted FTEs,because the hospital is located in a ruralarea. The revised FTE cap is equal to130 percent of the number ofunweighted residents in its most recentcost reporting period ending on orbefore December 31, 1996. The ruralhospital’s new FTE cap, effective April1, 2000, is now 13 FTEs. However, if ahospital located in a rural area had zerounweighted FTEs for its count for bothdirect GME and IME in its most recentcost reporting period ending on orbefore December 31, 1996, under thisnew provision, this hospital wouldreceive no adjustment to its FTE cap(130 percent of zero is zero FTEs).

We are incorporating the provisions ofsection 407(b) of Public Law 106–113 in§§ 412.105(f)(1)(iv) and 413.86(g)(4).

C. Rural Track FTE Limitation forPurposes of GME and IME for UrbanHospitals That Establish SeparatelyAccredited Approved Medical Programsin a Rural Area (Section 407(c) of PublicLaw 106–113 and new 42 CFR412.105(f)(1)(x) and 413.86(g)(11))

Section 407(c) of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(h)(4)(H) of theAct to add a provision that, in the caseof a hospital that is not located in a ruralarea but establishes separatelyaccredited approved medical residencytraining programs (or rural tracks) in arural area or has an accredited trainingprogram with an integrated rural track,an adjustment may be made to thehospital’s cap on the number ofresidents in order to encourage thetraining of physicians in rural areas. Fordirect GME, the amendment applies topayments to hospitals for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after April 1,2000; for IME, the amendment appliesto discharges occurring on or after Aprill, 2000.

Section 407(c) of Public Law 106–113does not define ‘‘rural tracks’’ or an‘‘integrated rural track,’’ nor are theseterms defined elsewhere in the SocialSecurity Act or in any applicableFederal regulations. Currently, there area number of accredited residencyprograms, particularly 3-year primarycare residency programs, in whichresidents train for 1 year of the programat an urban hospital and are then rotatedfor training for the other 2 years of the3-year program to a rural facility. Theseseparately accredited ‘‘rural track’’programs are identified by theAccreditation Council of GraduateMedical Education (ACGME) as ‘‘1–2’’rural track programs. We areimplementing section 407(c) to address

these ‘‘1–2’’ programs. In addition, weare implementing section 407(c) toaccount for other programs that are not‘‘1–2’’ programs but which include ruraltraining portions.

As stated above, there is no existingdefinition of ‘‘rural track’’ or ‘‘integratedrural track.’’ We are defining at§ 413.86(b) a ‘‘rural track’’ and an‘‘integrated rural track’’ as an approvedmedical residency training programestablished by an urban hospital inwhich residents train for a portion of theprogram at the urban hospital and thenrotate for a portion of the program to arural hospital(s) or to a ruralnonhospital site(s). We note that ‘‘ruraltrack’’ and ‘‘integrated rural track,’’ forpurposes of this definition, aresynonymous.

We are amending § 413.86 to addparagraph (g)(11) (and amending§ 412.105 to add paragraph (f)(1)(x)) tospecify that, for direct GME, for costreporting periods beginning on or afterApril 1, 2000, (or, for IME, fordischarges occurring on or after April 1,2000), an urban hospital that establishesa new residency program, or has anexisting residency program, with a ruraltrack (or an integrated rural track) mayinclude in its FTE count residents inthose rural tracks, in addition to theresidents subject to the FTE cap at§ 413.86(g)(4). An urban hospital maycount the residents in the rural track upto a ‘‘rural track FTE limitation’’ for thathospital. We are defining this rural trackFTE limitation at § 413.86(b) as themaximum number of residents (asspecified at § 413.86(g)(11)(i) through(vi)) training in a rural track residencyprogram that an urban hospital mayinclude in its FTE count, that is inaddition to the number of FTE residentsalready included in the hospital’s FTEcap.

Generally, the rural track policy isdivided into two categories: Rural trackprograms in which residents are rotatedto a rural area for at least two-thirds ofthe duration of the program; and ruraltrack programs in which residents arerotated to a rural area for less than two-thirds of the duration of the program.These two categories are thensubdivided according to where theresidents are training in the rural area;the residents may be trained in a ruralhospital or the residents may be trainedin a rural nonhospital site. To accountfor rural track residency programs withrural rotations that have programlengths greater than or less than 3 years,or that are not ‘‘1–2’’ programs, we arespecifying ‘‘two-thirds of the length ofthe program,’’ instead of ‘‘2 out of 3program years,’’ as a qualification tocount FTEs in the rural track.

We are specifying that urban hospitalsthat wish to count FTE residents in ruraltracks, up to a rural track FTElimitation, must comply with theconditions discussed below:

1. Rotating Residents for at Least Two-Thirds of the Program to a RuralHospital(s)

We are specifying at § 413.86(g)(11)(i)that if an urban hospital rotatesresidents in the rural track program toa rural hospital(s) for at least two-thirdsof the duration of the program, theurban hospital may include thoseresidents in its FTE count for the timethe rural track residents spend at theurban hospital. The urban hospital mayinclude in its FTE count those residentsin the rural track training at the urbanhospital, not to exceed its rural trackFTE limitation, determined as follows:

• For the first 3 years of the ruraltrack’s existence, the rural track FTElimitation for each urban hospital willbe the actual number of FTE residentstraining in the rural track at the urbanhospital.

• Beginning with the fourth year ofthe rural track’s existence, the ruraltrack FTE limitation is equal to theproduct of: (a) The highest number ofresidents in any program year who,during the third year of the rural track’sexistence, are training in the rural trackat the urban hospital or the ruralhospital(s) and are designated at thebeginning of their training to be rotatedto the rural hospital(s) for at least two-thirds of the duration of the program;and (b) the number of years thoseresidents are training at the urbanhospital.

We are utilizing the term‘‘designated’’ at § 413.86(g)(11)(i) (aswell as at §§ 413.86(g)(11)(ii) and (iv)) torefer to the calculation of the rural trackFTE limitation. ‘‘Designated’’ meansthat the residents must actually haveenrolled in that rural track program torotate for a portion of the rural trackprogram to a rural area (either ruralhospital(s) or rural nonhospital site(s)).To be counted as an FTE in this firstscenario, these enrolled residents mustactually rotate for at least two-thirds ofthe duration of the program to a ruralhospital(s). If a resident, at thebeginning of his or her training, intendsto train in the rural area for at least two-thirds of the duration of the program,but ultimately never does so, thisresident would be proportionatelyexcluded from the urban hospital’s FTEcount and rural track FTE count.

We note that if the residents in therural track are rotating to a ruralhospital(s), the rural hospital(s) may beeligible to count the residents as part of



its FTE count. If the rural trackresidency program is a new residencyprogram as specified in redesignated§ 413.86(g)(12), the rural hospital maybe eligible to receive an FTE capadjustment for those residents trainingin the rural track for the time thoseresidents are training at the ruralhospital(s), in accordance with theprovisions of existing § 413.86(g)(6)(iii).If the rural track residency program isan existing residency program, a ruralhospital may be eligible to count theFTE residents training in the rural trackat the rural hospital(s), in accordancewith the provisions of § 413.86(g)(4), asamended in this interim final rule toimplement section 407(b)(1) of PublicLaw 106–113.

2. Rotating Residents for at Least Two-Thirds of the Program to a RuralNonhospital Site

We are specifying at § 413.86(g)(11)(ii)that if an urban hospital rotatesresidents in the rural track program toa rural nonhospital site(s) for at leasttwo-thirds of the duration of theprogram, the urban hospital mayinclude those residents in its FTE count,subject to the requirements underexisting § 413.86(f)(4). The urbanhospital may include in its FTE countthose residents in the rural track, not toexceed its rural track FTE limitation,determined as follows:

• For the first 3 years of the ruraltrack’s existence, the rural track FTElimitation for each urban hospital willbe the actual number of FTE residentstraining in the rural track at the urbanhospital and the rural nonhospital site.

• Beginning with the fourth year ofthe rural track’s existence, the ruraltrack FTE limitation is equal to theproduct of: (a) The highest number ofresidents in any program year who,during the third year of the rural track’sexistence, are training in the rural trackat the urban hospital and are designatedat the beginning of their training to berotated to a rural nonhospital site(s) forat least two-thirds of the duration of theprogram and the rural nonhospitalsite(s); and, (b) the number of years inwhich the residents are expected tocomplete each program based on theminimum accredited length for the typeof program.

We note that we specify at§ 413.86(g)(11)(ii) that an urban hospitalmay include in its FTE count thoseresidents in the rural track rotating to arural nonhospital site, subject to therequirements under § 413.86(f)(4). Theregulations at § 413.86(f)(4) provide, inpart, that a hospital that incurs ‘‘all orsubstantially all’’ of the costs of trainingresidents in a nonhospital site may

include those residents in determiningthe number of FTE residents (not toexceed the FTE cap) for that hospital.Under this new rural track policy,where the urban hospital rotatesresidents for at least two-thirds of theresidency program to a ruralnonhospital site, the urban hospitalwould be eligible to include in its FTEcount residents training in the ruraltrack up to its rural track FTE limitation,but the urban hospital must stillreimburse the rural nonhospital site forthe costs of training those residents, asspecified under § 413.86(f)(4).

An example of this second scenario iswhere urban hospital A has a newinternal medicine residency programthat was established July 1, 1998, androtates six PGY (program year) 2s andfive PGY 3s in the third year of theprogram to rural nonhospital site B. Inthe third year of the program, five PGY1s who will subsequently rotate to therural nonhospital site are training athospital A. If hospital A is complyingwith the requirements at § 413.86(f)(4)by incurring all or substantially all ofthe cost of the training at ruralnonhospital site B, beginning with thefourth year of the program, hospital Awill receive a rural track FTE limitationof 18 FTEs, because the highest numberof residents training at either hospital Aor rural nonhospital site B is six PGY 2sat rural nonhospital site B and theminimum accredited length for internalmedicine is 3 years (thus, six PGY 2s ×3 years = 18 FTEs). (Note that for thefirst 3 years of the new rural trackprogram, the actual count of residentstraining in the rural track at bothhospital A and rural nonhospital site Bwill be hospital A’s rural track FTEcount (and rural track FTE limitation forthe first 3 years of the new rural trackprogram).)

3. Rotating Residents for Less ThanTwo-Thirds of the Program to a RuralHospital(s)

We are specifying at§ 413.86(g)(11)(iii) that if an urbanhospital rotates residents in the ruraltrack program to a rural hospital(s) forperiods of time that are less than two-thirds of the duration of the program,the urban hospital may not includethose residents in its FTE count (if theurban hospital FTE count exceeds theurban hospital FTE cap), nor may theurban hospital include those residentswhen calculating its rural track FTEcount. However, we note that, in thisscenario, if the rural track residencyprogram is a new residency program asspecified in redesignated§ 413.86(g)(12), the rural hospital maybe eligible to receive an FTE cap

adjustment for those residents trainingin the rural track, in accordance withthe provisions of existing§ 413.86(g)(6)(iii). If the rural trackresidency program is an existingresidency program, a rural hospital maycount the FTE residents training in therural track at the rural hospital(s), inaccordance with the provisions of§ 413.86(g)(4), as amended, toincorporate the provisions of section407(b)(1) of Public Law 106–113.

We are not permitting an urbanhospital to count the FTE of residents ina rural track rotating to a ruralhospital(s) for less than two-thirds theduration of the program (either as partof the urban hospital’s FTE count or aspart of its rural track FTE limitation),because to do so would inappropriatelyallow the urban hospital to circumventthe FTE caps (assuming the urbanhospital’s FTE count exceeds its FTEcap) by creating a new program withminimal training in a rural track.However, in this situation, like the otherthree provisions that concern thetraining of residents in rural areas, wewill allow Medicare payment for therural portion of the training to the ruralhospital.

4. Rotating Residents for Less ThanTwo-Thirds of the Program to a RuralNonhospital Site

We are specifying at§ 413.86(g)(11)(iv) that if an urbanhospital rotates residents in the ruraltrack program to a rural nonhospitalsite(s) for periods of time that are lessthan two-thirds of the duration of theprogram, the urban hospital mayinclude those residents in its FTE count,subject to the requirements underexisting § 413.86(f)(4). The urbanhospital may include in its FTE countthose residents in the rural track, not toexceed its rural track FTE limitation,determined as follows:

• For the first 3 years of the ruraltrack’s existence, the rural track FTElimitation for the urban hospital will bethe actual number of FTE residentstraining in the rural track at the ruralnonhospital site.

• Beginning with the fourth year ofthe rural track’s existence, the ruraltrack FTE limitation is equal to theproduct of: (a) the highest number ofresidents in any program year who,during the third year of the rural track’sexistence, are training in the rural trackat the rural nonhospital site(s); and (b)the length of time in which the residentsare being trained at the ruralnonhospital site(s).

We note that, in this situation, anurban hospital would not be able tocount the FTE for the rural track



resident while the resident is training atthe urban hospital (unless the urbanhospital’s FTE count does not exceed itsFTE cap). The rural track FTE count andthe rural track FTE limitation for theurban hospital would be limited toaccount for the residents training at therural nonhospital site.

As in the second scenario at new§ 413.86(g)(11)(ii), we are specifying at§ 413.86(g)(11)(iv) that an urban hospitalmay include in its FTE count thoseresidents in the rural track rotating to arural nonhospital site, subject to therequirements under § 413.86(f)(4).Under this new rural track policy,where the urban hospital rotatesresidents for less than two-thirds of theresidency program to a ruralnonhospital site, the urban hospitalwould be eligible to include in its FTEcount residents training in the ruraltrack up to its rural track FTE limitation,but the urban hospital must stillreimburse the rural nonhospital site forthe costs of training those residents, asspecified under § 413.86(f)(4).

We note that, in this last scenario, weare allowing the urban hospital toreceive a rural track FTE limitation evenin situations where it is rotatingresidents to a rural area for a minimalperiod of time (less than two-thirds theduration of the program). We believethat this last scenario can bedistinguished from the third scenario inwhich the urban hospital is rotatingresidents to a rural area for a minimalportion of the program but to a ruralhospital instead of a rural nonhospitalsite. In the third scenario, we areallowing Medicare payment to go to therural hospital for the portion of theurban hospital program that involvesrural training (but not to the urbanhospital, since the rural hospital isreceiving an FTE cap adjustment for thattraining). However, in the last scenario,we are allowing the urban hospital toinclude the rural track residents in itsFTE count (and as part of its rural trackFTE limitation), based on how long itrotates the residents to the ruralnonhospital site (and also incurs all orsubstantially all of the training costs).We do not believe that the urbanhospital can circumvent its FTE cap inthis last scenario because it will onlycount the rural track residents based onthe portion of training in the ruralnonhospital site (assuming the urbanhospital’s FTE count exceed its FTEcap).

An example of this last scenariowould be in the situation where urbanhospital C establishes a new residencyprogram in FY 2001 by training six PGY1s in the first year of the program’sexistence at the urban hospital. In the

second year of the program, urbanhospital C trains six PGY 1s and rotatesthe (now) six PGY 2s to ruralnonhospital site D. In the third year ofthe program, urban hospital C trainsseven PGY 1s, zero PGY 2s (rotating thesix PGY 2s to rural nonhospital site D)and six PGY 3s. Urban hospital C wouldreceive a rural track FTE limitation ofzero FTEs in the first year of theprogram’s existence, since urbanhospital C did not rotate any residentsto a rural nonhospital site in that firstyear; in the second year of the program,urban hospital C may count six FTEresidents above its FTE cap as its secondyear rural track FTE limitation, since itrotated six PGY 2s to rural nonhospitalsite D in that second year; in the thirdyear of the program, urban hospital Cmay count six FTE residents above itsFTE cap as its third year rural track FTElimitation, as well, since it rotated sixPGY 2s to the rural nonhospital site Din the third year. Finally, beginningwith the fourth year of the rural trackprogram’s existence, urban hospital Cwill receive a rural track FTE limitationof seven FTEs (seven PGY 1 residentstraining at urban hospital C that aredesignated to rotate for one year of theirtraining to rural nonhospital site D × 1year of training at rural nonhospital siteD), assuming urban hospital C complieswith the requirements at § 413.86(f)(4)that urban hospital C incurs all orsubstantially all of the costs of trainingthe six residents in rural nonhospitalsite D.

5. Conditions That Apply to All UrbanHospitals

We are specifying that all urbanhospitals that wish to count FTEresidents in rural tracks, not to exceedtheir respective rural track FTElimitations, must comply with each ofthe following conditions, as stated at§§ 413.86(g)(11)(v) and (vi):

(a) A hospital may not include in itsrural track limitation or its FTE count(assuming the hospital’s FTE countexceeds its cap), FTE residents who aretraining in a rural track residencyprogram that were already included aspart of the hospital’s FTE cap (if therural track program was in existenceduring the hospital’s most recent costreporting period ending on or beforeDecember 31, 1996).

(b) A hospital must base its count ofresidents in a rural track on writtencontemporaneous documentation thateach resident enrolled in a rural trackprogram at the urban hospital intends torotate for a portion of the residencyprogram to a rural area. For example,written contemporaneousdocumentation might be a letter of

intent signed and dated by the ruraltrack residency program director andthe resident at the time of the resident’sentrance into the rural track program asa PGY 1.

(c) All residents who are included bythe hospital as part of its FTE count (notto exceed its rural track FTE limitation)must ultimately train in the rural area.

(d) If HCFA finds that residents whoare included by the urban hospital aspart of its FTE count did not actuallycomplete the training in the rural area,HCFA will reopen the urban hospital’scost report within the 3-year reopeningperiod (as specified in § 405.1885) andadjust the hospital’s Medicare GMEpayments (and, where applicable, thehospital’s rural track FTE limitation).

D. Not Counting Against NumericalLimitation Certain ResidentsTransferred From a Department ofVeterans Affairs Hospital’s ResidencyProgram That Loses Accreditation(Section 407(d) of Public Law 106–113and new 42 CFR 412.105(f)(1)(xii) and413.86(g)(10))

Section 407(d) of Public Law 106–113addresses the situation where residentswere training in a residency trainingprogram at a Veterans Affairs (VA)hospital and then were transferred on orafter January 1, 1997, and before July 31,1998, to a non-VA hospital because theprogram in which the residents weretraining would lose its accreditation bythe ACGME if the residents continued totrain at the VA hospital. In thissituation, the non-VA hospital mayreceive a temporary adjustment to itsFTE cap to reflect those residents whowere transferred to the non-VA hospitalfor the duration that those transferredresidents were training at the non-VAhospital. We are specifying that, inorder to receive this adjustment, thenon-VA hospital must submit a requestto its fiscal intermediary for a temporaryadjustment to its FTE cap, documentthat the hospital is eligible for thistemporary adjustment by identifying theresidents who have come from the VAhospital, and specify the length of timethe adjustment is needed.

We note that section 407(d) of PublicLaw 106–113 only refers to programsthat would lose their accreditation bythe ACGME. This provision does notapply to accreditation by the AmericanOsteopathy Association (AOA), theAmerican Podiatry Association (APA),or the American Dental Association(ADA).

Under section 407(d)(3) of Public Law106–113, this policy is effective as ifincluded in the enactment of PublicLaw 105–33, that is, for direct GME,with cost reporting periods beginning



on or after October 1, 1997, and for IME,discharges occurring on or after October1, 1997. If a hospital is owed paymentsas a result of this provision, paymentsmust be made immediately.

We are adding new§§ 412.105(f)(1)(xii) and 413.86(g)(10) toincorporate the provisions of section407(d) of Public Law 106–113.

E. Initial Residency Period for ChildNeurology Residency Programs (Section312 of Public Law 106–113 and 42 CFR413.86(g)(1))

Generally, section 1886(h)(5)(F) of theAct defines the term ‘‘initial residencyperiod’’ to mean the ‘‘period of boardeligibility.’’ The period of boardeligibility is defined in section1886(h)(5)(G) of the Act as the periodrecognized by ACGME as specified inthe Graduate Medical EducationDirectory which is published by theAmerican Medical Association. Theinitial residency period limitation wasdesigned to limit full Medicare paymentfor direct GME to the time required totrain in a single specialty. Therefore, theinitial residency period is determinedbased on the minimum time required fora resident to become board eligible in aspecialty and the published periodsincluded in the Graduate MedicalEducation Directory. During the initialresidency period, the residents areweighted at 1.0 FTE for purposes ofMedicare payment. Residents seekingadditional specialty or subspecialtytraining are weighted at 0.5 FTE.

In order to become board eligible inchild neurology, residents mustcomplete training in more than onespecialty. Thus, for example, before theeffective date of section 312 of PublicLaw 106–113, if a resident enrolled ina child neurology residency program byfirst completing 2 years of training inpediatrics (which is associated with a 3-year initial residency period), followedby 3 years of training in childneurology, the resident would belimited by the initial residency period ofpediatrics. Section 312 of Public Law106–113 amended section 1886(h)(5) ofthe Act by adding at the end a clause (v)which states that ‘‘in the case of aresident enrolled in a child neurologyresidency training program, the periodof board eligibility and the initialresidency period shall be the period ofboard eligibility for pediatrics plus 2years.’’ (The initial residency period forpediatrics is currently 3 years). Theamendments made by section 312(a) ofPublic Law 106–113 applies to futurechild neurology residents and to childneurology residents who have alreadybegun their training (for whom an initialresidency period was already

established). However, it does not applyto residents who have completed theirchild neurology training before July 1,2000.

We are revising § 413.86(g)(1) toreflect that, effective on or after July 1,2000, for residency programs that beganbefore, on, or after November 29, 1999,the period of board eligibility and theinitial residency period for childneurology is now the period of boardeligibility for pediatrics plus 2 years. Wenote that the initial residency period isthe same for all child neurologyresidents, regardless of whether or notthe resident completes the first year oftraining in pediatrics or neurology.

Following are four examples of how achild neurology resident’s FTE statuswould be determined:

Example 1: Assume the resident completes2 years of training in pediatrics followed by3 years of training in child neurology.

Before Public Law 106–113:Year 1: July 1, 1997–June 30, 1998. 1.0 FTEYear 2: July 1, 1998–June 30, 1999. 1.0 FTEYear 3: July 1, 1999–June 30, 2000. 1.0 FTEYear 4: July 1, 2000–June 30, 2001. 0.5 FTEYear 5: July 1, 2001–June 30, 2002. 0.5 FTE

After Public Law 106–113:Year 1: July 1, 1997–June 30, 1998. 1.0 FTEYear 2: July 1, 1998–June 30, 1999. 1.0 FTEYear 3: July 1, 1999–June 30, 2000. 1.0 FTEYear 4: July 1, 2000–June 30, 2001. 1.0 FTEYear 5: July 1, 2001–June 30, 2002. 1.0 FTE

Example 2: Assume the resident completes2 years of training in pediatrics followed by3 years of training in child neurology.



Example 3: Assume the resident completes1 year of neurology training, followed by 1year of pediatrics training, followed by 3years of child neurology training.

Note: The initial residency period forneurology is currently 4 years.



Example 4: Assume the resident completes1 year of neurology training, followed by 1year of pediatrics training, followed by 3years of child neurology training.

Note: The initial residency period forneurology is currently 4 years.



F. Technical Amendment

It has come to our attention that thefirst sentence of existing § 413.86(g)(1)contains a technical error. The firstsentence of this paragraph reads ‘‘Forpurposes of this section, an initialresidency period is the number of yearsnecessary to satisfy the minimumrequirements for certification in aspecialty or subspecialty, plus oneyear.’’ This section of the regulation wasrevised as a result of section 13563(b) ofPublic Law 103–66, and was effectiveonly until June 30, 1995. Generally,effective July 1, 1995, an initialresidency period is defined as theminimum number of years required forboard eligibility. Therefore, we arerevising the first sentence of paragraph(g)(1) of § 413.86 accordingly. Theremainder of paragraph (g)(1) of § 413.86is unchanged.

VIII. Additional Payment to HospitalsThat Operate Approved Nursing andAllied Health Education Programs(Section 541 of Public Law 106–113 and42 CFR 413.86(d) and new 413.87)

Under sections 1861(v) and 1886(a) ofthe Act, hospitals that operate approvednursing or allied health educationprograms may be eligible for the pass-through payment under the prospectivepayment system. Section 1886(h) of theAct establishes the methodology fordetermining payments to hospitals forthe direct costs of GME programs.Section 1886(h) of the Act, asimplemented in regulations at § 413.86,specifies that Medicare payments fordirect costs of GME are based on aprospectively determined per residentamount (PRA). The PRA is multipliedby the number of FTE residents workingin all areas of the hospital complex (andnonhospital sites, where applicable),and the hospital’s Medicare share oftotal inpatient days to determineMedicare’s direct GME payment.

Section 1886(h)(3)(D) of the Act, asadded by section 4624 of Public Law105–33, provides a 5-year phase-in ofpayments to teaching hospitals fordirect costs of GME associated with



services to Medicare+Choice (managedcare) enrollees for portions of costreporting periods occurring on or afterJanuary 1, 1998. The amount of paymentfor direct GME is equal to the productof the PRA, the number of FTE residentsworking in all areas of the hospital (andnonhospital sites, if applicable), theratio of the number of inpatient beddays that are attributable toMedicare+Choice enrollees to totalinpatient bed days, and an applicablepercentage. The applicable percentagesare 20 percent for portions of costreporting periods occurring in calendaryear 1998, 40 percent in calendar year1999, 60 percent in calendar year 2000,80 percent in calendar year 2001, and100 percent in calendar year 2002 andsubsequent years. (Section 1886(d)(11)of the Act, as added by section 4622 ofPublic Law 105–33, provides a 5-yearphase-in of payments to teachinghospitals for IME associated withservices to Medicare+Choice enrolleesfor portions of cost reporting periodsoccurring on or after January 1, 1998, aswell. However, the Medicare+ChoiceIME payments are irrelevant for thepurposes of this section of the interimfinal rule, because although section 541of Public Law 106-113 affects thepayments for Medicare+Choice directGME, it in no way affects the paymentsfor Medicare+Choice IME.)

Section 541 of Public Law 106–113further amended section 1886 of the Actby adding subsection (l) and amendingsection 1886(h)(3)(D) to provide foradditional payments to hospitals fornursing and allied health educationprograms associated with services toMedicare+Choice enrollees. Hospitalsthat, under § 413.85, operate approvednursing or allied health educationprograms and receive Medicarereasonable cost reimbursement for theseprograms would receive additionalpayments. This provision is effective forportions of cost reporting periodsoccurring in a calendar year, beginningwith calendar year 2000.

Section 1886(l) of the Act, as addedby section 541 of Public Law 106–113,specifies the methodology to be used tocalculate these additional payments andplaces a limitation on the total amountthat is projected to be expended in anycalendar year; that is, $60 million. Inthis document, we refer to the totalamount of $60 million or less as thepayment ‘‘pool.’’ We emphasize that weuse the term ‘‘pool’’ solely for ease ofreference; the term reflects an estimateddollar figure, a number that is pluggedinto a formula to calculate the amountof additional payments. The term‘‘pool’’ does not refer to a discrete fundof money that is set aside in order to

make the additional payments (thus, forexample, if the estimated ‘‘pool’’ is $50million, we use the number 50 millionto calculate the amount of additionalpayments, but this does not mean thatwe set aside $50 million in a separatefund from which we make theadditional payments). The total amountof additional payments associated withutilization of Medicare+Choiceenrollees is based on the ratio of totaldirect GME payments forMedicare+Choice enrollees to totalMedicare direct GME payments,multiplied by the total Medicare nursingand allied health education payments. Ahospital would receive its share of theseadditional payments in proportion tothe amount of Medicare nursing andallied health education paymentsreceived in the cost reporting periodthat ended in the fiscal year that is 2years prior to the current calendar year,to the total amount of nursing and alliedhealth payments made to all hospitals inthat cost reporting period. Section541(b) of Public Law 106–113 amendedsection 1886(h)(3) of the Act to providethat direct GME payments forMedicare+Choice utilization will bereduced to account for the additionalpayments that are made for nursing andallied health education programs underthe provisions of section 1886(l) of theAct.

We are implementing section 541 byestablishing regulations at new § 413.87to incorporate the provisions of section1886(l) of the Act. We are specifying therules for a hospital’s eligibility toreceive the additional payment undersection 1886(l), the requirements fordetermining the additional payment toeach eligible hospital, and themethodologies for calculating eachadditional payment and for calculatingthe payment ‘‘pool.’’ These provisionsare discussed below:

A. Qualifying Conditions for PaymentWe are providing that, for portions of

cost reporting periods occurring on orafter January 1, 2000, a hospital thatoperates a nursing or allied healtheducation program in accordance with§ 413.85 may receive an additionalpayment amount associated withMedicare+Choice utilization if it meetstwo conditions.

First, section 541 of Public Law 106–113 directs the Secretary to determinethe amount of payment for each hospitalbased on an ‘‘* * * estimate of the ratioof the amount of payments made undersection 1861(v) to the hospital fornursing and allied health educationactivities for the hospital’s costreporting period ending in the secondpreceding fiscal year to the total of such

amounts for all hospitals for such costreporting periods.’’ (Emphasis added).Accordingly, we are providing that thehospital must have received reasonablecost Medicare payment for a nursing orallied health education program(s) in itscost reporting period(s) ending in thefiscal year that is 2 years prior to thecurrent calendar year. For example, ifthe current calendar year is calendaryear 2000, the fiscal year that is 2 yearsprior to calendar year 2000 is FY 1998.In this example, if a hospital did notreceive reasonable cost payment forapproved nursing or allied healtheducation programs in FY 1998, but firstestablishes these programs and receivessuch payment as specified in § 413.85after FY 1998, the hospital will only beeligible to receive an additionalpayment amount in the calendar yearthat is 2 years after the respective fiscalyear. For example, if the hospitalestablishes a nursing or allied healthprogram in FY 1999, it will first beeligible to receive an additionalpayment amount in calendar year 2001.

Second, section 541 of Public Law106–113 states, ‘‘For portions of costreporting periods occurring in a year(beginning with 2000), the Secretaryshall provide for an additional paymentamount for any hospital that receivespayments for the costs of approvededucational activities for nurse andallied health professional training* * *.’’ (Emphasis added). Accordingly,we are specifying that the hospital alsomust be receiving reasonable costspayment for its nursing or allied healtheducation program(s) in the currentcalendar year to receive these additionalpayments for nursing and allied healthtraining.

B. Calculating the Additional PaymentAmount

The Medicare fiscal intermediary willdetermine if the hospital is eligible toreceive the additional payment byapplying the two criteria specified insection VIII.A.1. of this preamble. Forportions of cost reporting periodsoccurring on or after January 1, 2000, aneligible hospital will receive theadditional payment amount calculatedaccording to the following steps:

Step 1: Determine the hospital’s totalMedicare payments received forapproved nursing or allied healtheducation programs based on data fromthe settled cost reports for the period(s)ending in the fiscal year that is 2 yearsprior to the current calendar year.

For example, if the current calendaryear is 2000, determine the hospital’stotal nursing or allied health educationpayments made in its cost reportingperiod ending in FY 1998. If a hospital



has more than one cost reporting periodending in that fiscal year, the fiscalintermediary will sum the nursing andallied health payments made to thehospital over those cost reportingperiods.

Step 2: Determine the ratio of theindividual hospital’s total nursing orallied health payments from Step 1, tothe total of all nursing and allied healtheducation program payments madeacross all hospitals for all cost reportingperiods ending in the fiscal year that is2 years prior to the current calendaryear.

To determine these total payments,we will use the best available costreporting data for the applicablehospitals from the Hospital Cost ReportInformation System (HCRIS) that is forcost reporting periods in the fiscal yearthat is 2 years prior to the currentcalendar year. If the necessary data arenot included in HCRIS because ahospital files a manual cost report, wewill obtain the necessary data from thefiscal intermediaries that serve thosehospitals. If a hospital has more thanone cost reporting period ending in thefiscal year that is 2 years prior to thecurrent calendar year, we will includeall of the hospital’s cost reports for thoseperiods in our calculations. If a hospitaldoes not have a cost reporting periodending in the fiscal year that is 2 yearsprior to the current calendar year (suchas a hospital with a long cost reportingperiod), the hospital will be included inthe calculations for the calendar yearthat is 2 years after the fiscal year inwhich the long cost reporting periodends.

Each calendar year, HCFA willdetermine and publish in a proposedrule and a final rule the total amount ofnursing and allied health educationpayments made across all hospitalsduring the fiscal year that is 2 yearsprior to the current calendar year.

Step 3: Multiply the ratio calculatedin step 2 by the Medicare+Choicenursing and allied health payment‘‘pool’’ (described under section VIII.C.of this preamble) that is determined byHCFA for the current calendar year.

The resulting product is eachrespective hospital’s additional paymentamount. We note that, as evidenced bythe methodology outlined above, inaccordance with section 541 of PublicLaw 106–113, Congress is not requiringeach hospital’s additional paymentamount for a given period to be basedon the hospital’s Medicare+Choiceutilization in that period.

C. HCFA Calculation ofMedicare+Choice Nursing and AlliedHealth Payment ‘‘Pool’’

In accordance with section 1886(l) ofthe Act, each calendar year, HCFAestimates a total amount, not to exceed$60 million, which is the basis fordetermining the additional payments fornursing and allied health educationassociated with Medicare+Choiceenrollees to hospitals that operateapproved nursing or allied healtheducation programs. The total amount iscalculated in the following manner:

Step 1: We determine the ratio ofprojected total Medicare+Choice directGME payments across all hospitals inthe current calendar year to projectedtotal direct GME payments across allhospitals in the current calendar year.

Step 2: We multiply the ratiocalculated in step 1 by projected totalnursing and allied health educationreasonable cost payments across allhospitals in the current calendar year.

The resulting product of Step 1 andStep 2, not to exceed $60 million, is theMedicare+Choice nursing and alliedhealth payment ‘‘pool’’ for the currentcalendar year.

The projections of Medicare+Choicedirect GME, direct GME, and nursingand allied health payments for acalendar year are based on suchpayments from the best available costreport data from the HCRIS. (Forexample, for calendar year 2000, theprojections are based on the bestavailable cost report data from HCRIS1998). These payment amounts are thenincreased to the appropriate calendaryear using the increases allowed bysection 1886(h) of the Act for theseservices (using the percentageapplicable for the current calendar yearfor Medicare+Choice direct GME andthe Consumer Price Index (CPI)increases for direct GME, and assumingnursing and allied health remains aconstant percentage of inpatienthospital spending).

D. Proportional Reduction toMedicare+Choice Direct GME Payments

In order for the Secretary to make theadditional payments to eligiblehospitals operating approved nursing orallied health education programs,section 1886(h)(3)(D) of the Act, asamended by section 541(b) of PublicLaw 106–113, specifies that theSecretary will carve out an estimatedpercentage of payments that are made toteaching hospitals for direct GMEassociated with services toMedicare+Choice enrollees.Specifically, the law provides that theestimated reductions in

Medicare+Choice direct GME paymentsmust equal the estimated totaladditional Medicare+Choice nursingand allied health education payments.Because the data for the components ofthe formula used to calculate thispercentage will change each year (due topercentage changes in theMedicare+Choice direct GME phase-in,changes in direct GME paymentamounts, and changes in nursing andallied health education paymentamounts), we will calculate and publishthe applicable percentage reductioneach year in the proposed rule and thefinal rule for the annual update to thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem rates. The percentage isestimated by calculating the ratio of theMedicare+Choice nursing and alliedhealth payment ‘‘pool’’ for the currentcalendar year to the projected totalMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentsmade across all hospitals for the currentcalendar year.

E. Calculation of Amounts for CalendarYear 2000

The total amount of nursing andallied health education payments madeacross all hospitals for cost reportingperiods ending in FY 1998, that is, 2fiscal years prior to calendar year 2000,is estimated at $220,622,805. We havecalculated this amount for FY 2000based upon data from hospitals’ costreporting periods ending during FY1998 (October 1, 1997 throughSeptember 30, 1998), as provided bysection 541 of Public Law 106–113.(Section VIII.B. of this preambleprovides a more detailed explanation ofhow this amount was derived.) We notethat, if a hospital did not have a costreporting period ending in FY 1998,such as a hospital with a long costreporting period beginning in FY 1997and ending in FY 1999, the hospital wasexcluded from our calendar year 2000calculations (but will be included in ourcalendar year 2001 calculations). We areincluding data for 1,257 hospitals in thecalendar year 2000 calculations. Ten ofthese hospitals had more than one costreporting period.

According to the methodologyoutlined in section VIII.C. of thispreamble, we have estimated theMedicare+Choice nursing and alliedhealth education payment ‘‘pool’’ forcalendar year 2000 to be $26,272,140.The ratio of each hospital’s nursing andallied health education payments fromits cost reporting period ending in FY1998 to total nursing and allied healtheducation payments made from all costreporting periods ending in FY 1998 isthen multiplied by $26,272,140 todetermine each hospital’s additional



payment amount (as described insection VIII.B. of this preamble).

For calendar year 2000, the projectedtotal Medicare+Choice direct GMEpayments made to all hospitals is $250million. Therefore, consistent with themethodology described in sectionVIII.D. of this preamble, the ratio forcalendar year 2000 is $26,272,140 to$250 million, which equals a 10.5percent reduction to each hospital’sMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentduring calendar year 2000.

Accordingly, for portions of costreporting periods occurring in calendaryear 2000, hospitals that receiveMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentswill have these payments reduced by10.5 percent. Specifically, each hospitalwith a calendar year cost reportingperiod that is receivingMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentswill have those payments reduced by10.5 percent for the period of Januarythrough December 2000. If a hospitaldoes not have a calendar year costreporting period, then the reductions toits Medicare+Choice direct GMEpayments will depend upon the portionof its cost reporting period that fallswithin the current calendar year. Forexample, if a hospital has an Octoberthrough September fiscal year, itsMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentsfrom October through December 1999will not be affected. However, thehospital’s Medicare+Choice direct GMEpayments from January throughSeptember 2000 (from its FY 2000 costreporting period), and itsMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentsfrom October through December 2000(from its FY 2001 cost reporting period),will be reduced by 10.5 percent. ItsMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentsfor the remainder of its FY 2001 costreporting period, which extends fromJanuary through September 2001, willbe reduced by the applicable percentagefor calendar year 2001. Similarly, if ahospital has a July through June costreporting period, its Medicare+Choicedirect GME payments from July throughDecember 1999 will not be affected.However, its Medicare+Choice directGME payments from January throughJune 2000, and its Medicare+Choicedirect GME payments from July throughDecember 2000, will be reduced by 10.5percent. Its Medicare+Choice directGME payments for the remainder of itscost reporting period, which extendsfrom January through June 2001, will bereduced by the applicable percentage forcalendar year 2001.

In general, we note that hospitals thatoperate both GME and nursing or alliedhealth education programs shouldexperience either a net gain or loss as a

result of this provision, becausealthough their Medicare+Choice directGME payments will be reduced by acertain percentage, theirMedicare+Choice nursing and alliedhealth payments will be increased.However, hospitals that operate onlyGME programs will see their Medicarereimbursement reduced, and hospitalsthat operate only nursing or alliedhealth education programs will see theirMedicare reimbursement increased.

F. Regulation Changes

We are adding a new § 413.87 toincorporate the provisions of section541 of Public Law 106–113. In addition,we are making a conforming change to§§ 413.86(d)(4) through (d)(6) to accountfor the revised methodology indetermining a hospital’sMedicare+Choice direct GME payments.

IX. Hospitals and Units Excluded Fromthe Prospective Payment System(Section 121 of Public Law 106–113 and42 CFR 413.40(c)(4)(iii)(B) and413.40(c)(4)(v))

A. Limitation on the Target Amounts

In the August 29, 1997 final rule (62FR 46018), in accordance with section4414 of Public Law 105–33, weimplemented section 1886(b)(3)(H) ofthe Act, which provides for caps on thetarget amounts for excluded hospitalsand units for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 1997,through September 30, 2002. The capson the target amounts apply to thefollowing three classes of excludedhospitals: psychiatric hospitals andunits, rehabilitation hospitals and units,and long-term care hospitals. Inestablishing the caps on the targetamounts within each class of hospitalfor new hospitals, section 1886(b)(7)(C)of the Act, as amended by section 4416of Public Law 105–33, instructed theSecretary to provide an appropriateadjustment to take into account areadifferences in average wage-relatedcosts. However, since the statutorylanguage under section 4414 of PublicLaw 105–33 did not provide for theSecretary to account for area differencesin wage-related costs in establishing thecaps on the target amounts within eachclass of hospital for existing hospitals,HCFA did not account for wage-relateddifferences in establishing the caps onthe target amounts for existing facilitiesin FY 1998.

Section 121 of Public Law 106–113,which amended section 1886(b)(3)(H) ofthe Act, directed the Secretary toprovide for an appropriate wageadjustment to the caps on the targetamounts for psychiatric hospitals and

units, rehabilitation hospitals and unitsand long-term care hospitals, effectivefor cost reporting periods beginning onor after October 1, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 2002. For purposes ofcalculating the caps, section1886(b)(3)(H)(ii) of the Act requires theSecretary to first ‘‘estimate the 75thpercentile of the target amounts for suchhospitals within such class for costreporting periods ending during fiscalyear 1996.’’ Section 1886(b)(3)(H)(iii) ofthe Act, as added by Public Law 106–113, requires the Secretary to providefor ‘‘an appropriate adjustment to thelabor-related portion of the amountdetermined under such subparagraph totake into account differences betweenaverage wage-related costs in the area ofthe hospital and the national average ofsuch costs within the same class ofhospital.’’

For cost reporting periods beginningin FY 2000, we update the FY 1996wage-neutralized national 75thpercentile target amount for each classof hospital by the market basketpercentage increase up through FY2000. For cost reporting periodsbeginning during FY 2001 through 2002,we update the previous fiscal year’swage-neutralized national 75thpercentile target amount for each classof hospital by the applicable marketbasket percentage increase. Indetermining the national 75th percentiletarget amount for each class of hospitaland consistent with the broad authorityconferred on the Secretary by section1886(b)(3)(H)(iii) of the Act (as added byPublic Law 106–113) to determine theappropriate wage adjustment, we haveaccounted for differences in wage-related costs by adjusting the caps onthe target amounts for each class ofhospital (psychiatric, rehabilitation, andlong-term care) using the methodologydescribed in the following section.

B. Wage-Neutralized National 75thPercentile Target Amounts

In determining the wage-neutralizednational 75th percentile target amountfor each class of hospital, we used FY1996 hospital cost report data anddetermined the labor-related portion ofeach hospital’s FY 1996 target amountby multiplying its target amount by themost recent actuarial estimate of thelabor-related portion of excludedhospital costs (or 0.71553). Thisactuarial estimate of the labor-relatedshare of excluded hospital costs reflectsrevisions made in connection with otherrevisions to the excluded hospitalmarket basket published in the August29, 1997 final rule (62 FR 45996). Basedon the most recent estimate of therelative weights of the labor cost



categories (wages and salaries, employeebenefits, professional fees, postalservices, and all other labor intensiveservices), the labor-related portion is71.553 percent. The remaining 28.447percent is the most recent estimate ofthe nonlabor-related portion. Similarly,we determined the nonlabor-relatedportion of each hospital’s FY 1996 targetamount by multiplying its target amountby the actuarial estimate of thenonlabor-related portion of costs (or0.28447).

Next, we wage-neutralized eachhospital’s FY 1996 target amount bydividing the labor-related portion ofeach hospital’s FY 1996 target amountby the hospital’s FY 2000 hospital wageindex under the hospital inpatientprospective payment system (see§ 412.63), as shown in Tables 4A and 4Bof the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41585). The FY 2000 wage index is themost current wage index available.Moreover, the FY 2000 hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemwage index was calculated using FY1996 data. Within the specified class ofhospital, each hospital’s FY 1996 targetamount was wage-neutralized using thepublished FY 2000 wage index. Eachhospital’s wage-neutralized FY 1996target amount was calculated by addingthe nonlabor-related portion of its targetamount and the wage-neutralized labor-related portion of its target amount.

This methodology for wage-neutralizing each hospital’s targetamount to determine the national 75thpercentile of the target amounts for eachclass of hospital is identical to themethodology we utilized for the wageindex adjustment described in theAugust 29, 1997 final rule (62 FR 46020)to calculate the wage-adjusted 110percent of the national median targetamounts for new excluded hospitals andunits. Again, we recognize that wagesmay differ for prospective paymenthospitals and excluded hospitals andunits, but we believe that the wage datareflect area differences in wage-relatedcosts.

In light of the short timeframe wehave for implementing section 121 ofPublic Law 106–113 for cost reportingprovisions beginning in FY 2000, the FY2000 wage data for acute care hospitalswas the most feasible data source todetermine the wage-neutralized national75th percentile target amounts sincereliable wage data for hospitals andhospital units excluded from theprospective payment system is notavailable.

Within each class of hospital, thewage-neutralized national 75thpercentile target amounts weredetermined by arraying the hospitals’wage-neutralized FY 1996 targetamounts. The wage-neutralized national75th percentile target amount for each

class of hospital is then separated intoa labor-related share and a nonlabor-related share based on actuarialestimates of 71.553 percent labor-relatedshare and 28.447 percent nonlabor-related share.

In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41557), based on the national 75thpercentile of the target amounts for costreporting periods ending during FY1996 (which did not account for areawage-related differences), updated bythe market basket percentage increase toFY 2000, we had established the caps onthe target amounts for existing excludedhospitals and units as follows:

• Psychiatric hospitals and units:$11,100

• Rehabilitation hospitals and units:$20,129

• Long-term care hospitals: $39,712Using the wage-neutralized national

75th percentile of the target amounts forcost reporting periods ending during FY1996, updated by the applicable marketbasket percentage increase to FY 2000,and the wage adjustment provided forunder the amendments made by PublicLaw 106–113, we are establishing thelabor-related share and nonlabor-relatedshare of the FY 2000 wage-neutralizednational 75th percentile target amountsfor each class of hospital to determinea hospital’s FY 2000 cap on the targetamount as follows:

Class of excluded hospital or unit Labor-relatedshare

Nonlabor-relatedshare

Psychiatric ...................................................................................................................................................... $7,863 $3,126Rehabilitation ................................................................................................................................................. 14,666 5,831Long-Term Care ............................................................................................................................................ 28,321 11,259

We note that the March 2000 ProgramMemorandum (Transmittal Number A–00–16) issued to all Medicare fiscalintermediaries listed incorrect amountsfor the labor-related portion andnonlabor-related portion of the wage-neutralized caps on the target amountsfor FY 2000. The FY 2001 proposed rule(65 FR 26314) also listed incorrectamounts for the labor-related portionand nonlabor-related portion of theproposed FY 2001 wage-neutralizednational 75th percentile caps on thetarget amounts. The correct labor-relatedand nonlabor-related portions of thewage-neutralized national 75thpercentile cap on the target amount forFY 2000 for each class of hospital arelisted above. The correct labor-relatedand nonlabor-related portions of the FY2001 wage-neutralized national 75thpercentile caps on the target amountsfor each class of hospital will beincluded in the FY 2001 hospital

inpatient prospective payment systemfinal rule to be published by August 1,2000.

The estimates of the national 75thpercentile of the target amounts weredeveloped from the best available dataon the hospital-specific target amountsfor cost reporting periods ending duringfiscal year 1996 and then updated by themarket basket percentage increase forFY 2000. We used the data that havebeen reported to HCFA for over 3,000hospitals and units within the threeclasses of hospitals specified by thestatute. We note that, with respect tolong-term care hospitals, we used thesame data (provider universe and targetamount figures for hospitals within thatclass) as were used to establish the capson the target amounts for long-term carehospitals published in the May 12, 1998final rule (63 FR 26347). The data forpsychiatric hospitals and units andrehabilitation hospitals and units used

to establish the caps on the targetamounts for these classes of hospitalsincluded updates to the hospital’s FY1996 target amounts resulting fromsettling cost reports that previously hadnot been settled prior to August 1997when the final rule establishing the capson the target amounts for existingexcluded hospitals was published.

C. Wage-Adjusted Target Amounts

We are specifying that, within eachclass of hospital, a hospital’s wage-adjusted cap on the target amount perdischarge for FY 2000 is determined byadding the hospital’s nonlabor-relatedportion of the wage-neutralized national75th percentile cap to its wage-adjustedlabor-related portion of the national75th percentile cap. A hospital’s wage-adjusted labor-related portion of thetarget amount is calculated bymultiplying the labor-related portion ofthe wage-neutralized national 75th



percentile cap for the hospital’s class bythe hospital’s applicable wage index.For FY 2000, a hospital’s applicablewage index is the wage index under thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem (see § 412.63) for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,1999, and ending on or beforeSeptember 30, 2000 as shown in Tables4A and 4B of the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41585). The FY 1996 wage-neutralized national 75th percentiletarget amount for each class of hospitalupdated through FY 2000 by theapplicable market basket percentageincrease for excluded hospitals andhospital units used to determine ahospital’s limitation on its FY 2000target amount. For FY 2000, a hospital’sFY 2000 limitation on its target amountis used to determine payments forexcluded hospitals and units under§ 413.40(d). The FY 2000 acute carehospital wage index is used to wage-adjust the labor-related portion of theFY 2000 wage-neutralized national 75thpercentile target amount within thespecified class of hospital since it isused to provide for an appropriate wageadjustment by accounting fordifferences in area wage-related costs inFY 2000 hospital inpatient prospectivepayment system payments. As we statedpreviously in this section, we recognizethat wages may differ for prospectivepayment hospitals and excludedhospitals and units, but we believe thatthese wage data reflect area differencesin wage-related costs. A hospital’sapplicable wage index is the wage indexvalue for the area in which the hospitalor unit is physically located (MSA orrural area) without taking into accountprospective payment system hospitalreclassification under section1886(d)(10) of the Act, and section1886(d)(8) of the Act as amended bysection 401 of Public Law 106–113.

D. Changes in the Regulations

We are revising §§ 413.40(c)(4)(iii)(B)and (c)(4)(v) to incorporate the changesin the methodology used to determinethe limitation on the target amounts forpsychiatric hospitals and units,rehabilitation hospitals and units, andlong-term care hospitals, as provided forunder the amendments made by section121 of Public Law 106–113.

X. Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs)

A. Background: The Medicare RuralHospital Flexibility Program and CAHs

Section 4201 of Public Law 105–33amended section 1820 of the Act tocreate a nationwide Medicare RuralHospital Flexibility (MRHF) Program toreplace the 7-State Essential Access

Community Hospital/Rural PrimaryCare Hospital (EACH/RPCH) program.Under section 1820(c)(2) of the Act, asamended, a State could designatecertain rural hospitals as CAHs if theywere located a specified distance fromother hospitals, made 24-houremergency care available, and keptinpatients for a limited period of time.Additionally, CAH staffing requirementsdiffered from those of other hospitalsunder Medicare and CAHs receivedpayment for inpatient and outpatientservices on the basis of reasonable cost.A comprehensive discussion of CAHswithin the context of the MRHFProgram may be found in the August 29,1997 Federal Register (62 FR 45970 and46008–46010).

Sections 401(b) and 403 of Public Law106–113 modified the CAH program setforth in section 1820 of the Act.

B. Permitting Certain Facilities To BeDesignated as CAHs (Section 401(b) ofPublic Law 106–113 and 42 CFR485.610)

One of the threshold criteria fordesignation as a CAH under section1820(c)(2)(B)(i) of the Act is that thehospital must be rural as defined insection 1886(d)(2)(D) of the Act. SectionIV. of this preamble discusses the optionof urban to rural classification for a‘‘subsection (d)’’ hospital authorized bysection 401(a) of Public Law 106–113under an amendment to section1886(d)(8) of the Act. Section 401(b)(2)of Public Law 106–113 amended section1820(c)(2)(B)(i) of the Act to authorize aState to designate a hospital in an urbanarea as a CAH if, under one of thecriteria set forth in section 1886(d)(8)(E)of the Act, it would be treated as beinglocated in the rural area of the State inwhich the hospital is located. Section401(b)(2) only provides authority for ahospital to meet the rural requirement.We note that the hospital would have tootherwise meet the statutory andregulatory requirements governing CAHdesignation.

The first criteria in section 401(a)specified that a hospital will be treatedas located in a rural area if the hospitalis located in a rural census tract of anMSA, as determined under the mostrecent Goldsmith Modification,originally published in the FederalRegister on February 27, 1992. A listingof existing hospitals that may qualify asCAHs because they are located inGoldsmith areas is included inAppendix B of this interim final rulewith comment period.

The application procedures andeffective dates for an urban hospitalseeking to reclassify as rural and thuseligible for CAH designation are set

forth in the new regulation at § 412.103that implements section 401(a), anddiscussed in section IV.C. of this interimfinal rule with comment period. We alsoare revising the regulation concerningCAH location at § 485.610(b) to reflectthis amendment.

C. Other Legislative Changes AffectingCAHs

1. 96-hour Average Length of StayStandard (Section 403(a) of Public Law106–113 and 42 CFR 485.620(b))

Prior to the enactment of Public Law106–113, section 1820(c)(2)(B)(iii) of theAct limited CAH designation only tofacilities that provided inpatient care toeach patient for a period of time not toexceed 96 hours, unless a longer periodwas required because of inclementweather or other emergency conditions,or a peer review organization (PRO) orequivalent entity, on request, waivedthe 96-hour restriction. Section 403(a) ofPublic Law 106–113 amended section1820(c)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act to requirethat the 96-hour limit on stays beapplied on an annual average basis, andto delete the provisions regardingwaiver of longer stays. Therefore, CAHswill be permitted to keep someindividual patients more than 96 hourswithout a waiver request, so long as thefacility’s average length of acute stays inany 12-month cost reporting period isnot more than 96 hours.

The effective date of this provision isNovember 29, 1999.

We are revising the conditions ofparticipation for length of stay for CAHsat § 485.620(b) to reflect this change.

2. For-Profit Facilities (Section 403(b) ofPublic Law 106-113 and 42 CFR485.610(a))

Prior to enactment of Public Law 106–113, section 1820(c)(2)(B) of the Actallowed only nonprofit or publichospitals to be designated as CAHs.Section 403(b) of Public Law 106–113revises section 1820(c)(2)(B) of the Actto remove the words ‘‘nonprofit orpublic’’ before ‘‘hospitals,’’ thusenabling for-profit hospitals to qualifyfor CAH status.

We are revising the conditions ofparticipation related to the status andlocation for CAHs at § 485.610(a) toreflect this change.

3. Closed and Downsized Hospitals(Section 403(c) of Public Law 106–113and 42 CFR 485.610(a)(1))

Under section 1820(c)(2) of the Act,CAH designation was available only tofacilities currently operating ashospitals. Section 403(c) of Public Law106–113 amended the statute to permit



a State to designate as a CAH a facilitythat previously was a hospital butceased operations on or after November29, 1989 (10 years prior to theenactment of Public Law 106–113), ifthat facility fulfills the criteria undersection 1820(c)(2)(B) of the Act for CAHdesignation as of the effective date of itsdesignation. The amendment alsoallows State CAH designation forfacilities that previously had beenhospitals, but are currently State-licensed health clinics or health centersif they meet the revised criteria for CAHdesignation under section 1820(c)(2)(B)of the Act as of the effective date ofdesignation.

We are revising the CAH criteria forState certification at § 485.610(a)(1) toreflect this change.

4. Elimination of Coinsurance forClinical Diagnostic Laboratory TestsFurnished by a CAH (Section 403(e) ofPublic Law 106–113 and 42 CFR410.152 and 413.70))

Under the law in effect before theenactment of Public Law 106–113,clinical diagnostic laboratory servicesfurnished by a CAH to its outpatientswere, like other outpatient CAHservices, paid for on a reasonable costbasis, subject to the Part B deductibleand coinsurance provisions. Withrespect to coinsurance, this means thatthe beneficiary was responsible forpayment of 20 percent of the CAH’scustomary charges for the services andthe CAH received payment from theMedicare program equal to 80 percent ofits reasonable costs of furnishing theservices.

Section 403(e) of Public Law 106–113eliminated the Part B coinsurance anddeductible for laboratory tests furnishedby a CAH on an outpatient basis byproviding for Medicare payment to thefull amount of the lesser of the feeschedule or billed charges. Thus, CAHsare not permitted to impose a deductibleor coinsurance charge on the beneficiaryfor these services, and Medicare Part Bis to pay 100 percent of the lesser of theamount determined under the locallaboratory fee schedule, the nationallimitation amount for that test, or theamount of the charges billed for thetests. In the case of services paid for onthe basis of a negotiated rate undersection 1833(h)(6) of the Act, theamount to be paid is equal to 100percent of the negotiated rate. The effectof this change is that clinical diagnosticlaboratory tests furnished by a CAH toits outpatients will be paid for on thesame basis as is paid for these servicesfurnished by all hospitals to outpatients.

Section 403(e)(2) of Public Law 106–113 provides that this provision is

effective with respect to servicesfurnished on or after November 29,1999.

We are clarifying our policy andincorporating the provisions of section403(e) of Public Law 106–113 in§§ 410.152 and 413.70 of theregulations.

Since enactment of Public Law 106–113, we have received many inquiriesfrom the provider community aboutimplementation of section 403(e). Inresponse, we wish to note that revisedpayment instructions were issued inJune 2000 as Medicare IntermediaryManual Transmittal No. 1799 and asMedicare Hospital Manual TransmittalNo. 757, and that needed Part Belectronic bill processing systemchanges will be made as soon aspossible. The payment instructionsexplain that CAHs are to no longercollect deductible or coinsurance forthese services and that any amountscollected from beneficiaries for theseservices provided on or after November29, 1999, are to be returned to thebeneficiaries in an appropriate andtimely manner. The instructions alsoexplain that payments to CAHs for theservices will be adjusted, at cost reportsettlement, to reflect the paymentmethod required by section 403(e).

5. Participation in Swing-Bed Program(Section 403(f) of Public Law 106–113)

Section 403(f) of Public Law 106–113,entitled ‘‘Improvements in the CriticalAccess Hospital Program,’’ includes aprovision on swing-bed agreements.Since our existing regulations at§ 485.645 already provide for swingbeds in CAHs, we are not making anychanges to our regulations based on thisprovision.

XI. Hospital Swing-Bed ProgramSection 408(a) of Public Law 106–113

amended section 1883(b) of the Act toremove the provision that in order for ahospital to enter into an agreement toprovide Medicare post-hospitalextended care services, the hospital hadto be granted a certificate of need for theprovision of long-term care servicesfrom the State health planning anddevelopment agency (designated undersection 1521 of the Public HealthService Act) for the State in which thehospital is located. Section 408(b) ofPublic Law 106–113 amended section1883(d) of the Act to remove theprovisions under paragraphs (d)(2) and(d)(3) that placed restrictions on lengthsof stays in hospitals with more than 49beds for post-hospital extended careservices. These provisions are effectiveon the first day after the expiration ofthe transition period under section

1888(e)(2)(E) of the Act for payment forcovered skilled nursing facility (SNF)services under the Medicare program;that is, at the end of the transitionperiod for the SNF prospectivepayments system that began with thefacility’s first cost reporting periodbeginning on or after July 1, 1998 andextend through the end of the facility’sthird cost reporting period after thisdate.

The Medicare regulations thatimplemented the provision of section1883(b) of the Act are located at§ 482.66(a)(3). The regulations thatimplemented the provisions of sections1883(d)(2) and (d)(3) of the Act arelocated at §§ 482.66(a)(6) and (a)(7). Asa result of the changes made by section408(a) and (b) of Public Law 106–113,we are removing §§ 482.66(a)(3), (a)(6),and (a)(7). (Existing paragraphs (a)(4)and (a)(5) are being redesignated as(a)(3) and (a)(4) respectively as a resultof the removal of existing paragraph(a)(3).)

XII. Waiver of Notice of ProposedRulemaking and Delay in the EffectiveDate

We ordinarily publish a notice ofproposed rulemaking in the FederalRegister to provide a period for publiccomment before the provisions of therule take effect. However, section1871(b) of the Act provides thatpublication of a notice of proposedrulemaking is not required before a ruletakes effect where ‘‘a statute establishesa specific deadline for theimplementation of the provision and thedeadline is less than 150 days after thedate of enactment of the statute inwhich the deadline is contained.’’ Inaddition, we may waive a notice ofproposed rulemaking if we find goodcause that notice and comment areimpracticable, unnecessary, or contraryto the public interest.

On July 30, 1999, we published a finalrule addressing FY 2000 payment ratesand policies for prospective paymentsystem hospitals and excluded hospitals(64 FR 41490). Subsequently, onNovember 29, 1999, Public Law 106–113 was enacted. Public Law 106–113contained a number of provisionsrelating to issues addressed in the finalrule that have effective dates of October1, 1999, November 29, 1999, or datesprior to the beginning of FY 2001 (thatis, October 1, 2000).

In accordance with section 1871(b) ofthe Act, publication of a notice ofproposed rulemaking is not requiredbefore implementing the statutoryprovisions of Public Law 106–113 thattake effect on October 1, 1999,November 29, 1999, January 1, 2000, or



April 1, 2000. In addition, we find goodcause to waive prior notice andcomment procedures with respect to theprovisions of this interim final rule withcomment period that implement thespecified provisions of Public Law 106–113 with these effective dates (exceptfor sections 404 and 408), because thestatutory provisions implemented bythis document are clear and specific.Moreover, it would be impracticable toundertake such procedures before thoseprovisions take effect, given theextremely short timeframe forimplementing these statutoryprovisions.

Sections 404 and 408 are bothprovisions of Public Law 106–113 thatcontain changes to programs that haveprospective effective dates after October1, 2000. However, these provisions arespecific and leave no room for furtherinterpretation. That is, section 404extends the MCH program as it iscurrently operated from FY 2002through 2006. Sections 408(a) and (b)remove two provisions relating toimplementation of the hospital swing-bed provision under sections 1883(b)and (d) that are effective on the first dayafter the expiration of the transitionperiod under section 1888(e)(2)(E) of theAct for payment for covered SNFservices; that is at the end of thetransition period for the SNFprospective payments system that beganwith the facility’s first cost reportingperiod beginning on or after July 1,1998, and extend through the end of thefacility’s third cost reporting periodafter that date. These provisions ofPublic Law 106–113 require no exerciseof discretion and we are merelyconforming the Medicare regulations tothe statute.

We are providing a 30-day period forpublic comments on all of theseprovisions.

This rule has been determined to bea major rule as defined in Title 5,United States Code, section 804(2).Ordinarily, under 5 U.S.C. 801, as addedby section 251 of Public Law 104–121,major rule shall take effect 60 days afterthe later of (1) the date a report on therule is submitted to Congress or (2) thedate the rule is published in the FederalRegister. However, section 808(2) ofTitle 5, United States Code, providesthat, notwithstanding 5 U.S.C. 801, amajor rule shall take effect at such timeas the Federal agency promulgating therule determines, if, for good cause, theagency finds that notice and publicprocedure are impracticable,unnecessary, or contrary to the publicinterest. As indicated above, for goodcause we find that it was impracticableto complete notice and comment

procedures before publication of thisrule and to delay the effective date ofthis rule . Accordingly, pursuant to 5U.S.C. 808, these regulations areeffective August 1, 2000.

XIII. Response to Comments

Because of the large number of itemsof correspondence we normally receiveon Federal Register documentspublished for comment, we are not ableto acknowledge or respond to themindividually. Comments on theprovisions of this interim final rule withcomment period will be considered ifwe receive them by the date specified inthe DATES section of this preamble.

XIV. Regulatory Impact Analysis

A. Introduction

We have examined the impacts of thisinterim final rule with comment periodas required by Executive Order 12866and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)(Pub. L. 96–354). Executive Order 12866directs agencies to assess all costs andbenefits of available regulatoryalternatives and, if regulation isnecessary, to select regulatoryapproaches that maximize net benefits(including potential economic,environmental, public health and safetyeffects, distributive impacts, andequity). A regulatory impact analysis(RIA) must be prepared for major ruleswith economically significant effects($100 million or more annually). TheRFA requires agencies to analyzeoptions for regulatory relief of smallbusinesses. For purposes of the RFA,small entities include small businesses,nonprofit organizations and governmentagencies. Most hospitals and most otherproviders and suppliers are smallentities, either by nonprofit status or byhaving revenues of $5 million or lessannually. For purposes of the RFA, allhospitals are considered to be smallentities. Individuals and States are notincluded in the definition of a smallentity.

Also, section 1102(b) of the Actrequires us to prepare a regulatoryimpact analysis if a rule may have asignificant impact on the operations ofa substantial number of small ruralhospitals. This analysis must conform tothe provisions of section 604 of theRFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) ofthe Act, we define a small rural hospitalas a hospital that is located outside ofa Metropolitan Statistical Area and hasfewer than 50 beds.

Section 202 of the UnfundedMandates Reform Act of 1995 alsorequires that agencies assess anticipatedcosts and benefits before issuing anyrule that may result in an expenditure

in any one year by State, local, or tribalgovernments, in the aggregate, or by theprivate sector, of $100 million. Thisinterim final rule with comment perioddoes not mandate any requirements forState, local, or tribal governments.

It is clear that the changes being madein this document will affect both asubstantial number of small ruralhospitals as well as other classes ofhospitals, and the effects on some maybe significant. We are providing below,in combination with the rest of thisinterim final rule with comment period,a discussion of the regulatory impact onproviders of the various provisions ofPublic Law 106–113 implemented inthis interim final rule with commentperiod for which we are able to computeestimates of fiscal impact. Two sectionsof Public Law 106–113, sections 401and 403, authorize certain hospitals toreclassify into different paymentcategories or apply for designation as adifferent class of provider. Since wehave no way of anticipating how manyhospitals will avail themselves of theseoptions, we cannot predict the financialimpact on the Medicare program ofthese provisions. The total anticipatedimpact of the provisions for which wecan gather data is $400 million for FY2000. These provisions, along withthose for which data cannot bepredicted, are discussed below.

B. Anticipated Effects

1. Impact of Changes Relating to the IMEAdjustment Factor Schedule

As discussed in section VI. of thisinterim final rule with comment period,we are implementing the revisedtransition schedule for the IMEadjustment for FY 2000. Section 111 ofPublic Law 106–113 provides for specialpayments to be made to each hospital toreflect the amount of IME payments ifthe payment factor for FY 2000 equaled1.6 rather than 1.47.

For the purposes of this interim finalrule, we have simulated the differencein IME payments due to the changedescribed above based on the figures weused for computing the proposed FY2001 prospective payment system rates.We have estimated that, for FY 2000, thetotal increase in IME payments toteaching hospitals is approximately$342.2 million, or 0.81 percent.

2. Impact on Excluded Hospitals andUnits

We are implementing section 121(a)of Public Law 106–113, which amendedsection 1886(b)(3)(H) of the Act to directthe Secretary to make an appropriatewage adjustment to the 75th percentilecap on target amounts for psychiatric



hospitals and units, rehabilitationhospitals and units, and long-term carehospitals, established in FY 1998 bysection 4414 of Public Law 105–33. Thedata sources for determining the wage-neutralized national 75th percentiletarget amounts were FY 1996 cost reportdata and the FY 2000 inpatient hospitalprospective payment system wage indexdata.

Prior to the enactment of Public Law106–113, target amounts for thesehospitals were set, in accordance withthe regulations at § 413.40(c)(4)(iii), atthe lesser of the hospital-specific targetamount or the national 75th percentiletarget amount, which was not adjustedto account for area differences in wage-

related costs. Public Law 106–113amended the regulations at§ 413.40(c)(4)(iii) to specify that targetamounts for FY 2000 for psychiatrichospitals and units, rehabilitationhospitals and units, and long-term carehospitals are set at the lesser of thehospital-specific target amount or thewage-adjusted cap on the target amount,which is derived from the national 75thpercentile wage-neutralized targetamount for each class of hospital.

In order to estimate the impact of thewage-adjusted target amounts onhospitals within each class, we firstcalculated the target amount for eachhospital as it was set under section 4414of Public Law 105–33. Each hospital’s

target amount was set at the lesser of thehospital’s hospital-specific targetamount or the national 75th percentiletarget amount. In accordance theregulations at 42 CFR 413.40(d), we thencompared the resulting target amount tothe hospital’s costs per discharge.

Taking into account the provisions ofsection 123(a) of Public Law 106–113,we then repeated the comparativecalculations described above, replacingthe national unadjusted 75th percentiletarget amount with each hospital’swage-adjusted target amount. Theresults were compared to show theestimated impact on these classes ofhospitals and units as follows:

PERCENT OF TOTAL PROVIDERS BY TYPE

Class of hospital/unitPercent of free-standing hos-

pitals

Percent of hos-pital-based units

Psychiatric ........................................................................................................................................................ 30.7 69.3Rehabilitation ................................................................................................................................................... 16.4 83.6Long-Term Care .............................................................................................................................................. 100.0 (1)

1 Not applicable.

PERCENT OF TOTAL PROVIDERS BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION

Class of hospital/unit Percent of largeurban

Percent of otherurban Percent of rural

Psychiatric ........................................................................................................................ 48.3 33.5 18.2Rehabilitation ................................................................................................................... 49.8 38.1 12.1Long Term Care .............................................................................................................. 68.6 23.1 8.3

NET CHANGE IN FY 2000 CAP PER DISCHARGE

Class of hospital/unitUnadjusted FY

2000 targetamount 1

Wage-neutral FY2000 target

amount

Net percentagechange

Psychiatric ........................................................................................................................ $11,100 $10,990 ¥1.0Rehabilitation ................................................................................................................... 20,129 20,496 +1.8Long-Term Care .............................................................................................................. 39,712 39,580 ¥0.3

1 As published in the July 30, 1999 Final Rule (64 FR 41557).

NET CHANGE BY CLASS OF HOSPITAL

Class of hospital/unit

Percent of Pro-viders estimated

to experiencenegative impact

Percent of pro-viders estimatedto experience no

impact

Percent of pro-viders estimated

to experiencepositive impacts

Psychiatric ........................................................................................................................ 6.7 87.7 5.6Rehabilitation ................................................................................................................... 2.5 95.0 2.5Long-Term Care .............................................................................................................. 6.5 90.2 3.3

The impact of the wage-adjusted capson target amounts on excluded hospitalsand units (psychiatric, rehabilitation,and long-term care) was estimated basedon FY 1996 data as this was the mostcomplete data source available. Thetarget amounts (hospital-specific targets,75th percentile targets, and wage-

adjusted targets) and costs compared inthis estimated impact analysis weretrended forward to account for inflationthrough FY 2000.

When comparing the costs to targetamounts to determine the impact onhospitals, we did not attempt todetermine the impact on incentive

payments, continuous improvementbonus payments, or other paymentadjustments for excluded hospitalsoutlined in the regulations at§ 413.40(d). The actual impact onpayments to each class of hospitaldepends on the cost experienced byeach excluded hospital or unit since its



applicable base period. It is important tonote that while the providers whosehospital-specific target amounts exceedthe wage-adjusted cap on the targetamounts will have their target amountsreduced to their wage-adjusted targetamount, the real impact on eachhospital and unit will depend on thelevel of its operating cost per dischargein relation to its target amount asoutlined in at § 413.40(d).

As discussed in the precedingparagraphs, excluded hospital paymentsare calculated based on the lesser ofcosts per discharge or the target amountas set forth under § 413.40(c)(4)(iii).Consequently, the fact that the wage-neutralized national 75th percentiletarget amounts decreased slightly forboth psychiatric hospitals and units andlong-term care hospitals does notnecessarily imply lower payments.

Approximately 75 percent of thehospitals and units in each of theseclasses have hospital-specific targetamounts lower than both the unadjustedand wage-neutralized target amounts,and of those hospitals and units whosehospital-specific target amounts arehigher than both the unadjusted andwage-neutralized target amounts, manyhave costs lower than their targetamounts. Consequently, as shown in thetable ‘‘Net Change by Class of Hospital,’’most hospitals and hospital units do notappear to experience an impact from thewage-adjustment to the target amounts.

Among those hospitals that do appearto experience an impact from the wage-adjustment to the target amount, thewage-index associated with theirlocation is an indicator in determiningwhether that impact is positive ornegative. Since the wage-neutralizedtarget amounts are wage-adjusted usingthe hospital inpatient prospectivepayment system wage index, hospital’slocated in areas with wage-index valuesgreater than one will have higher wage-adjusted target amounts relative tohospitals located in areas with wage-index values less than one.

3. Impact of Provisions onReclassification of Hospitals

We are implementing section 401(a)of Public Law 106–113, which added anew section 1886(d)(8)(E) to the Act thatdirects the Secretary to treat anyhospital located in an urban area asbeing located in the rural area of a Stateif the hospital files an application andmeets certain criteria specified in thestatute.

The number of hospitals that will seekto reclassify from urban to rural isunknown at this time. However,generally, reclassification may affectpayment rates under the prospective

payment system, wage indexcalculations, and DSH, SCH, and IMEadjustments.

4. Impact of Provisions on CAHs

We are implementing sections 401(b)and 403 of Public Law 106–113, whichmade a number of modifications to theCAH program under section 1820 of theAct. Specifically, it—

• Authorizes a State to designate ahospital as a CAH if, as set forth in thesection 401(a) criteria for a hospital tobe eligible to request reclassificationfrom urban to rural, it would beconsidered as being located in the ruralarea of the State in which the hospitalis located.

• Requires the 96-hour limit on staysin CAHs to be applied on an annualaverage basis and deletes the provisionsregarding waiver for longer stays.

• Provides that for-profit hospitalsmay qualify for CAH status.

• Permits a State to designate as aCAH a facility that previously was ahospital but ceased operations on orafter November 29, 1989 if that facilityfulfills the criteria under section1820(c)(2)(B) of the Act as of theeffective date of its designation.

• Permits a State to designate as aCAH a facility that was once a hospitalthat downsized and now functions as aState licensed health clinic or healthcenter, if the facility meets criteriaunder section 1820(c)(2)(B) of the Act asof the effective date of its designation.

• Eliminates the coinsurance anddeductible for outpatient clinicaldiagnostic laboratory tests furnished bya CAH and requires that such tests bepaid for on the same basis as wouldapply if the tests had been performed onan outpatient basis.

• Reaffirms the eligibility of CAHsthat meet the applicable requirements toenter into ‘‘swing-bed’’ agreements, thuspermitting inpatient CAH facilities to beused for furnishing of extended careservices type (SNF) services.

The number of facilities that qualifyas CAHs will increase as a consequenceof the Public Law 106–113 amendmentsto the CAH program. CAHs are paid ona reasonable cost basis rather than underthe prospective payment system. Thebudgetary impact of these amendmentswill correlate with the number offacilities that are designated as CAHsunder the statutory amendment made bysections 401(b) and 403 of Public Law106–113. However, we are unable at thistime to predict the number of facilitiesthat will be designated as CAHs underthese provisions.

5. Impact of Provisions on MDHs

We are incorporating the provisions ofsection 404 of Public Law 106–113,which extended special payments underthe prospective payment system toMDHs for 5 years, from FY 2002 throughFY 2006. We estimate that the extensionwill amount to an increase in paymentof 4.4 percent for each of the 5 years ofthe MDH extension. There is no increasein payment amounts for MDHs for FY2000 as a result of PublicLaw 106–113.

6. Impact of Direct GME and IMEProvisions

We are amending our regulations toincorporate changes mandated bysections 407(a) through (d) of PublicLaw 106-113, which amended sections1886(d) and (h) of the Act to addressspecific GME FTE cap issues. Thesechanges include increasing the cap forrural hospitals and urban hospitals thatestablish programs with training in ruralareas, revising the FTE caps forhospitals with certain residents on leaveduring the base period, and temporarilyincreasing the cap for hospitals thattrain residents that transferred fromcertain VA hospitals. The regulationsalso reflect the provisions of section 312of Public Law 106–113, which amendedsection 1886(h)(5) of the Act to change(for purposes of payment) the initialresidency period for child neurologyresidents.

a. Approved Leave of Absences ofResidents. Section VII.A. of this interimfinal rule implements section 407(a) ofPublic Law 106–113, which directs theSecretary to count an individual forpurposes of determining a hospital’sFTE cap, to the extent that theindividual would have been counted asa primary care resident for purposes ofthe FTE cap but for the fact that theindividual was on maternity ordisability leave or a similar approvedleave of absence. The provision allowsa hospital to receive an adjustment to itsindividual FTE cap of up to threeadditional FTE residents. We are unableto predict at this time the number ofresidents affected by this provision.However, we believe the financialimpact will be negligible, because fewhospitals and FTEs are likely to beaffected.

b. Adjustment to FTE Caps for RuralHospitals. As explained in section VII.C.of this interim final rule, we areimplementing section 407(b) of PublicLaw 106-113 which provides for a 30-percent expansion to a rural hospital’sFTE resident cap. We have calculated anestimated impact on the Medicareprogram as a result of this provision. Weused the best available cost report data



from 1995 HCRIS, which included theresident counts from which the ruralhospitals’ (and urban hospitals’) capswere set. Seventy rural teachinghospitals were included in this impactanalysis.

To determine the impact of thisprovision, we first estimated the averageGME (direct GME and IME combined)payment amount made to rural hospitalsin FY 1995. Then, we increased theaverage GME payment amount by 30-percent and multiplied this amount by70 to reflect a potential 30-percentincrease in the number of FTEs acrossall rural hospitals. Next, we updatedthis amount for inflation from FY 1995to FY 2000, and from FY 2000 throughFY 2004. Specifically, the estimatedcosts for each fiscal year are as follows:FY 2000: $28.8 millionFY 2001: $29.5 millionFY 2002: $30.2 millionFY 2003: $31.1 millionFY 2004: $31.9 million

The total maximum estimated cost forFY 2000 through FY 2004 is $151.5million. However, we do not anticipatethat all rural hospitals will expand theircounts by 30-percent in FY 2000.Therefore, we believe that the actualcost in FY 2000 will be somewhat lessthan $28.8 million.

c. Urban Hospitals with Rural TrackResidency Programs. As discussed insection VII.C. of this interim final rulewith comment period, we areimplementing the provision that allowsan urban hospital that establishes a newresidency program or has an existingresidency program with a rural track (oran integrated rural track) to include inits FTE count residents in those ruraltracks, in addition to the residentsalready included in the hospital’s FTEcap.

We estimated the costs to theMedicare program from FY 2000through FY 2004 based on the numberof currently existing (as of May 2000),separately accredited, ‘‘1–2’’ ruraltraining track programs. Consideringthat there are currently 26 suchprograms, each averaging 4 residents,and making assumptions about thegrowth of new programs, we estimatethat the cost from FY 2000 through FY2004 will be $75 million. Specifically,the estimated cost per year is $5 millionfor FY 2000, $10 million for FY 2001,and $20 million for FYs 2002, 2003, and2004.

d. Residents Training at VA HospitalsThat Would Lose Accreditation. SectionVII.D. of this interim final rule withcomment period implements section407(d) of Public Law 106–113 whichaddresses the situation where a non-VA

hospital temporarily takes on residentstraining at a VA hospital because theprogram at the VA hospital would loseits ACGME accreditation if the residentscontinued to train at the VA hospital.We estimate that the number ofresidents affected by this provision willbe small; we know of only one hospitalthat is affected by this provision.Therefore, the financial impact will benegligible.

e. Child Neurology Training. We areimplementing the provisions of section312 of Public Law 106–113 whichamended section 1886(h)(5) of the Actto revise the initial residency period forchild neurology residency programs. Webelieve this provision will have aminimal financial impact, because thereare so few hospitals that will be affectedby this provision.

7. Medicare+Choice Nursing and AlliedHealth Education Payments

As discussed in section VIII. of thisinterim final rule, we are implementingthe methodology for determining theadditional payments to be made tohospitals that receive reasonable costpayment for approved nursing or alliedhealth education programs for theirservices associated withMedicare+Choice enrollees. Theestimated total amount calculated forthese payments, not to exceed$60,000,000 in a calendar year, is basedon the proportion of projected totaldirect GME payments forMedicare+Choice enrollees to projectedtotal direct GME payments, multipliedby projected total nursing and alliedhealth education payments. Hospitalswould receive these payments inproportion to the amount of Medicarenursing and allied health educationpayments received in the cost reportingperiod that ended in the fiscal year thatis 2 years prior to the current calendaryear, to the total amount of nursing andallied health education payments paidto all hospitals in that cost reportingperiod. Direct GME payments forMedicare+Choice utilization would bereduced to reflect the estimated amountof additional payments that would bemade for nursing and allied healtheducation programs under thisprovision. For a more detailedexplanation of this policy, refer tosection VIII. of this preamble.

By requiring that theMedicare+Choice direct GME paymentsbe reduced in order to provide for theadditional nursing and allied healtheducation payments, this provision isdesigned to be budget neutral in theaggregate. However, on a hospitalspecific basis, hospitals that operateboth GME and nursing or allied health

education programs may experienceeither a net gain or loss as a result of thisprovision. This is because, althoughtheir Medicare+Choice direct GMEpayments will be reduced by a certainpercentage, their nursing and alliedhealth education payments will beincreased. However, those hospitals thatoperate only GME programs will seetheir Medicare reimbursement reduced,and those hospitals that operate onlynursing or allied health educationprograms will see their Medicarereimbursement increased.

As explained in section VIII.E. of thispreamble, the percentage decrease tohospitals’ Medicare+Choice direct GMEpayments is 10.5 percent. For purposesof this interim final rule with commentperiod, we have estimated a percentageincrease to hospitals’ nursing and alliedhealth education payments for calendaryear 2000. When the nursing and alliedhealth education payment ‘‘pool’’ isadded to the total projected nursing andallied health education payments forcalendar year 2000, the estimatedpercentage increase in total nursing andallied health payments is 10.2 percent.

8. Hospital Swing Bed ProgramThe elimination of the requirements

for State certification of need to useacute care beds as swing beds for long-term care patients and the eliminationof the constraints on the length of stayin swing beds for rural hospitals with 50to 100 beds will have a positive effecton providers, especially rural hospitals.However, we do not have the necessarydata to determine at this time abudgetary impact of these provisions onMedicare payments.

C. FederalismWe have examined this interim final

rule with comment period inaccordance with Executive Order 13132,Federalism, and have determined thatthis interim final rule with commentperiod will not have any negativeimpact on the rights, rules, andresponsibilities of State, local, or tribalgovernments.

D. Executive Order 12866In accordance with the provisions of

Executive Order 12866, this interimfinal rule with comment period wasreviewed by the Office of Managementand Budget.

XV. Information CollectionRequirements

Under the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995, we are required to provide 60-day notice in the Federal Register andsolicit public comment before acollection of information requirement is



submitted to the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) for review andapproval. In order to fairly evaluatewhether an information collectionshould be approved by OMB, section3506(c)(2)(A) of the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995 requires that wesolicit comment on the following issues:

• The need for the informationcollection and its usefulness in carryingout the proper functions of our agency.

• The accuracy of our estimate of theinformation collection burden.

• The quality, utility, and clarity ofthe information to be collected.

• Recommendations to minimize theinformation collection burden on theaffected public, including automatedcollection techniques.

We are soliciting public comment oneach of these issues for § 412.103(b),which contains information collectionand recordkeeping requirements.

Section 412.103(b) specifies that afacility seeking reclassification undersection 401(a) or (b) of Public Law 106–113 must apply in writing to the HCFARegional Office and includedocumentation of the criteria on whichits request is based. The applicationmust be mailed; facsimile or otherelectronic means are not acceptable.

The hospital’s application mustinclude a copy of the State law orregulation or other authoritativedocument verifying that the requestinghospital is situated in an areadetermined to be rural by the State orthe hospital is considered to be a ruralhospital.

We estimate that it will take eachhospital approximately 30 minutes tocomplete the application process. Weestimate that additional time would beneeded to collect the requireddocumentation. This recordkeepingshould take no more than approximately2 hours. Therefore, the paperworkburden associated with thereclassification process would add up toan additional 21⁄2 hours per hospital thatrequest reclassification under section401 of Public Law 106–113.

These information collection andrecordkeeping requirements are noteffective until they are approved byOMB.

Comments on these informationcollection and recordkeepingrequirements should be mailed to thefollowing addresses:Health Care Financing Administration,

Office of Information Services,Security and Standards Group,Division of HCFA EnterpriseStandards, Room N2–14–26, 7500Security Boulevard, Baltimore,Maryland 21244–1850, Attn: JohnBurke HCFA–1131-IFC; and

Office of Information and RegulatoryAffairs, Office of Management andBudget, Room 3001, New ExecutiveOffice Building, Washington, DC20503, Attn: Allison Herron EydtHCFA–1131–IFC, HCFA Desk Officer.

List of Subjects

42 CFR Part 410

Health facilities, Health professions,Kidney diseases, Laboratories,Medicare, Rural areas, X-rays.

42 CFR Part 412

Administrative practice andprocedure, Health facilities, Medicare,Puerto Rico, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

42 CFR Part 413

Health facilities, Kidney diseases,Medicare, Puerto Rico, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

42 CFR Part 482

Grant programs-health, Hospitals,Medicaid, Medicare, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

42 CFR Part 485

Grant programs-health, Healthfacilities, Medicaid, Medicare,Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

42 CFR Chapter IV is amended as setforth below:

PART 410—SUPPLEMENTARYMEDICAL INSURANCE (SMI)BENEFITS

A. Part 410 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for part 410

continues to read as follows:Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the

Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and1395hh).

2. Section 410.152 is amended byrevising paragraph (k) to read as follows:

§ 410.152 Amounts of payment.

* * * * *(k) Amount of payment: Outpatient

CAH services. (1) Payment for CAHoutpatient services is the reasonablecost of the CAH in providing theseservices, as determined in accordancewith section 1861(v)(1)(A) of the Act,with § 413.70(b) and (c) of this chapter,and with the applicable principles ofcost reimbursement in part 413 and inpart 415 of this chapter.

(2) Payment for CAH outpatientservices is subject to the applicableMedicare Part B deductible andcoinsurance amounts, except asdescribed in § 413.70(c) of this chapter,with Part B coinsurance being

calculated as 20 percent of thecustomary (insofar as reasonable)charges of the CAH for the services.* * * * *

PART 412—PROSPECTIVE PAYMENTSYSTEMS FOR INPATIENT HOSPITALSERVICES

B. Part 412 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for part 412



2. Section 412.63 is amended byrevising paragraph (b)(1) to read asfollows:

§ 412.63 Federal rates for inpatientoperating costs for fiscal years afterFederal fiscal year 1984.

* * * * *1. Geographic classifications. (1) For

purposes of this section, the definitionsset forth in § 412.62(f) apply, exceptthat, effective January 1, 2000, a hospitalreclassified as rural may mean areclassification that results from ageographic redesignation as set forth in§ 412.62(f)(1)(iv) or a reclassificationthat results from an urban hospitalapplying for reclassification as rural asset forth in § 412.103.* * * * *

3. Section 412.90 is amended byrevising paragraphs (e) and (j) to read asfollows:

§ 412.90 General rules.

* * * * *(e) Hospitals located in areas that are

reclassified from urban to rural. (1)HCFA adjusts the rural Federal paymentamounts for inpatient operating costs forhospitals located in geographic areasthat are reclassified from urban to ruralas defined in § 412.62(f). Thisadjustment is set forth in § 412.102.

(2) HCFA establishes a procedure bywhich certain individual hospitalslocated in urban areas may apply forreclassification as rural. The criteria forreclassification are set forth in§ 412.103.* * * * *

(j) Medicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals. For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after April 1, 1990 andbefore October 1, 1994, or beginning onor after October 1, 1997 and beforeOctober 1, 2006, HCFA adjusts theprospective payment rates for inpatientoperating costs determined undersubparts D and E of this part if ahospital is classified as a Medicare-dependent, small rural hospital.* * * * *



4. The section heading of § 412.102 isrevised to read as follows:

§ 412.102 Special treatment: Hospitalslocated in areas that are reclassified fromurban to rural as a result of a geographicredesignation.

5. A new § 412.103 is added to readas follows:

§ 412.103 Special treatment: Hospitalslocated in urban areas and that apply forreclassification as rural.

(a) General criteria. A prospectivepayment hospital that is located in anurban area (as defined in§ 412.62(f)(1)(ii)) may be reclassified asa rural hospital if it submits anapplication in accordance withparagraph (b) of this section and meetsany of the following conditions:

(1) The hospital is located in a ruralcensus tract of a Metropolitan StatisticalArea (MSA) as determined under themost recent version of the GoldsmithModification as determined by theOffice of Rural Health Policy (ORHP) ofthe Health Resources and ServicesAdministration which is available viathe ORHP website at http://www.nal.usda.gov/orph or from the U.S.Department of Health and HumanServices, Health Resources and ServicesAdministration, Office of Rural HealthPolicy, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 9–05,Rockville, MD 20857.

(2) The hospital is located in an areadesignated by any law or regulation ofthe State in which it is located as a ruralarea, or the hospital is designated as arural hospital by State law or regulation.

(3) The hospital would qualify as arural referral center as set forth in§ 412.96, or as a sole communityhospital as set forth in § 412.92, if thehospital were located in a rural area.

(b) Application requirements. (1)Written application. A hospital seekingreclassification under this section mustsubmit a complete application inwriting to HCFA in accordance withparagraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of thissection.

(2) Contents of application. Anapplication is complete if it contains anexplanation of how the hospital meetsthe condition that constitutes the basisof the request for reclassification setforth in paragraph (a) of this section,including data and documentationnecessary to support the request.

(3) Mailing of application. Anapplication must be mailed to the HCFARegional Office by the requestinghospital and may not be submitted byfacsimile or other electronic means.

(4) Notification by HCFA. Within 5business days after receiving thehospital’s application, the HCFA

Regional Office will send the hospital aletter acknowledging receipt, with acopy to the HCFA Central Office.

(5) Filing date. The filing date of theapplication is the date HCFA receivesthe application.

(c) HCFA review. The HCFA RegionalOffice will review the application andnotify the hospital of its approval ordisapproval of the request within 60days of the filing date.

(d) Effective dates of reclassification.(1) Except as specified in paragraph(d)(2) of this section, HCFA willconsider a hospital that satisfies any ofthe criteria set forth in paragraph (a) ofthis section as being located in the ruralarea of the State in which the hospitalis located as of that filing date.

(2) If a hospital’s complete applicationis received in HCFA by September 1,2000, and satisfies any of the criteria setforth in paragraph (a) of this section,HCFA will consider the filing date to beJanuary 1, 2000.

(e) Withdrawal of application. Ahospital may withdraw an application atany time prior to the date of HCFA’sdecision as set forth in paragraph (c) ofthis section.

(f) Duration of classification. Anapproved reclassification under thissection remains in effect without needfor reapproval unless there is a changein the circumstances under which theclassification was approved.

(g) Cancellation of classification. (1) Ahospital may cancel its ruralreclassification by submitting a writtenrequest to the HCFA Regional Office notless than 120 days prior to the end ofits current cost reporting period.

(2) The hospital’s cancellation of theclassification is effective beginning withthe hospital’s next full cost reportingperiod following the date of its requestfor cancellation.

6. Section 412.105 is amended by:A. Revising paragraph (d)(3)(iv).B. Revising paragraph (f)(1)(iv).C. Adding and reserving paragraphs

(f)(1)(viii) and (ix).D. Adding new paragraphs (f)(1)(x),

(f)(1)(xi), and (f)(1)(xii).

§ 412.105 Special treatment: Hospitals thatincur indirect costs for graduate medicaleducation programs.

* * * * *(d) Determination of education

adjustment factor. * * *(3) Step three. * * *(iv) For discharges occurring during

fiscal year 2000, 1.47.(A) Each hospital receives an amount

that is equal in the aggregate to thedifference between the amount ofpayments made to the hospital if ‘c’equaled 1.6, rather than 1.47.

(B) The payment of this amount willnot affect any other payments,determinations, or budget neutralityadjustments.* * * * *

(f) Determining the total number offull-time equivalent residents for costreporting periods beginning on or afterJuly 1, 1991. (1) * * *

(iv) Effective for discharges occurringon or after October 1, 1997, the totalnumber of FTE residents in the fields ofallopathic and osteopathic medicine ineither a hospital or a nonhospital settingthat meets the criteria listed inparagraph (f)(1)(ii) of this section maynot exceed the number of such FTEresidents in the hospital (or, in the caseof a hospital located in a rural area,effective for discharges occurring on orafter April 1, 2000, 130 percent of thatnumber) with respect to the hospital’smost recent cost reporting period endingon or before December 31, 1996.* * * * *

(x) Effective for discharges occurringon or after April 1, 2000, an urbanhospital that establishes a newresidency program (as defined in§ 413.86(g)(12) of this subchapter), orhas an existing residency program, witha rural track (or an integrated ruraltrack) may include in its FTE countresidents in those rural tracks inaccordance with the provisions of§§ 413.86(g)(11) of this subchapter.

(xi) Effective for discharges occurringin cost reporting periods beginning onor after November 29, 1999, a hospitalmay receive an adjustment to its FTEcap of up to three additional FTEs to theextent that the additional residentswould have been counted as primarycare residents for purposes of thehospital’s FTE cap but for the fact thatthe additional residents were onmaternity or disability leave or a similarapproved leave of absence, inaccordance with the provisions of§ 413.86(g)(9) of this subchapter.

(xii) For discharges occurring on orafter October 1, 1997, a non-VeteransAffairs (VA) hospital may receive atemporary adjustment to its FTE cap toreflect residents who had beenpreviously trained at a VA hospital andwere subsequently transferred to thenon-VA hospital, if the hospital meetsthe criteria and other provisions of§ 413.86(g)(10) of this subchapter.* * * * *

§ 412.108 [Amended]6. Section 412.108 is amended as

follows:a. In paragraph (a)(1), the date

‘‘October 1, 2001’’, is removed and‘‘October 1, 2006’’ is added in its place.



b. In paragraph (c)(2)(ii) the date‘‘October 1, 2001’’, is removed and‘‘October 1, 2006’’ is added in its place.

PART 413—PRINCIPLES OFREASONABLE COSTREIMBURSEMENT; PAYMENT FOREND-STAGE RENAL DISEASESERVICES; OPTIONALPROSPECTIVELY DETERMINEDPAYMENT RATES FOR SKILLEDNURSING FACILITIES

C. Part 413 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for Part 413

continues to read as follows:Authority: Secs. 1102, 1812(d), 1814(b),

1815, 1833(a), (i), and (n), 1871, 1881, 1883,and 1886 of the Social Security Act (42U.S.C. 1302, 1395d(d), 1395f(b), 1395g,1395l(a), (i), and (n), 1395hh, 1395rr, 1395tt,and 1395ww).

2. Section 413.40 is amended byrepublishing the introductory text ofparagraph (c)(4) and of paragraph(c)(4)(iii) and revising paragraphs(c)(4)(iii)(B) and (c)(4)(v), to read asfollows:

§ 413.40 Ceiling on the rate of increase inhospital inpatient costs.

* * * * *(c) Costs subject to the ceiling. * * *(4) Target amounts. The intermediary

will establish a target amount for eachhospital. The target amount for a costreporting period is determined asfollows:* * * * *

(iii) In the case of a psychiatrichospital or unit, rehabilitation hospitalor unit, or long-term care hospital, thetarget amount is the lower of—* * * * *

(B) One of the following for theapplicable cost reporting period—

(1) For cost reporting periodsbeginning during fiscal year 1998, the75th percentile of target amounts forhospitals in the same class (psychiatrichospital or unit, rehabilitation hospitalor unit, or long-term care hospital) forcost reporting periods ending during FY1996, increased by the applicablemarket basket percentage up to the firstcost reporting period beginning on orafter October 1, 1997.

(2) For cost reporting periodsbeginning during fiscal year 1999, theamount determined under paragraph(c)(4)(iii)(B)(1) of this section, increasedby the market basket percentage upthrough the subject period, subject tothe provisions of paragraph (c)(4)(iv) ofthis section.

(3) For cost reporting periodsbeginning during fiscal year 2000—

(i) The labor-related portion and thenonlabor-related portion of the wage-

neutralized 75th percentile of targetamounts for hospitals in the same class(psychiatric hospital or unit,rehabilitation hospital or unit, or long-term care hospital) for cost reportingperiods ending during FY 1996, areincreased by the applicable marketbasket percentage up to the first costreporting period beginning on or afterOctober 1, 1999.

(ii) The labor-related portion of thewage-neutralized 75th percentile targetamounts under paragraph(c)(4)(iii)(B)(4)(i) of this section is wageadjusted by multiplying it by thehospital’s FY 2000 hospital inpatientprospective payment system wageindex.

(iii) The wage-adjusted 75thpercentile target amounts for hospitalsin the same class is determined byadding the nonlabor-related portion ofthe wage-neutralized 75th percentiletarget amounts under paragraph(c)(4)(iii)(B)(3)(i) of this section and thehospital’s wage-adjusted labor-relatedportion of the wage-neutralized 75thpercentile target amounts determinedunder paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(3)(ii) ofthis section, subject to the provisions ofparagraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section.

(4) For cost reporting periodsbeginning during fiscal years 2001 and2002—

(i) The amounts determined underparagraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(3)(i) of thissection are increased by the marketbasket percentage up through thesubject period.

(ii) The labor-related portion of thewage-neutralized 75th percentile targetamounts under paragraph(c)(4)(iii)(B)(4)(i) of this section is wage-adjusted by multiplying by thehospital’s FY 2001 hospital inpatientprospective payment system wageindex, for cost reporting periodsbeginning during fiscal year 2001 andthe hospital’s FY 2002 hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemwage index for cost reporting periodsbeginning during fiscal year 2002.

(iii) The wage-adjusted 75thpercentile target amounts for hospitalsin the same class are determined byadding the nonlabor-related portion ofthe wage-neutralized 75th percentiletarget amounts under paragraph(c)(4)(iii)(B)(4)(i) of this section and thehospital’s wage-adjusted labor-relatedportion of the wage-neutralized 75thpercentile target amounts determinedunder paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(4)(ii) ofthis section, subject to the provisions ofparagraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section.* * * * *

(v) In the case of a hospital thatreceived payments under paragraph

(f)(2)(ii) of this section as a newlycreated hospital or unit, to determinethe hospital’s target amount for thehospital’s third 12-month cost reportingperiod, the payment amount determinedunder paragraph (f)(2)(ii)(A) of thissection for the preceding cost reportingperiod is updated to the third costreporting period.* * * * *

3. Section 413.70 is amended by:A. Revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and

(b)(2)(iv).B. Removing paragraph (b)(2)(v).C. Adding a new paragraph (c).

§ 413.70 Payment for services of a CAH.

* * * * *(b) * * *(2) * * *(iii) Any type of reduction to

operating or capital costs under§ 413.124 or § 413.130(j)(7); and

(iv) Blended payment amounts forASC, radiology, and other diagnosticservices.

(c) The following payment principlesare used when determining payment foroutpatient clinical diagnostic laboratorytests:

(1) The amount paid is equal to 100percent of the least of—

(i) Charges determined under the feeschedule as set forth in section1833(h)(1) or section 1834(d)(1) of theAct;

(ii) The limitation amount for that testdetermined under section 1833(h)(4)(B)of the Act or the amount of the chargesbilled for the test; or

(iii) A negotiated rate establishedunder section 1833(h)(6) of the Act.

(2) Payment for outpatient clinicaldiagnostic laboratory tests is not subjectto the Medicare Part B deductible andcoinsurance amounts, as specified in§ 410.152(k) of this chapter.

4. Section 413.86 is amended by:A. Adding definitions of ‘‘rural track

FTE limitation’’ and ‘‘rural track orintegrated rural track’’ in alphabeticalorder under paragraph (b).

B. Revising paragraphs (d)(4) and(d)(5).

C. Adding a new paragraph (d)(6).D. Revising paragraph (g)(1).E. Revising the first sentence of

paragraph (g)(4).F. Redesignating paragraph (g)(9) as

paragraph (g)(12).G. Add new paragraphs (g)(9), (g)(10),

and (g)(11).

§ 413.86 Direct graduate medicaleducation payments.

* * * * *(b) Definitions. * * *Rural track FTE limitation means the

maximum number of residents (as



specified in paragraph (g)(11) of thissection) training in a rural trackresidency program that an urbanhospital may include in its FTE countand that is in addition to the number ofFTE residents already included in thehospital’s FTE cap.

Rural track or integrated rural trackmeans an approved medical residencytraining program established by anurban hospital in which residents trainfor a portion of the program at the urbanhospital and then rotate for a portion ofthe program to a rural hospital(s) or arural nonhospital site(s).* * * * *

(d) Calculating payment for graduatemedical education costs. * * *

(4) Step four. Effective for costreporting periods beginning on or afterJanuary 1, 2000, the product derivedfrom step three is reduced in accordancewith the provisions of § 413.87(f).

(5) Step five. (i) For portions of costreporting periods beginning on or afterJanuary 1, 1998 and before January 1,2000, add steps two and three.

(ii) Effective for portions of costreporting periods beginning on or afterJanuary 1, 2000, add the results of stepstwo and four.

(6) Step six. The product derived instep two is apportioned between Part Aand Part B of Medicare based on theratio of Medicare’s share of reasonablecosts excluding graduate medicaleducation costs attributable to each partas determined through the Medicarecost report.* * * * *

(g) Determining the weighted numberof FTE residents. (1) Generally, forpurposes of this section, effective July 1,1995, an initial residency period isdefined as the minimum number ofyears required for board eligibility. Priorto July 1, 1995, the initial residencyperiod equals the minimum number ofyears required for board eligibility in aspecialty or subspecialty plus 1 year. Aninitial residency period may not exceed5 years in order to be counted towarddetermining FTE status except in thecase of fellows in an approved geriatricprogram whose initial residency periodmay last up to 2 additional years.Effective July 1, 2000, for residencyprograms that began before, on, or afterNovember 29, 1999, the period of boardeligibility and the initial residencyperiod for a resident in an approvedchild neurology program is the period ofboard eligibility for pediatrics plus 2years. Effective August 10, 1993,residents or fellows in an approvedpreventive medicine residency orfellowship program also may be countedas a full FTE resident for up to 2

additional years beyond the initialresidency period limitations. Forcombined residency programs, an initialresidency period is defined as the timerequired for individual certification inthe longer of the programs. If theresident is enrolled in a combinedmedical residency training program inwhich all of the individual programs(that are combined) are for trainingprimary care residents (as defined inparagraph (b) of this section) orobstetrics and gynecology residents, theinitial residency period is the timerequired for individual certification inthe longer of the programs plus 1 year.* * * * *

(4) For purposes of determining directgraduate medical education payment,for cost reporting periods beginning onor after October 1, 1997, a hospital’sunweighted FTE count for residents inallopathic and osteopathic medicinemay not exceed the hospital’sunweighted FTE count (or, effective forcost reporting periods beginning on orafter April 1, 2000, 130 percent of theunweighted FTE count for a hospitallocated in a rural area) for theseresidents for the most recent costreporting period ending on or beforeDecember 31, 1996. * * *

(9) Effective for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after November 29,1999, a hospital may receive anadjustment to its FTE cap of up to threeadditional resident FTEs, if the hospitalmeets the following criteria:

(i) The additional residents areresidents of a primary care program thatwould have been counted by thehospital as residents for purposes of thehospital’s FTE cap but for the fact thatthe additional residents were onmaternity or disability leave or a similarapproved leave of absence during thehospital’s most recent cost reportingperiod ending on or before December31, 1996;

(ii) The leave of absence wasapproved by the residency programdirector to allow the residents to beabsent from the program and return tothe program after the leave of absence;and

(iii) No later than 6 months afterAugust 1, 2000, the hospital submits tothe fiscal intermediary a request for anadjustment to its FTE cap, and providescontemporaneous documentation of theapproval of the leave of absence by theresidency director, specific to eachadditional resident that is to be countedfor purposes of the adjustment.

(10) For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 1997, anon-Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital mayreceive a temporary adjustment to its

FTE cap to reflect residents who hadpreviously trained at a VA hospital andwere subsequently transferred to thenon-VA hospital, if that hospital meetsthe following criteria:

(i) The transferred residents had beentraining previously at a VA hospital ina program that would have lost itsaccreditation by the ACGME if theresidents continued to train at the VAhospital;

(ii) The residents were transferred tothe hospital from the VA hospital on orafter January 1, 1997, and before July 31,1998; and

(iii) The hospital submits a request toits fiscal intermediary for a temporaryadjustment to its FTE cap, documentsthat it is eligible for this temporaryadjustment by identifying the residentswho have come from the VA hospital,and specifies the length of time thoseresidents will be trained at the hospital.

(11) For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after April 1, 2000, anurban hospital that establishes a newresidency program, or has an existingresidency program, with a rural track (oran integrated rural track) may include inits FTE count residents in those ruraltracks, in addition to the residentssubject to its FTE cap specified underparagraph (g)(4) of this section. Anurban hospital with a rural trackresidency program may count residentsin those rural tracks up to a rural trackFTE limitation if the hospital complieswith the conditions specified inparagraphs (g)(11)(i) through (g)(11)(vi)of this section.

(i) If an urban hospital rotatesresidents in the rural track program toa rural hospital(s) for at least two-thirdsof the duration of the program, theurban hospital may include thoseresidents in its FTE count for the timethe rural track residents spend at theurban hospital. The urban hospital mayinclude in its FTE count those residentsin the rural track training at the urbanhospital, not to exceed its rural trackFTE limitation, determined as follows:

(A) For the first 3 years of the ruraltrack’s existence, the rural track FTElimitation for each urban hospital willbe the actual number of FTE residentstraining in the rural track at the urbanhospital.

(B) Beginning with the fourth year ofthe rural track’s existence, the ruraltrack FTE limitation is equal to theproduct of the highest number ofresidents in any program year, whoduring the third year of the rural track’sexistence are training in the rural trackat the urban hospital or the ruralhospital(s) and are designated at thebeginning of their training to be rotatedto the rural hospital(s) for at least two-



thirds of the duration of the program,and the number of years those residentsare training at the urban hospital.

(ii) If an urban hospital rotatesresidents in the rural track program toa rural nonhospital site(s) for at leasttwo-thirds of the duration of theprogram, the urban hospital mayinclude those residents in its FTE count,subject to the requirements underparagraph (f)(4) of this section. Theurban hospital may include in its FTEcount those residents in the rural track,not to exceed its rural track FTElimitation, determined as follows:

(A) For the first 3 years of the ruraltrack’s existence, the rural track FTElimitation for each urban hospital willbe the actual number of FTE residentstraining at the urban hospital and therural nonhospital site(s).

(B) Beginning with the fourth year ofthe rural track’s existence, the ruraltrack FTE limitation is equal to theproduct of—

(1) The highest number of residents inany program year who, during the thirdyear of the rural track’s existence, aretraining in the rural track at—

(i) The urban hospital and aredesignated at the beginning of theirtraining to be rotated to a ruralnonhospital site(s) for at least two-thirdsof the duration of the program; and

(ii) The rural nonhospital site(s); and(2) The number of years in which the

residents are expected to complete eachprogram based on the minimumaccredited length for the type ofprogram.

(iii) If an urban hospital rotatesresidents in the rural track program toa rural hospital(s) for periods of timethat are less than two-thirds of theduration of the program, the ruralhospital may not include those residentsin its FTE count (if the urban hospital’sFTE count exceeds that hospital’s FTEcap), nor may the urban hospitalinclude those residents whencalculating its rural track FTElimitation.

(iv) If an urban hospital rotatesresidents in the rural track program toa rural nonhospital site(s) for periods oftime that are less than two-thirds of theduration of the program, the urbanhospital may include those residents inits FTE count, subject to therequirements under paragraph (f)(4) ofthis section. The urban hospital mayinclude in its FTE count those residentsin the rural track, not to exceed its ruraltrack FTE limitation, determined asfollows:

(A) For the first 3 years of the ruraltrack’s existence, the rural track FTElimitation for the urban hospital will bethe actual number of FTE residents

training in the rural track at the ruralnonhospital site(s).

(B) Beginning with the fourth year ofthe rural track’s existence, the ruraltrack FTE limitation is equal to theproduct of—

(1) The highest number of residents inany program year who, during the thirdyear of the rural track’s existence, aretraining in the rural track at the ruralnonhospital site(s) or are designated atthe beginning of their training to berotated to the rural nonhospital site(s)for a period that is less than two-thirdsof the duration of the program; and

(2) The length of time in which theresidents are being training at the ruralnonhospital site(s) only.

(v) All urban hospitals that wish tocount FTE residents in rural tracks, notto exceed their respective rural trackFTE limitation, must also comply withall of the following conditions:

(A) An urban hospital may notinclude in its rural track FTE limitationor (assuming the urban hospital’s FTEcount exceeds its FTE cap) FTE countresidents who are training in a ruraltrack residency program that werealready included as part of thehospital’s FTE cap.

(B) The hospital must base its countof residents in a rural track on writtencontemporaneous documentation thateach resident enrolled in a rural trackprogram at the hospital intends to rotatefor a portion of the residency programto a rural area.

(C) All residents that are included bythe hospital as part of its FTE count (notto exceed its rural track FTE limitation)must ultimately train in the rural area.

(vi) If HCFA finds that residents whoare included by the urban hospital aspart of its FTE count did not actuallycomplete the training in the rural area,HCFA will reopen the urban hospital’scost report within the 3-year reopeningperiod as specified in § 405.1885 of thischapter and adjust the hospital’sMedicare GME payments (and, whereapplicable, the hospital’s rural trackFTE limitation).* * * * *

5. A new § 413.87 is added to read asfollows:

§ 413.87 Payments for Medicare+Choicenursing and allied health educationprograms.

(a) Statutory basis. This sectionimplements section 1886(l) of the Act,which provides for additional paymentsto hospitals that operate and receiveMedicare reasonable costreimbursement for approved nursingand allied health education programsand the methodology for determiningthe additional payments.

(b) Scope. This section sets forth therules for determining an additionalpayment amount to hospitals thatreceive payments for the costs ofoperating approved nursing or alliedhealth education programs under§ 413.85.

(c) Qualifying conditions for payment.For portions of cost reporting periodsoccurring on or after January 1, 2000, ahospital that operates and receivespayment for a nursing or allied healtheducation program under § 413.85 mayreceive an additional payment amount.The hospital may receive the additionalpayment amount, which is calculated inaccordance with the provisions ofparagraph (d) of this section, if both ofthe conditions specified in paragraph(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section are met.

(1) The hospital must have receivedMedicare reasonable cost payment foran approved nursing or allied healtheducation program under § 413.85 in itscost reporting period(s) ending in thefiscal year that is 2 years prior to thecurrent calendar year. (For example, ifthe current year is calendar year 2000,the fiscal year that is 2 years prior tocalendar year 2000 is FY 1998.) For ahospital that first establishes a nursingor allied health education program andreceives reasonable cost payment for theprogram as specified under § 413.85after FY 1998, the hospital is eligible toreceive an additional payment amountin a calendar year that is 2 years afterthe respective fiscal year so long as thehospital also meets the condition underparagraph (c)(2) of this section.

(2) The hospital must be receivingreasonable cost payment for anapproved nursing or allied healtheducation program under § 413.85 in thecurrent calendar year.

(d) Calculating the additionalpayment amount. Subject to theprovisions of paragraph (f) of thissection relating to calculating aproportional reduction inMedicare+Choice direct GME payments,the additional payment amountspecified in paragraph (c) of this sectionis calculated according to the followingsteps:

(1) Step one. Each calendar year,determine the hospital’s total nursingand allied health education programpayments from its cost reportingperiod(s) ending in the fiscal year thatis 2 years prior to the current calendaryear.

(2) Step two. Determine the ratio ofthe hospital’s payments from step one tothe total of all nursing and allied healtheducation program payments across allhospitals for all cost reporting periodsending in the fiscal year that is 2 yearsprior to the current calendar year.



(3) Step three. Multiply the ratiocalculated in step two by the amountdetermined in accordance withparagraph (e) of this section for thecurrent calendar year. The resultingproduct is each respective hospital’sadditional payment amount.

(e) Calculation of the payment ‘‘pool.’’(1) Subject to paragraph (e)(3) of thissection, each calendar year, HCFA willcalculate a Medicare+Choice nursingand allied health payment ‘‘pool’’according to the following steps:

(i) Determine the ratio of projectedtotal Medicare+Choice direct GMEpayments made in accordance with theprovisions of § 413.86(d)(3) across allhospitals in the current calendar year toprojected total direct GME paymentsmade across all hospitals in the currentcalendar year.

(ii) Multiply the ratio calculated inparagraph (e)(1)(i) of this section byprojected total Medicare nursing andallied health education reasonable costpayments made across all hospitals inthe current calendar year.

(2) The resulting product of the stepsunder paragraph (e)(1)(i) and (e)(1)(ii) ofthis section is the Medicare+Choicenursing and allied health payment poolfor the current calendar year.

(3) The payment pool may not exceed$60 million in any calendar year.

PART 482—CONDITIONS OFPARTICIPATION FOR HOSPITALS

D. Part 482 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for Part 482



§ 482.66 [Amended]

2. Section 482.66 is amended by:A. Removing paragraph (a)(3).B. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(4) and

(a)(5) as (a)(3) and (a)(4), respectively.C. Removing paragraphs (a)(6) and

(a)(7).

PART 485—CONDITIONS OFPARTICIPATION: SPECIALIZEDPROVIDERS

E. Part 485 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for Part 485



2. Section 485.610 is amended by:A. Revising paragraph (a).B. Republishing the introductory text

of paragraph (b).C. Redesignating paragraph (b)(4) as

paragraph (b)(5) and republishing newlydesignated paragraph (b)(5).

D. Adding a new paragraph (b)(4).

§ 485.610 Condition of participation:Status and location.

(a) Standard: Status. The facility is—(1) A currently participating hospital

that meets all conditions ofparticipation set forth in this subpart;

(2) A recently closed facility,provided that the facility—

(i) Was a hospital that ceasedoperations on or after the date that is 10years before November 29, 1999; and

(ii) Meets the criteria for designationunder this subpart as of November 29,1999; or

(3) A health clinic or a health center(as defined by the State) that—

(i) Is licensed by the State as a healthclinic or a health center;

(ii) Was a hospital that wasdownsized to a health clinic or a healthcenter; and

(iii) As of the effective date of itsdesignation, meets the criteria fordesignation set forth in this subpart.

(b) Standard: Location. The CAHmeets the following requirements:* * * * *

(4) The CAH is being treated as beinglocated in a rural area in accordancewith § 412.103 of this chapter.

(5) The CAH is located more than a35-mile drive (or, in the case ofmountainous terrain or in areas withonly secondary roads available, a 15-mile drive) from a hospital or anotherCAH, or the CAH is certified by theState as being a necessary provider ofhealth care services to residents in thearea.

3. Section 485.620 is amended byrevising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 485.620 Condition of participation:Number of beds and length of stay.

* * * * *(b) Standard: Length of stay. The CAH

provides acute inpatient care for aperiod that does not exceed, on anannual average basis, 96 hours perpatient.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic AssistanceProgram No. 93.773, Medicare—HospitalInsurance)

Dated: July 21, 2000.Nancy Ann Min DeParle,Administrator, Health Care FinancingAdministration.

Dated: July 24, 2000.Donna E. Shalala,Secretary.

Note: The following appendices will notappear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

APPENDIX A—URBAN COUNTIES AS OFJANUARY 1, 2000 WITH CENSUSTRACTS THAT MAY QUALIFY ASRURAL UNDER GOLDSMITH MODI-FICATION

[Based on 1990 Census Data]

County State

BALDWIN .................. ALABAMA.MOBILE ..................... ALABAMA.TUSCALOOSA .......... ALABAMA.ANCHORAGE ........... ALASKA.COCONINO .............. ARIZONA.MARICOPA ............... ARIZONA.MOHAVE ................... ARIZONA.PIMA ......................... ARIZONA.PINAL ........................ ARIZONA.YUMA ........................ ARIZONA.BUTTE ...................... CALIFORNIA.EL DORADO ............. CALIFORNIA.FRESNO ................... CALIFORNIA.KERN ........................ CALIFORNIA.LOS ANGELES ......... CALIFORNIA.MADERA ................... CALIFORNIA.MERCED ................... CALIFORNIA.MONTEREY .............. CALIFORNIA.PLACER .................... CALIFORNIA.RIVERSIDE ............... CALIFORNIA.SAN BERNARDINO .. CALIFORNIA.SAN DIEGO .............. CALIFORNIA.SAN JOAQUIN .......... CALIFORNIA.SAN LUIS OBISPO ... CALIFORNIA.SANTA BARBARA .... CALIFORNIA.SANTA CLARA ......... CALIFORNIA.SHASTA .................... CALIFORNIA.SONOMA .................. CALIFORNIA.STANISLAUS ............ CALIFORNIA.TULARE .................... CALIFORNIA.VENTURA ................. CALIFORNIA.ADAMS ..................... COLORADO.EL PASO ................... COLORADO.LARIMER .................. COLORADO.MESA ........................ COLORADO.PUEBLO .................... COLORADO.WELD ........................ COLORADO.COLLIER ................... FLORIDA.DADE ........................ FLORIDA.MARION .................... FLORIDA.OSCEOLA ................. FLORIDA.PALM BEACH ........... FLORIDA.POLK ......................... FLORIDA.BUTLER .................... KANSAS.RAPIDES .................. LOUISIANA.TERREBONNE ......... LOUISIANA.PENOBSCOT ............ MAINE.WORCESTER ........... MASSACHUSETTS.POLK ......................... MINNESOTA.ST. LOUIS ................. MINNESOTA.STEARNS ................. MINNESOTA.CASCADE ................. MONTANA.MISSOULA ................ MONTANA.YELLOWSTONE ....... MONTANA.CLARK ...................... NEVADA.NYE ........................... NEVADA.WASHOE .................. NEVADA.DONA ANA ............... NEW MEXICO.SANDOVAL ............... NEW MEXICO.SANTA FE ................ NEW MEXICO.HERKIMER ............... NEW YORK.BURLEIGH ................ NORTH DAKOTA.CASS ........................ NORTH DAKOTA.GRAND FORKS ........ NORTH DAKOTA.MORTON .................. NORTH DAKOTA.OSAGE ..................... OKLAHOMA.



APPENDIX A—URBAN COUNTIES AS OFJANUARY 1, 2000 WITH CENSUSTRACTS THAT MAY QUALIFY ASRURAL UNDER GOLDSMITH MODI-FICATION—Continued


County State

CLACKAMAS ............ OREGON.JACKSON ................. OREGON.LANE ......................... OREGON.LYCOMING ............... PENNSYLVANIA.PENNINGTON .......... SOUTH DAKOTA.BEXAR ...................... TEXAS.BRAZORIA ................ TEXAS.HARRIS ..................... TEXAS.HIDALGO .................. TEXAS.



County State

TOM GREEN ............ TEXAS.WEBB ........................ TEXAS.KANE ........................ UTAH.UTAH ........................ UTAH.BENTON ................... WASHINGTON.FRANKLIN ................ WASHINGTON.KING ......................... WASHINGTON.PIERCE ..................... WASHINGTON.SNOHOMISH ............ WASHINGTON.



County State

SPOKANE ................. WASHINGTON.WHATCOM ............... WASHINGTON.YAKIMA ..................... WASHINGTON.DOUGLAS ................. WISCONSIN.MARATHON .............. WISCONSIN.LARAMIE .................. WYOMING.NATRONA ................. WYOMING.

APPENDIX B.—HOSPITALS AS OF JANUARY 1, 2000 THAT MAY QUALIFY AS RURAL WITHIN A GOLDSMITH MODIFICATIONAREA


Hospital name County State

North Baldwin Hospital ................................................................................................................ BALDWIN .................... ALABAMA.South Baldwin Hospital ............................................................................................................... BALDWIN .................... ALABAMA.Thomas Hospital ......................................................................................................................... BALDWIN .................... ALABAMA.Flagstaff Medical Center ............................................................................................................. COCONINO ................. ARIZONA.Page Hospital .............................................................................................................................. COCONINO ................. ARIZONA.Wickenburg Regional Hospital .................................................................................................... MARICOPA .................. ARIZONA.Bullhead Community Hospital ..................................................................................................... MOHAVE ..................... ARIZONA.Havasu Samaritan Regional Hospital ......................................................................................... MOHAVE ..................... ARIZONA.Kingman Regional Medical Center ............................................................................................. MOHAVE ..................... ARIZONA.Mohave Valley Hospital and Medical Center .............................................................................. MOHAVE ..................... ARIZONA.Central Arizona Medical Center .................................................................................................. PINAL .......................... ARIZONA.Casa Grande Regional Medical Center ...................................................................................... PINAL .......................... ARIZONA.Biggs-Gridley Memorial Hospital ................................................................................................. BUTTE ......................... CALIFORNIA.Feather River Hospital ................................................................................................................ BUTTE ......................... CALIFORNIA.Barton Memorial Hospital ............................................................................................................ EL DORADO ............... CALIFORNIA.Coalinga Regional Medical Center ............................................................................................. FRESNO ...................... CALIFORNIA.Kingsburg Medical Center ........................................................................................................... FRESNO ...................... CALIFORNIA.Sanger General Hospital ............................................................................................................. FRESNO ...................... CALIFORNIA.Selma District Hospital ................................................................................................................ FRESNO ...................... CALIFORNIA.Sierra Kings Health Care District ................................................................................................ FRESNO ...................... CALIFORNIA.Delano Regional Medical Center ................................................................................................ KERN ........................... CALIFORNIA.Kern Valley Hospital .................................................................................................................... KERN ........................... CALIFORNIA.Ridgecrest Community Hospital .................................................................................................. KERN ........................... CALIFORNIA.Tehachapi Valley Hospital ........................................................................................................... KERN ........................... CALIFORNIA.Westside District Hospital ........................................................................................................... KERN ........................... CALIFORNIA.Avalon Municipal Hospital and Clinic .......................................................................................... LOS ANGELES ........... CALIFORNIA.Chowchilla District Memorial Hospital ......................................................................................... MADERA ..................... CALIFORNIA.Madera Community Hospital ....................................................................................................... MADERA ..................... CALIFORNIA.Bloss Memorial Hospital .............................................................................................................. MERCED ..................... CALIFORNIA.Dos Palos Memorial Hospital ...................................................................................................... MERCED ..................... CALIFORNIA.Los Banos Community Hospital .................................................................................................. MERCED ..................... CALIFORNIA.Sutter Auburn Faith Hospital ....................................................................................................... PLACER ...................... CALIFORNIA.Palo Verde Hospital .................................................................................................................... RIVERSIDE ................. CALIFORNIA.San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital ................................................................................................ RIVERSIDE ................. CALIFORNIA.Santa Ynez Valley Cottage Hospital ........................................................................................... SANTA BARBARA ...... CALIFORNIA.Barstow Community Hospital ...................................................................................................... SAN BERNARDINO .... CALIFORNIA.Needles Desert Community Hospital .......................................................................................... SAN BERNARDINO .... CALIFORNIA.Hi-Desert Medical Center ............................................................................................................ SAN BERNARDINO .... CALIFORNIA.Doctors Hospital of Manteca ....................................................................................................... SAN JOAQUIN ............ CALIFORNIA.‘‘St Dominic’s Hospital’’ ............................................................................................................... SAN JOAQUIN ............ CALIFORNIA.Tracy Community Memorial Hospital .......................................................................................... SAN JOAQUIN ............ CALIFORNIA.Twin Cities Community Hospital ................................................................................................. SAN LUIS OBISPO ..... CALIFORNIA.South Valley Hospital .................................................................................................................. SANTA CLARA ............ CALIFORNIA.Petaluma Valley Hospital ............................................................................................................ SONOMA ..................... CALIFORNIA.Sonoma Valley Health Care District ........................................................................................... SONOMA ..................... CALIFORNIA.Del Puerto Hospital ..................................................................................................................... STANISLAUS .............. CALIFORNIA.Emanuel Medical Center ............................................................................................................. STANISLAUS .............. CALIFORNIA.Oak Valley District Hospital ......................................................................................................... STANISLAUS .............. CALIFORNIA.Alta District Hospital .................................................................................................................... TULARE ....................... CALIFORNIA.



APPENDIX B.—HOSPITALS AS OF JANUARY 1, 2000 THAT MAY QUALIFY AS RURAL WITHIN A GOLDSMITH MODIFICATIONAREA—Continued


Hospital name County State

Sierra View District Hospital ........................................................................................................ TULARE ....................... CALIFORNIA.Tulare District Hospital ................................................................................................................ TULARE ....................... CALIFORNIA.Lindsay District Hospital .............................................................................................................. TULARE ....................... CALIFORNIA.Exeter Memorial Hospital ............................................................................................................ TULARE ....................... CALIFORNIA.Estes Park Medical Center ......................................................................................................... LARIMER ..................... COLORADO.McKee Medical Center ................................................................................................................ LARIMER ..................... COLORADO.Glades General Hospital ............................................................................................................. PALM BEACH ............. FLORIDA.Bartow Memorial Hospital ........................................................................................................... POLK ........................... FLORIDA.Heart of Florida Hospital ............................................................................................................. POLK ........................... FLORIDA.Polk General Hospital ................................................................................................................. POLK ........................... FLORIDA.Lake Wales Medical Center ........................................................................................................ POLK ........................... FLORIDA.Susan B. Allen Memorial Hospital .............................................................................................. BUTLER ....................... KANSAS.Millinocket Regional Hospital ...................................................................................................... PENOBSCOT .............. MAINE.Penobscot Valley Hospital .......................................................................................................... PENOBSCOT .............. MAINE.Harrington Memorial Hospital ...................................................................................................... WORCESTER ............. MASSACHUSETTS.Heywood Hospital ....................................................................................................................... WORCESTER ............. MASSACHUSETTS.Athol Memorial Hospital .............................................................................................................. WORCESTER ............. MASSACHUSETTS.Clinton Hospital ........................................................................................................................... WORCESTER ............. MASSACHUSETTS.First Care Medical Services ........................................................................................................ POLK ........................... MINNESOTA.Riverview Healthcare Association ............................................................................................... POLK ........................... MINNESOTA.Ely-Bloomenson Community Hospital ......................................................................................... ST. LOUIS ................... MINNESOTA.Eveleth Health Services Park ..................................................................................................... ST. LOUIS ................... MINNESOTA.Cook Hospital & Convalescent Center ....................................................................................... ST. LOUIS ................... MINNESOTA.University Medical Center—Mesabi ............................................................................................ ST. LOUIS ................... MINNESOTA.Virginia Regional Medical Center ................................................................................................ ST. LOUIS ................... MINNESOTA.White Community Hospital .......................................................................................................... ST. LOUIS ................... MINNESOTA.Albany Area Hospital & Medical Center ..................................................................................... STEARNS .................... MINNESOTA.‘‘St Michael’s Hospital’’ ................................................................................................................ STEARNS .................... MINNESOTA.Melrose Hospital & Pine Villa ...................................................................................................... STEARNS .................... MINNESOTA.Paynesville Area Health Care ..................................................................................................... STEARNS .................... MINNESOTA.Nye Regional Medical Center ..................................................................................................... NYE ............................. NEVADA.Lake Tahoe Medical Center ........................................................................................................ WASHOE ..................... NEVADA.Little Falls Hospital ...................................................................................................................... HERKIMER .................. NEW YORK.Northwood Deaconess Healthcare ............................................................................................. GRAND FORKS .......... NORTH DAKOTA.Fairfax Memorial Hospital ........................................................................................................... OSAGE ........................ OKLAHOMA.Pawhuska Hospital ...................................................................................................................... OSAGE ........................ OKLAHOMA.Ashland Community Hospital ...................................................................................................... JACKSON .................... OREGON.Cottage Grove Hospital ............................................................................................................... LANE ........................... OREGON.Peace Harbor Hospital ................................................................................................................ LANE ........................... OREGON.Jersey Shore Hospital ................................................................................................................. LYCOMING .................. PENNSYLVANIA.Muncy Valley Hospital ................................................................................................................. LYCOMING .................. PENNSYLVANIA.Angleton-Danbury General Hospital ........................................................................................... BRAZORIA .................. TEXAS.Brazosport Memorial Hospital ..................................................................................................... BRAZORIA .................. TEXAS.Sweeny Community Hospital ...................................................................................................... BRAZORIA .................. TEXAS.Kane County Hospital ................................................................................................................. KANE ........................... UTAH.Prosser Memorial Hospital .......................................................................................................... BENTON ...................... WASHINGTON.Providence Toppenish Hospital .................................................................................................. YAKIMA ....................... WASHINGTON.Sunnyside Community Hospital .................................................................................................. YAKIMA ....................... WASHINGTON.

[FR Doc. 00–19107 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]



Health Care Financing Administration

42 CFR Parts 410, 412, 413, and 485

[HCFA–1118–F]

RIN 0938–AK09

Medicare Program; Changes to theHospital Inpatient ProspectivePayment Systems and Fiscal Year 2001Rates

AGENCY: Health Care FinancingAdministration (HCFA), HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are revising the Medicarehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem for operating costs to: implementapplicable statutory requirements,including a number of provisions of theMedicare, Medicaid, and StateChildren’s Health Insurance ProgramBalanced Budget Refinement Act of1999 (Pub. L. 106–113); and implementchanges arising from our continuingexperience with the system. In addition,in the Addendum to this final rule, wedescribe changes to the amounts andfactors used to determine the rates forMedicare hospital inpatient services for



operating costs and capital-related costs.These changes apply to dischargesoccurring on or after October 1, 2000.We also set forth rate-of-increase limitsand make changes to our policy forhospitals and hospital units excludedfrom the prospective payment systems.

We are making changes to the policiesgoverning payments to hospitals for thedirect costs of graduate medicaleducation, sole community hospitalsand critical access hospitals.

We are adding a new condition ofparticipation on organ, tissue, and eyeprocurement for critical access hospitalsthat parallels the condition ofparticipation that we previouslypublished for all other Medicare-participating hospitals.

Lastly, we are finalizing a January 20,2000 interim final rule with commentperiod (65 FR 3136) that sets forth thecriteria to be used in calculating theMedicare disproportionate shareadjustment in reference to Medicaidexpansion waiver patient days undersection 1115 of the Social Security Act.DATES: The provisions of this final ruleare effective October 1, 2000. This ruleis a major rule as defined in 5 U.S.C.804(2). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.801(a)(1)(A), we are submitting a reportto Congress on this rule on August 1,2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Steve Phillips, (410) 786–4531,Operating ProspectivePayment, DiagnosticRelated Groups, WageIndex, Reclassifications, and Sole

Community Hospital IssuesTzvi Hefter, (410) 786–4487,Capital ProspectivePayment, ExcludedHospitals, GraduateMedical Education andCritical Access HospitalIssuesSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Copies and ElectronicAccess

Copies: To order copies of the FederalRegister containing this document, sendyour request to: New Orders,Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954.Specify the date of the issue requestedand enclose a check or money orderpayable to the Superintendent ofDocuments, or enclose your Visa orMaster Card number and expirationdate. Credit card orders can also beplaced by calling the order desk at (202)512–1800 or by faxing to (202) 512–2250. The cost for each copy is $8.00.As an alternative, you can view andphotocopy the Federal Register

document at most libraries designatedas Federal Depository Libraries and atmany other public and academiclibraries throughout the country thatreceive the Federal Register.

This Federal Register document isalso available from the Federal Registeronline database through GPO Access, aservice of the U.S. Government PrintingOffice. Free public access is available ona Wide Area Information Server (WAIS)through the Internet and viaasynchronous dial-in. Internet users canaccess the database by using the WorldWide Web; the Superintendent ofDocuments home page address is http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara docs/, byusing local WAIS client software, or bytelnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, thenlogin as guest (no password required).Dial-in users should usecommunications software and modemto call (202) 512–1661; type swais, thenlogin as guest (no password required).

I. Background

A. Summary

Section 1886(d) of the Social SecurityAct (the Act) sets forth a system ofpayment for the operating costs of acutecare hospital inpatient stays underMedicare Part A (Hospital Insurance)based on prospectively set rates. Section1886(g) of the Act requires the Secretaryto pay for the capital-related costs ofhospital inpatient stays under aprospective payment system. Underthese prospective payment systems,Medicare payment for hospital inpatientoperating and capital-related costs ismade at predetermined, specific ratesfor each hospital discharge. Dischargesare classified according to a list ofdiagnosis-related groups (DRGs).

Certain specialty hospitals areexcluded from the prospective paymentsystems. Under section 1886(d)(1)(B) ofthe Act, the following hospitals andhospital units are excluded from theprospective payment systems:psychiatric hospitals and units,rehabilitation hospitals and units,children’s hospitals, long-term carehospitals, and cancer hospitals. Forthese hospitals and units, Medicarepayment for operating costs is based onreasonable costs subject to a hospital-specific annual limit.

Under sections 1820 and 1834(g) ofthe Act, payments are made to criticalaccess hospitals (CAHs) (that is, ruralnonprofit hospitals or facilities thatmeet certain statutory requirements) forinpatient and outpatient services on areasonable cost basis. Reasonable cost isdetermined under the provisions ofsection 1861(v)(i)(A) of the Act and

existing regulations under 42 CFR Parts413 and 415.

Under section 1886(a)(4) of the Act,costs of approved educational activitiesprograms are excluded from theoperating costs of inpatient hospitalservices. Hospitals with approvedgraduate medical education (GME)programs are paid for the direct costs ofGME in accordance with section 1886(h)of the Act; the amount of payment fordirect GME costs for a cost reportingperiod is based on the hospital’s numberof residents in that period and thehospital’s costs per resident in a baseyear.

The regulations governing thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem are located in 42 CFR Part 412.The regulations governing excludedhospitals and hospital units are locatedin 42 CFR Parts 412 and 413, and theGME regulations are located in 42 CFRPart 413.

On November 29, 1999, the Medicare,Medicaid, and State Children’s HealthInsurance Program (SCHIP) BalancedBudget Refinement Act of 1999, PublicLaw 106–113, was enacted. Public Law106–113 made a number of changes tothe Act affecting prospective paymentsto hospitals for inpatient services andpayments to excluded hospitals. Thisfinal rule implements amendmentsenacted by Public Law 106–113 relatingto FY 2001 payments for GME costs,disproportionate share hospitals (DSHs),sole community hospitals (SCHs), andCAHs. These changes are addressed insections IV and VI of this preamble.

Other related provisions of PublicLaw 106–113 that pertain to Medicarehospital inpatient payments with aneffective date prior to October 1, 2000,are addressed in an interim final rulewith comment period that is publishedelsewhere in this issue of the FederalRegister.

Public Law 106–113 also amendedsection 1886(j) of the Act, which wasadded by section 4421 of the BalancedBudget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33). Section 1886(j) of the Act providesfor a fully implemented prospectivepayment system for inpatientrehabilitation hospitals andrehabilitation units, effective for costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2002, with paymentprovisions during a transitional periodof October 1, 2000 to October 1, 2002based on target amounts specified insection 1886(b) of the Act. We areissuing a separate notice of proposedrulemaking to implement theprospective payment system forinpatient rehabilitation hospitals andunits.



B. Summary of the Provisions of theMay 5, 2000 Proposed Rule

On May 5, 2000, we published aproposed rule in the Federal Register(65 FR 26282) that set forth proposedchanges to the Medicare hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemfor operating costs for FY 2001. In theproposed rule, we made no policychanges relating to payments for capital-related costs under the hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemin FY 2001. However, we did proposechanges to the amounts and factors usedin determining the rates for capital-related costs for FY 2001. The proposedrule also included changes relating topayments for GME costs and paymentsto excluded hospitals and units, SCHs,and CAHs.

The following is a summary of themajor changes we proposed and theissues we addressed in the May 5, 2000proposed rule:

• We proposed changes to the FY2001 DRG classifications and relativeweights, as required by section1886(d)(4)(C) of the Act.

• We proposed an update to the FY2001 hospital wage index, using FY1997 wage data. We also proposed toimplement the second year phaseout ofPart A physician teaching-related costs,Part A certified registered nurseanesthetist (CRNA) costs and residentcosts from the FY 2001 wage indexcalculation.

• We discussed the impact of ourpolicy on post acute care transfers andset forth certain proposed changesconcerning sole community hospitals(SCHs), rural referral centers (RRCs), theindirect medical education adjustment,the DSH adjustment and collection ofdata on uncompensated costs forservices furnished in hospitals, theMedicare Geographic ClassificationReview Board (MGCRB) classifications,and payment for the direct costs ofGME.

• We discussed FY 2001 as the lastyear of a 10-year transition establishedto phase-in the prospective paymentsystem for capital-related costs forinpatient hospital services.

• We discussed a number ofproposals concerning excluded hospitaland hospital units and CAHs. Theproposed changes addressed limits onand adjustments to the proposed targetamounts for FY 2001; development of aprospective payment system forinpatient rehabilitation hospitals andunits; continuous improvement bonuspayments; clarification that the 5-percent threshold used in calculating anexcluded hospital’s cost per discharge isbased only on Medicare inpatients

discharged from the hospital-within-a-hospital; an all-inclusive payment rateoption for CAHs; and adding a newcondition of participation for CAHsrelating to organ, tissue, and eyeprocurement.

• In the Addendum to the proposedrule, we set forth proposed changes tothe amounts and factors for determiningthe FY 2001 prospective payment ratesfor operating costs and capital-relatedcosts. We also addressed update factorsfor determining the rate-of-increaselimits for cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 2001 for hospitals andhospital units excluded from theprospective payment system.

• In Appendix A of the proposedrule, we set forth an analysis of theimpact of the proposed changes onaffected entities.

• In Appendix B of the proposed rule,we set forth the technical appendix onthe proposed FY 2001 capital costmodel.

• In Appendix C of the proposed rule,as required by section 1886(e)(3) (B) ofthe Act, we set forth our report toCongress on our initial estimate of arecommended update factor for FY 2001for payments to hospitals included inthe prospective payment systems, andhospitals excluded from the prospectivepayment systems.

• In Appendix D of the proposed rule,as required by sections 1886(e)(4) and(e)(5) of the Act, we included ourrecommendation of the appropriatepercentage change for FY 2001 for:—Large urban area and other area

average standardized amounts (andhospital-specific rates applicable tosole community and Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals) forhospital inpatient services paid forunder the prospective paymentsystem for operating costs; and

—Target rate-of-increase limits to theallowable operating costs of hospitalinpatient services furnished byhospitals and hospital units excludedfrom the prospective payment system.• In the proposed rule, we discussed

recommendations by the MedicarePayment Advisory Commission(MedPAC) concerning hospital inpatientpayment policies and presented ourresponses to those recommendations.Under section 1805(b) of the Act,MedPAC is required to submit a reportto Congress that reviews and makesrecommendations on Medicare paymentpolicies no later than March 1 of eachyear. This year, MedPAC released asubsequent report in June containingadditional recommendations. Werespond to those recommendations insection IV.E. of this preamble.

C. Public Comments Received inResponse to the Proposed Rule

We received a total of 290 timelyitems of correspondence containingmultiple comments on the proposedrule. Major issues addressed bycommenters included the creation of anew DRG for pancreas and kidneytransplants, the adequacy of the DRG forheart assist devices, various aspects ofthe wage index calculation, rebasing ofthe SCH payment rates, andreclassification of hospitals.

Summaries of the public commentsreceived and our responses to thosecomments are set forth below under theappropriate section heading.

D. Final Rule for the January 20, 2000Interim Final Rule

On January 20, 2000, we published inthe Federal Register an interim finalrule with comment period (65 F 3136)to implement a change in the MedicareDSH adjustment calculation policy inreference to section 1115 expansionwaiver days. The interim final rule setforth the criteria to use in calculatingthe Medicare DSH adjustment forhospitals for purposes of payment underthe prospective payment system. Thisfinal rule finalizes the policy in thisinterim final rule with comment period.We discuss this policy in detail inSection IV.E.2. of this preamble.

II. Changes to DRG Classifications andRelative Weights

A. BackgroundUnder the prospective payment

system, we pay for inpatient hospitalservices on a rate per discharge basisthat varies according to the DRG towhich a beneficiary’s stay is assigned.The formula used to calculate paymentfor a specific case takes an individualhospital’s payment rate per case andmultiplies it by the weight of the DRGto which the case is assigned. Each DRGweight represents the average resourcesrequired to care for cases in thatparticular DRG relative to the averageresources used to treat cases in allDRGs.

Congress recognized that it would benecessary to recalculate the DRGrelative weights periodically to accountfor changes in resource consumption.Accordingly, section 1886(d)(4)(C) ofthe Act requires that the Secretaryadjust the DRG classifications andrelative weights at least annually. Theseadjustments are made to reflect changesin treatment patterns, technology, andany other factors that may change therelative use of hospital resources.Changes to the DRG classificationsystem and the recalibration of the DRG



weights for discharges occurring on orafter October 1, 2000, are discussedbelow.

B. DRG Reclassification

1. General

Cases are classified into DRGs forpayment under the prospective paymentsystem based on the principal diagnosis,up to eight additional diagnoses, and upto six procedures performed during thestay, as well as age, sex, and dischargestatus of the patient. The diagnosis andprocedure information is reported bythe hospital using codes from theInternational Classification of Diseases,Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification(ICD–9–CM). Medicare fiscalintermediaries enter the informationinto their claims processing systems andsubject it to a series of automatedscreens called the Medicare Code Editor(MCE). These screens are designed toidentify cases that require furtherreview before classification into a DRG.

After screening through the MCE andany further development of the claims,cases are classified into the appropriateDRG by the Medicare GROUPERsoftware program. The GROUPERprogram was developed as a means ofclassifying each case into a DRG on thebasis of the diagnosis and procedurecodes and demographic information(that is, sex, age, and discharge status).It is used both to classify past cases inorder to measure relative hospitalresource consumption to establish theDRG weights and to classify currentcases for purposes of determiningpayment. The records for all Medicarehospital inpatient discharges aremaintained in the Medicare ProviderAnalysis and Review (MedPAR) file.The data in this file are used to evaluatepossible DRG classification changes andto recalibrate the DRG weights.

In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41500), we discussed a process forconsidering non-MedPAR data in therecalibration process. In order for theuse of particular data to be feasible, wemust have sufficient time to evaluateand test the data. The time necessary todo so depends upon the nature andquality of the data submitted. Generally,however, a significant sample of thedata should be submitted by August 1,approximately 8 months prior to thepublication of the proposed rule, so thatwe can test the data and make apreliminary assessment as to thefeasibility of using the data.Subsequently, a complete databaseshould be submitted no later thanDecember 1 for consideration inconjunction with the next year’sproposed rule, and as appropriate, in

the recalibration in the final rulefollowing the proposed rule.

Currently, cases are assigned to one of501 DRGs (including one DRG for adiagnosis that is invalid as a dischargediagnosis and one DRG for ungroupablediagnoses) in 25 major diagnosticcategories (MDCs). Most MDCs arebased on a particular organ system ofthe body (for example, MDC 6 (Diseasesand Disorders of the Digestive System));however, some MDCs are notconstructed on this basis since theyinvolve multiple organ systems (forexample, MDC 22 (Burns)).

In general, cases are assigned to anMDC based on the principal diagnosis,before assignment to a DRG. However,there are presently five DRGs to whichcases are directly assigned on the basisof procedure codes. These are the DRGsfor liver, bone marrow, and lungtransplants (DRGs 480, 481, and 495,respectively) and the two DRGs fortracheostomies (DRGs 482 and 483).Cases are assigned to these DRGs beforeclassification to an MDC.

Within most MDCs, cases are thendivided into surgical DRGs (based on asurgical hierarchy that orders individualprocedures or groups of procedures byresource intensity) and medical DRGs.Medical DRGs generally aredifferentiated on the basis of diagnosisand age. Some surgical and medicalDRGs are further differentiated based onthe presence or absence ofcomplications or comorbidities (CC).

Generally, the GROUPER does notconsider other procedures; that is,nonsurgical procedures or minorsurgical procedures generally notperformed in an operating room are notlisted as operating room (OR)procedures in the GROUPER decisiontables. However, there are a few non-ORprocedures that do affect DRGassignment for certain principaldiagnoses, such as extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for patients with aprincipal diagnosis of urinary stones.

We proposed several changes to theDRG classification system for FY 2001and discussed other issues concerningDRGs. The proposed changes, the publiccomments we received concerningthem, and the final DRG changes are setforth below. Unless otherwise noted, thechanges we are implementing will beeffective in the revised GROUPERsoftware (Version 18.0) to beimplemented for discharges on or afterOctober 1, 2000. (Also unless otherwisespecified, our DRG analysis is based onthe full (100 percent) FY 1999 MedPARfile (bills received through December 31,1999 for discharges in FY 1999).

2. MDC 5 (Diseases and Disorders of theCirculatory System)

In the August 29, 1997 final rule withcomment period (62 FR 45974), wenoted that, because of the many recentchanges in heart surgery, we wereconsidering conducting acomprehensive review of the MDC 5surgical DRGs. In the July 31, 1998 finalrule with comment period (63 FR40956), we did adopt some changes tothe MDC 5 surgical DRGs. Since thattime, we have received inquiries on acontinuing basis regarding these DRGs.We have continued to review Medicareclaims data and, based on our analysis,we proposed several DRG changes inMDC 5 in the May 5, 2000 proposedrule.

a. Heart Transplant (DRG 103). Aspreviously stated, cases are generallyassigned to an MDC based on principaldiagnosis and subsequently assigned tosurgical or medical DRGs included inthat MDC. However, cases involvingliver, bone marrow, and lungtransplants (DRGs 480, 481, and 495,respectively) and the two DRGs fortracheostomies (DRGs 482 and 483) aredirectly assigned on the basis ofprocedure codes. Cases assigned tothese DRGs before classification to anMDC are referred to as pre-MDC.However, cases involving hearttransplants are currently assigned firstto MDC 5 and then to DRG 103.

Currently, when a bone marrowtransplant and a heart transplant areperformed during the same admission,the case is assigned to DRG 481 (BoneMarrow Transplant). Because bonemarrow transplant cases are firstclassified to pre-MDC, while hearttransplants are first assigned to MDC 5,the bone marrow transplant assumesprecedence in the assignment of thecase to a DRG. However, payment forDRG 481 is substantially less than DRG103. For FY 2000, the relative weight forDRG 103 is 19.5100, while the relativeweight for DRG 481 is 8.7285.

To ensure appropriate DRGassignment of these cases, we proposedthat the heart transplant DRG, whichencompasses combined heart-lungtransplantation (ICD–9–CM procedurecode 33.6) and heart transplantation(ICD–9–CM procedure code 37.5) beassigned to pre-MDC. In this way, casesinvolving a bone marrow transplant anda heart transplant would be assigned toDRG 103 (DRG 103 would be reorderedhigher in the pre-MDC surgicalhierarchy, as discussed in section II.B.5.of this preamble).

We received two comments insupport of this proposed change and areadopting it as final.



1 A single title combined with two DRG numbersis used to signify pairs. Generally, the first DRG isfor cases with CC and the second DRG is for caseswithout CC. If a third number is included, itrepresents cases with patients who are age 0–17.Occasionally, a pair of DRGs is split between age≥17 and age 0–17.

b. Heart Assist Devices. We continueto review data in MDC 5 (Diseases andDisorders of the Circulatory System) todetermine if cases are being assigned tothe most appropriate DRG based onclinical coherence and similar resourceconsumption. At the December 1, 1994ICD–9–CM Coordination andMaintenance Committee meeting, werecommended that new codes be createdto capture single and bi-ventricularheart assist systems.

These codes, 37.65 (Implant of anexternal, pulsatile heart assist system)and 37.66 (Implant of an implantable,pulsatile heart assist system), wereadopted for use for discharges occurringon or after October 1, 1995. However,code 37.66 was deemed investigationaland was not considered a coveredprocedure. Effective May 5, 1997, werevised Medicare coverage of heartassist devices to allow coverage of aventricular assist device (code 37.66)used for support of blood circulationpostcardiotomy if certain conditionswere met.

Due to some residualmisunderstanding regarding thiscoverage policy, we emphasize that thisdevice was and will continue to belisted as a noncovered procedure in theMedicare Code Editor (MCE), the front-end software product in the GROUPERprogram that detects and reports errorsin the coding of claims data. The reasonthat this device is listed in the MCE, inspite of the fact that its implantation iscovered, is because of the stringentconditions that must be met by hospitalsin order to receive payment.

In the August 29, 1997 final rule (62FR 45973), we moved procedure code37.66 from DRGs 110 and 111 1 (MajorCardiovascular Procedures with andwithout CCs, respectively) to DRG 108(Other Cardiothoracic Procedures). Asstated in the July 31, 1998 final rule (63FR 40956), we moved procedure code37.66 to DRGs 104 and 105 (CardiacValve and Other Major CardiothoracicProcedures with and without CCs,respectively) for FY 1999.

In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41498), we responded to a commentsuggesting that heart assist devices beassigned to DRG 103. For the proposedrule we reviewed the 100 percent FY1999 MedPAR file containing billsthrough December 31, 1999, and foundthat there were a total of 47 implantableheart assist system procedures

performed on Medicare beneficiaries. Ofthese cases, 13 (approximately 28percent) were assigned to DRG 103(Heart Transplant) and four(approximately 9 percent) were assignedto DRG 483 (Tracheostomy Except forFace, Mouth and Neck Diagnoses), and,therefore, were paid at significantlyhigher rates than the remaining 30cases. All of the procedure code 37.66cases have extremely high charges,which is consistent with past analysis,and all of these cases are subject topayment as cost outliers.

Our data analysis indicated that themost cases in any one hospital was 5,while 17 hospitals performed only oneheart assist system implant each. Wereiterate that only heart transplant casescan be properly assigned to thetransplant DRG (August 29, 1997 finalrule (62 FR 45974)). Since heart assistdevices are used across DRGs, many notinvolving a transplant, we did notpropose to assign procedure code 37.66to DRG 103.

In addition to the review of 37.66, wealso looked at procedure codes 37.62(Implant of other heart assist system),37.63 (Replacement and repair of heartassist system), and 37.65 (Implant of anexternal, pulsatile heart assist system).These cases are currently assigned toDRGs 110 and 111 (MajorCardiovascular Procedures). We believethat these procedures are similar bothclinically and in terms of resourceutilization to procedure code 37.66,which is already assigned to DRGs 104and 105. Therefore, we proposed tomove codes 37.62, 37.63, and 37.65from DRGs 110 and 111 to DRGs 104and 105.

Comment: We received fourcomments on this proposal.

Two comments in favor of ourproposal were received from nationalassociations concerned with health caredelivery.

Two commenters requestedreevaluation of the DRG assignment ofmechanical heart assist devices,particularly procedure code 37.66, andsuggested that a new DRG be created toclassify this technology, or that thesecases be assigned to DRG 103 (HeartTransplant). The commenters pointedout that the heart assist implantationprocedure is typically performed in thesame medical centers by the samesurgical teams as the heart transplantprocedure.

With respect to our past decision notto assign cases with procedure code37.66 to DRG 103, one commenteracknowledged our analysis of 1996MedPAR data showing the costs of thesecases to be more similar to DRGs 104and 105 than DRG 103, but suggested

that we look at more recent data. Thecommenter also questioned ourrationale for not assigning these cases toDRG 103 on the basis that heart assistdevices are used across DRGs.

One commenter argued that, as all thecases with procedure code 37.66 werequalified as cost outliers, themisplacement of this procedure isevident. This commenter also noted thatuse of this procedure is likely toincrease in the future and suggested thatHCFA position itself ahead of the curveby increasing payment now inanticipation of this event. Thecommenter urged HCFA to examine theoption of combining code 37.66 withother clinically similar low-volumeprocedures, and creating a new DRGthat would more appropriately paythese cases. This recommended newDRG could conceivably include codes37.62, 37.63, and 37.65, as they aresimilar both clinically and in terms ofresource consumption.

Finally, one commenter expressedconcern that the uncovered status ofprocedure code 37.66 in the MCE maybe resulting in inappropriate paymentdenials. The commenter recommendedthat HCFA review the proceduresemployed by fiscal intermediaries tooverride the MCE edits.

Response: We are adopting ourproposed change to assign procedurecodes 37.62, 37.63, and 37.65 to DRGs104 and 105.

With respect to the commentsregarding procedure code 37.66, wehave continually considered the issue ofDRG assignment of heart assist devicessince this technology was assigned anICD–9–CM code in 1995, and became aMedicare covered procedure (if specificconditions were met) effective in 1997.As we noted in the proposed rule, theseare costly cases that are currently spreadacross several DRGs. Although theoutlier policy is intended to helphospitals offset unusually costly cases,we are concerned when a particularprocedure always qualifies as an outliercase.

However, we do not believe it wouldbe appropriate to redefine DRG 103 toinclude these cases at this time. Thepresently limited incidence of thesecases, with very few cases occurring atany particular hospital over the courseof a year, does not warrant disruptingthe clinical coherence of DRG 103. Thefact that these cases are spread across anumber of DRGs indicates they do notrepresent a clinically cohesive group ofpatients in terms of their associateddiagnoses or other procedures.

We will continue to monitor andevaluate these cases to determinewhether a better approach might be



2 Topol EJ and Serruys PW. ‘‘Frontiers inInterventional Cardiology.’’ Circulation.1998; 98:1802. and Frishman W et al. ‘‘Medical therapies forthe Prevention of Restenosis after PercutaneousCoronary Interventions.’’ Curr Probl Cardology.1998; 23: 555.

identified, including the possibility of anew DRG for procedure codes 37.62,37.63, 37.65, and 37.66. We note thatthe classification of patients into DRGsis a constantly evolving process. Asthere are changes in the coding system,data collection, medical technology, ormedical practice, all DRG definitionswill be reviewed and potentiallyrevised.

Concerning the concept of HCFApositioning itself ‘‘ahead of the curve’’by anticipating increased use of heartassist devices and raising paymentaccordingly, we are reluctant to attemptto predict future trends in medicalpractice, especially when suchpredictions would affect paymentsacross all DRGs as a result of DRGrecalibration. We appreciate theindustry’s continued interest in thissystem, and look forward to workingtogether to arrive at equitable paymentsfor this and other new technologies.

With respect to the commentconcerning fiscal intermediary overridesof MCE edits listing procedure code37.66 as noncovered, we will instructour fiscal intermediaries to be aware ofthis issue. We are concerned thatMedicare payment for this procedure belimited to those cases for whichcoverage is appropriate and thatpayment is not inappropriately denied.

c. Platelet Inhibitors. EffectiveOctober 1, 1998, procedure code 99.20(Injection or infusion of plateletinhibitor) was created. The use ofplatelet inhibitors have been shown tosignificantly decrease the rate of acutevessel closure, as well as the rate ofcardiac complications and death.2Platelet inhibitors are frequentlyadministered to patients undergoingpercutaneous transluminal coronaryangioplasty (PTCA). In addition,patients admitted with unstable anginamay also benefit from plateletinhibitors.2 This procedure code isdesignated as a non-OR procedure thatdoes not affect DRG assignment (plateletinhibitors are administered eitherthrough intravenous injection orinfusion).

For the past 2 years, a manufacturerof platelet inhibitors has submitted datato support its position that casesinvolving platelet inhibitor therapyreceiving angioplasty should bereclassified from DRG 112(Percutaneous CardiovascularProcedures) to DRG 116 (OtherPermanent Cardiac Pacemaker Implant

or PTCA with Coronary Artery StentImplant). Using the 100 percent FY 1999MedPAR file that contains dischargesthrough September 30, 1999, weperformed analysis for the proposedrule of the cases for which procedurecode 99.20 was reported. There were atotal of 37,222 cases spread across 123DRGs.

The majority of the platelet inhibitorcases, 28,022 (75 percent of all plateletinhibitor cases), are already assigned toDRG 116. The average standardizedcharges for these cases areapproximately $26,683, compared toapproximately $25,251 for DRG 116overall. In DRG 112, there were 4,310platelet inhibitor cases (12 percent of allplatelet inhibitor cases) assigned. Theaverage standardized charge for thesecases is approximately $22,786,compared to approximately $20,224 forDRG 112 overall. Although the plateletinhibitor therapy cases that areclassified to DRG 112 do have somewhathigher charges than the average caseassigned to this DRG (11 percent, or$2,563), we found several procedures inDRG 112 with average standardizedcharges higher than the plateletinhibitor cases. For example, there were1,560 cases in which a single vesselPTCA or coronary atherectomy withthrombolytic agent (procedure code36.02) was performed with an averagestandardized charge of approximately$25,181, and there were 4,951 cases inwhich a multiple vessel PTCA orcoronary atherectomy was performed,with or without a thrombolytic agent(procedure code 36.05) with an averagestandardized charge of approximately$23,608.

We also noted that there are severalprocedures assigned to DRG 112 thathave average standardized chargeslower than the average charges for allcases in the DRG. For example, averagecharges for cases with procedure code37.34 (Catheter ablation of lesion ortissues of heart) were $18,429.

There is always some variation incharges within a DRG. The difference invariations of charges in DRG 112 iswithin the normal range of chargevariations.

Clinical homogeneity within DRGshas always been a fundamentalprinciple considered when assigningcodes to appropriate DRGs. Currently,DRG 116 includes cases involving theinsertion of a pacemaker as well as theinsertion of coronary artery stents withPTCA. On the other hand, casesassigned to DRG 112 involve lessinvasive operating room and, in somecases, nonoperating room procedures.

The basis for DRG assignment hasgenerally been the diagnosis of the

patient or the procedures performed. Tothe extent the use of a particulartechnology becomes prevalent in thetreatment of a particular type of case,the DRG system is designed to accountfor any increases or decreases in coststhrough recalibration. Hospitalsfrequently benefit from this processwhile efficiency-enhancing technologyis being introduced. We believe that theupdate factors established in section1886(b)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, combinedwith the potential for continuingimprovements in hospital productivity,and annual recalibration of the DRGweights, are adequate to financeappropriate care of Medicare patients.

We also discussed in the proposedrule our analysis of cases where plateletinhibitor therapy is targeted on acutecoronary syndrome patients withoutcoronary intervention. These cases areassigned to DRG 124 (CirculatoryDisorders Except Acute MyocardialInfarction with Cardiac Catheterizationand Complex Diagnosis) or DRG 140(Angina Pectoris). The concern is thatboth types of cases, those performed inconjunction with coronary interventionand those without, be given an equalfocus in this evaluation.

Based on our analysis, we found 410platelet inhibitor cases (1 percent)assigned to DRG 124. This is a smallpercentage of cases in comparison to theoverall total of 134,759 cases assigned tothis DRG. The platelet inhibitor caseshad an average standardized charge ofapproximately $17,378 compared toapproximately $14,730 for DRG 124overall. As we have indicated, there isalways some variation in charges withina DRG and this difference is withinnormal variation.

There were 66 platelet inhibitor cases(0.2 percent) assigned to DRG 140. Theaverage standardized charge for thesecases is higher than the overall DRGcharge, approximately $8,992 and$5,657, respectively. However, itrepresents a small percentage of thetotal (76,913) cases assigned to DRG140.

In summary, currently 75 percent ofcases where code 99.20 is present areassigned to DRG 116. The next mostcommon DRG where these cases areassigned is DRG 112 (12 percent). Casesassigned to DRG 116 generally involveimplantation of a pacemaker or arterystent, while cases assigned to DRG 112involve percutaneous cardiovascularprocedures. Our analysis found a $3,897difference between cases involvingplatelet inhibitor therapy that wereassigned to DRG 116 and cases assignedto DRG 112, indicating a clinicaldistinction between the cases groupingto the two DRGs. Finally, among platelet



inhibitor therapy cases that are assignedto DRG 112, our analysis found that theaverage charges are well within thenormal variation around the overallaverage charges within the DRG. Basedon these findings, we believe it wouldbe inappropriate to assign all caseswhere procedure code 99.20 is presentto DRG 116. Therefore, we did notpropose to change our current policythat specifies that assignment of cases tothis code does not affect the DRGassignment.

Comment: We received two commentson this issue. One commenter from anational hospital association supportednot assigning code 99.20 to DRG 116.The other commenter argued that theanalysis on which our position wasbased is flawed. This commenterbelieved that perhaps as many as fivetimes the 37,222 cases we identifiedwith ICD–9–CM procedure code 99.20actually exist in the data but theprocedure was not coded. To remedythis, the commenter suggested twooptions HCFA could pursue. The firstoption would be to reexamine the datafile with the goal of excluding cases thatappear to be miscoded. The commentersuggested that HCFA might check totalpharmacy charges in MedPAR andexclude from the analysis cases withoutICD–9–CM procedure code 99.20 thathave pharmacy charges over a certainthreshold (for example, a threshold of$500). The second option would be touse outside data to capture pharmacyinformation which would provide morereliable information than coding withprocedure code 99.20.

The commenter recommended thatHCFA make a concerted effort, perhapsthrough the Medicare fiscalintermediaries, to instruct hospitals touse ICD–9–CM procedure code 99.20 onthe claim of any case that receives anyof the three platelet inhibitors.

Response: We appreciate the supportof the hospital association for ourposition on this issue.

In response to the comment that theMedPAR data underreport procedurecode 99.20 because the data do notaffect DRG assignment and payment, webelieve it is in hospitals’ best interest tosubmit accurate billing data that areutilized in the DRG reclassification andrecalibration of the DRG relative weightsprocess.

We disagree with therecommendation that we exclude fromour analysis any bill with over $500 inpharmacy charges that does not reportprocedure code 99.20. We question theanalytical validity of this approach,particularly given that many Medicarebeneficiaries have multiple chronicconditions requiring multiple

medications. It is simply not possible todetermine coding accuracy by reviewingcharge data submitted on bills. The onlyway to identify coding errors would beto review the actual medical records. Toexclude cases with pharmacy chargesexceeding a certain predeterminedthreshold would likely skew the resultsof any such analysis.

We remain open to considering andusing non-MedPAR data to make DRGchanges if the data are reliable andvalidated. In the July 31, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41499), we described thetimetable and process for interestedparties to submit non-MedPAR data.

With respect to the recommendationthat we make a concerted effort toensure that hospitals use procedurecode 99.20 appropriately, from theinception of this procedure code,effective October 1, 1998, HCFA hascollaborated with the AmericanHospital Association (AHA) to educatecoders on platelet inhibitor therapy. Anextensive article in AHA’s publication,Coding Clinic for ICD–9–CM, FourthQuarter 1998, identifies the plateletinhibitor drugs and includesinstructions on the appropriate codeassignment. Coding instructions forplatelet inhibitors are also available viathe 1998 regulatory updatesteleconference sponsored by AHA.

d. Extracorporeal MembraneOxygenation. Extracorporeal MembraneOxygenation (ECMO) is acardiopulmonary bypass technique thatoffers long-term cardiopulmonarysupport to patients who have reversiblecardiopulmonary insufficiency that hasnot responded to conventionalmanagement. It involves passing apatient’s blood through anextracorporeal membrane oxygenatorthat adds oxygen and removes carbondioxide. The oxygenated blood then ispassed through a heat exchanger towarm it to body temperature prior toreturning it to the patient. The processand equipment are similar to those usedin open heart surgery, but are continuedover prolonged periods of time. ECMOattempts to provide the patient withartificial cardiopulmonary functionwhile his or her own cardiopulmonaryfunctions are incapable of sustaininglife.

Since ECMO involves the use of adevice that sustains cardiopulmonaryfunction while the underlying conditionis being treated, it is important toidentify and treat underlying conditionsleading to cardiopulmonary failure ifthe patient is to return to normalcardiopulmonary function.

ECMO is assigned to procedure code39.65 (Extracorporeal membraneoxygenation (ECMO)). This code is not

recognized as an OR procedure withinthe DRG system and, therefore, does notaffect payment. To evaluate theappropriateness of payment under thecurrent DRG assignment, we havereviewed a 10-percent sample ofMedicare claims in the FY 1999MedPAR file and found only 4 cases inwhich ECMO was used. The charges forthese cases ranged from $16,006 to$198,014. Since medical literatureindicates that ECMO is predominatelyused on newborns and pediatric cases,this low number of claims is notsurprising. Only in recent years havesome hospitals started to use ECMO onadults. It is reserved for cases facingalmost certain mortality.

Because ECMO is a procedureclinically similar to a heart assistdevice, we proposed that procedurecode 39.65 be classified as an ORprocedure and be classified in DRGs 104and 105 along with the heart assistsystem procedures (as discussed insection II.B.2.b. of this preamble). Thosecases in which ECMO was provided, butfor which the principal diagnosis is notclassified to MDC 5, would then beassigned to DRG 468 (Extensive ORProcedure Unrelated to PrincipalDiagnosis). This would be appropriatesince it is possible that secondaryconditions or complications may ariseduring hospitalization that wouldrequire the use of ECMO. The relativelyhigh weight of DRG 468 would beappropriate for these cases.

Comment: We received two commentsin support of the proposal to classifyprocedure code 39.65 as an ORprocedure and then assign it to DRGs104 and 105. One of the commentersstated that most of the adult patientsreceiving ECMO will fall within MDC 5since ECMO is used for patients withsevere, but reversible, heart or lungdisorders that have not responded to theusual treatments of mechanicalventilation, medicines, and extraoxygen. The commenter further statedthat these severely ill patients maycontinue on ECMO for a period of daysor weeks until the heart or lungsrecover, or until the treatment is nolonger effective.

Response: We acknowledge thesupport of the commenters to classify39.65 as an OR procedure and thenassign it to DRGs 104 and 105 and areadopting our proposal as final.

3. MDC 15 (Newborns and OtherNeonates With Conditions Originatingin the Perinatal Period)

a. V05.8 (Vaccination for disease,NEC). DRG 390 (Neonate with OtherSignificant Problems) contains newbornor neonate cases with other significant



problems, not assigned to DRGs 385through 389, DRG 391, or DRG 469. Inorder to be classified into DRG 391(Normal Newborn), the neonate musthave a principal diagnosis as listedunder DRG 391 and either no secondarydiagnosis or a secondary diagnosis aslisted under DRG 391. Neonates with asecondary diagnosis of V05.8(Vaccination for disease, NEC) arecurrently classified to DRG 390.Although it would seem that healthynewborns who receive vaccinations andhave no other problems would beassigned to DRG 391, code V05.8 is notincluded as one of the secondarydiagnoses under DRG 391, and thereforethe case would not be classified as anormal newborn (DRG 391). Code V05.8is assigned to DRG 390 as a default,since it is not included under anothercomplicated neonate DRG or the normalnewborn DRG.

In the proposed rule, we discussedour review of the appropriateness ofincluding diagnosis code V05.8 on thelist of acceptable secondary diagnosesunder DRG 390 based on inquires thatwe had received. We pointed out that byincluding V05.8 on the acceptablesecondary diagnosis list for DRG 390,newborns who receive vaccinations areclassified as having significant healthproblems. The inquirers believed thisincorrectly labels an otherwise healthynewborn as having a significant medicalcondition. Providing a vaccination to anewborn is performed to prevent theinfant from contracting a disease.

We agreed with the inquirers that,absent any evidence of disease, anewborn should not be considered ashaving a significant problem simplybecause a preventative vaccination wasprovided. Therefore, we proposed thatV05.8 be removed from the list ofacceptable secondary diagnoses underDRG 390 and assigned as a secondarydiagnosis under DRG 391. In doing so,these cases would no longer beclassified to DRG 390.

Comment: We received two commentsin support of our proposal to removecode V05.8 from the list of acceptablesecondary diagnoses under DRG 390.These commenters agreed that aprophylactic vaccination should not beclassified as a significant problem.Newborns who receive theseprophylactic vaccinations should stillbe considered normal newborns. Wereceived no comments in opposition tothe proposal.

Response: We are adopting theproposal to include V05.8 on the list ofacceptable secondary diagnoses underDRG 391 Normal Newborn. Codes V05.3(Viral hepatitis vaccination) and V05.4(Varicella vaccination) are already listed

as acceptable secondary diagnosesunder DRG 391.

b. Diagnosis code 666.02 (Third-stagepostpartum hemorrhage, delivered withpostpartum complication). Diagnosiscode 666.02 is assigned to DRG 373(Vaginal Delivery without ComplicatingDiagnoses). This DRG was created foruncomplicated vaginal deliveries.However, code 666.22 (Delayed andsecondary postpartum hemorrhage,delivered with postpartumcomplication) is assigned to DRG 372(Vaginal Delivery with ComplicatingDiagnoses). This means that motherswho have a delayed and secondarypostpartum hemorrhage would beassigned to DRG 372, while motherswho have a third-stage postpartumhemorrhage would not be considered asa complicated delivery.

We believe a third-stage postpartumhemorrhage should be considered acomplicating diagnosis and, in order tocategorize these cases moreappropriately, we proposed to movediagnosis code 666.02 from DRG 373and assign it as a complicating diagnosisunder DRG 372.

Comment: We received two commentssupporting the proposal to classify666.02 as a complicating diagnosisunder DRG 372. The commenters agreedthat a third-stage postpartumhemorrhage should be classified as acomplicated delivery. There were nocomments submitted in opposition tothis change.

Response: We are adopting as finalour proposal to classify 666.02 as acomplication diagnosis under DRG 372.

c. Diagnosis Code 759.89 (Specifiedcongenital anomalies, NEC) (Alport’sSyndrome). Alport’s Syndrome (alsoreferred to as hereditary nephritis) is aninherited disorder involving damage tothe kidney, blood in the urine, and, insome cases, loss of hearing. It may alsoinclude loss of vision. Patients who arenot treated early enough or who do notrespond to treatment may progress torenal failure. A kidney transplant is onetreatment option for these cases. Aswith many of the congenital anomalies,there is no unique ICD–9–CM code forthis condition. Alport’s Syndrome,along with many other rare and diversecongenital anomalies, is assigned to therather nonspecific diagnosis code759.89 (Specific congenital anomalies,NEC). Examples include WilliamSyndrome, Brachio-Oto-RenalSyndrome, and Costello’s Syndrome.Each of these is a unique hereditarydisorder affecting a variety of bodysystems.

Patients can be diagnosed and treatedfor congenital anomalies throughouttheir lives; treatment is not restricted to

the neonatal period. In our GROUPER,however, each diagnosis code isassigned to just one MDC. In this case,diagnosis code 759.89 is assigned toMDC 15 (Newborns and Other Neonateswith Conditions Originating in thePerinatal Period) although the patientmay be an adult.

In the proposed rule, we referred to arequest from a physician concerningrenal transplants for patients withAlport’s Syndrome. The physicianpointed out that when a patient withAlport’s Syndrome is admitted for akidney transplant, the case is assignedto DRG 390 (Neonate with OtherSignificant Problems). In theseinstances, when the principal diagnosisis code 759.89, the case is classified toMDC 15 although the patient may nolonger be a newborn. The physicianbelieved that these cases should beassigned to DRG 302 (KidneyTransplant).

The inquirer suggested movingdiagnosis code 759.89 to MDC 11(Diseases and Disorders of the Kidneyand Urinary Tract) so that when akidney transplant is performed, it willbe assigned to DRG 302. Although thisseems quite appropriate for patientswith Alport’s Syndrome found indiagnosis code 759.89, it does not workwell for the wide variety of patients alsodescribed by this code. Many otherswould be inappropriately classified toMDC 11.

Alport’s Syndrome cases with code759.89 as a principal diagnosis whoreceive a kidney transplant are assignedto DRG 468 (Extensive OR ProcedureUnrelated to Principal Diagnosis). ThisDRG has a FY 2000 relative weight of3.6400. Also for FY 2000, DRG 302(Kidney Transplant) has a relativeweight of 3.5669. Therefore, thepayment amounts are in factcomparable.

We discussed several options forresolving this issue:

(1) If the case is assigned a principaldiagnosis code of renal failure withAlport’s Syndrome as a secondarydiagnosis, the case could be assigned toDRG 302. As this option wouldrepresent a change in the sequencing ofcongenital anomaly codes and relatedcomplications, it would have to beevaluated and subsequently approvedby the Editorial Advisory Board forCoding Clinic for ICD–9–CM. TheEditorial Advisory Board is comprisedof representatives from the physician,coding, and hospital industry. Finaldecisions on coding policy issues aremade by the representatives from theAHA, the American Health InformationManagement Association, the NationalCenter for Health Statistics, and HCFA.



(2) A unique ICD–9–CM diagnosiscode could be created for Alport’sSyndrome that could then be evaluatedfor possible assignment within MDC 11.This issue has been referred to theNational Center for Health Statistics forconsideration as a future codingmodification.

One difficulty with this option is thelarge number of congenital anomaliesand the limited number of unused codesin this section of ICD–9–CM. Each newcode must be carefully evaluated forappropriateness.

(3) A third option, which was alreadyaddressed, involves moving diagnosiscode 759.89 to MDC 11. The problemwith this approach is that many caseswould then be misassigned to MDC 11because the congenital anomaly wouldnot involve diseases of the kidney andurinary tract.

(4) A fourth option would be to leavethe coding and DRG assignment as theycurrently exist. Since few cases exist,the overall impact may be minimal.

To evaluate the impact of leaving theDRG assignment as it currently exists, inthe proposed rule we examined datafrom a 10-percent sample of Medicarecases in the FY 1999 MedPAR file.There were 95 cases assigned to a widerange of DRGs with code 759.89 as asecondary diagnosis. There was onlyone case assigned to MDC 15 with aprincipal diagnosis of code 759.89.

In the proposed rule, werecommended that diagnosis code759.89 remain in MDC 15, since itencompasses such a wide variety ofconditions.

Comment: We received two commentsin support of modifying the codingadvice for this particular congenitalanomaly so that renal failure is reportedas the principal diagnosis and Alport’sSyndrome is reported as a secondarydiagnosis. One commenter pointed outthat a distinction exists between thosemanifestations that are integral to thecongenital anomaly (and thus, accordingto the official coding guidelines, wouldnot be coded at all) and those that arenot considered integral. This commenteralso supported the recommendation fora change in guidelines that would allowsequencing a manifestation that is notintegral to the congenital anomaly as theprincipal diagnosis. The othercommenter indicated that while renaldisease is usually present in Alport’sSyndrome, it does not always lead torenal failure. The commenter alsosupported the reporting of renal failureas the principal diagnosis, with Alport’sSyndrome as a secondary diagnosis.

Response: The coding and sequencingof Alport’s Syndrome patients withrenal failure who are admitted for renal

transplant were addressed at the June2000 meeting of the Editorial AdvisoryBoard of Coding Clinic for ICD–9–CM.Coding Clinic for ICD–9–CM is apublication of the AHA. The issuespecifically addressed was whether thecode used for Alport’s Syndrome or thecode for renal failure should besequenced first when the patient isadmitted for a renal transplant for therenal failure. In cases wheremanifestations are a key aspect of thecongenital anomaly, the congenitalanomaly code is usually sequenced first.

After careful evaluation, the Boarddetermined that, in this specific case,the code for renal failure would besequenced first, followed by the code forAlport’s Syndrome. The Board alsodetermined that renal failure is notalways present for patients withAlport’s Syndrome. These patients may,in fact, develop renal failure as a resultof other factors. Therefore, hospitals donot have to sequence the congenitalanomaly code first. By reporting renalfailure as the principal diagnosis, thecase is appropriately assigned to DRG302. The Board’s advice will bepublished in the third quarter 2000issue of Coding Clinic for ICD–9–CMand will be effective for dischargesoccurring on or after September 1, 2000.

4. MDC 17 (Myeloproliferative Diseasesand Disorders and Poorly DifferentiatedNeoplasm)

Diagnosis code 273.8 (Disorders ofplasma protein metabolism, NEC) isassigned to DRG 403 (Lymphoma andNonacute Leukemia with CC) and DRG404 (Lymphoma and NonacuteLeukemia without CC). A disorder ofplasma protein metabolism does notmean one has a lymphoma withnonacute leukemia. An individual canhave a disorder of plasma proteinmetabolism without having a lymphomaor leukemia.

In the proposed rule, we consideredthe appropriateness of includingdiagnosis code 273.8 in DRGs 403 and404. Disorders of plasma proteinmetabolism are not lymphomas orleukemia, thus diagnosis code 273.8 ismore closely related to DRG 413 (OtherMyeloproliferative Disorders or PoorlyDifferentiated Neoplasm Diagnoses withCC) and DRG 414 (OtherMyeloproliferative Disorders or PoorlyDifferentiated Neoplasm Diagnoseswithout CC).

We also examined charge data drawnfrom cases assigned to diagnosis code273.8 in a 10-percent sample ofMedicare cases in the FY 1999 MedPARfile and found that the average chargesfor these cases were also more closelyrelated to DRGs 413 and 414 than to

DRGs 403 and 404. We proposed tomove diagnosis code 273.8 from DRGs403 and 404 to DRGs 413 and 414.

We also noted that diagnosis code273.8 is included in the followingsurgical DRGs that are performed onpatients with lymphoma or leukemia:

• DRG 400 (Lymphoma and Leukemiawith Major OR Procedure)

• DRG 401 (Lymphoma and NonacuteLeukemia with Other OR Procedurewith CC)

• DRG 402 (Lymphoma and NonacuteLeukemia with Other OR Procedurewithout CC)

The same clinical issue would applyto these surgical DRGS performed onpatients with lymphoma and leukemia.Code 273.8 should be assigned to thesurgical DRGs for myeloproliferativedisorders since the cases are clinicallysimilar and, as stated before, code 273.8is not clinically similar to lymphomasand leukemias. Therefore, we proposedto remove code 273.8 from the surgicalDRGs related to lymphoma andleukemia (DRGS 400, 401, and 402) andassigned to the followingmyeloproliferative surgical DRGS, basedon the procedure performed:

• DRG 406 (MyeloproliferativeDisorders or Poorly DifferentiatedNeoplasms with Major OR Procedureswith CC)

• DRG 407 (MyeloproliferativeDisorders Or Poorly DifferentiatedNeoplasms with Major OR Procedureswithout CC)

• DRG 408 (MyeloproliferativeDisorders or Poorly DifferentiatedNeoplasms with Other OR Procedures)

Comment: We received two commentssupporting our proposal to remove code273.8 from the DRGs for lymphomasand leukemia (medical DRGs 403 and404 as well as surgical DRGs 400through 402). They supported moving273.8 to the DRGs for othermyeloproliferative disorders (medicalDRGs 413 and 414 as well as surgicalDRGs 406 through 408). One commenteralso pointed out that code 273.9(Unspecified disorder of plasma proteinmetabolism) is clinically similar to273.8 and is also included with theDRGs for lymphomas and leukemia. Thecommenter asked if HCFA also plannedto move 273.9 in a similar fashion tothat proposed for code 273.8 since theyappear to be companion codes. Thecommenter asserted that it wasinappropriate to keep 273.9 in the DRGSfor lymphoma and leukemia.

Response: We agree that code 273.8should be moved out of the DRGs forlymphoma and leukemia and into theDRGs for other myeloproliferativedisorders. Also, we agree with thecommenter who stated that code 273.9



is clinically similar to 273.8 and shouldbe treated in the same manner. Eachcode would be more appropriatelyassigned to the DRGS for othermyeloproliferative disorders. Therefore,we are removing 273.9 from medicalDRGS 403 and 404 and assigning it toDRGS 413 and 414. We are adopting asfinal our proposal to remove 273.8 frommedical DRGs 403 and 404 and assignit to medical DRGs 413 and 414. We arealso removing 273.8 and 273.9 fromsurgical DRGs 400, 401, and 402 andassigning them to surgical DRGs 406,407, and 408.

5. Surgical HierarchiesSome inpatient stays entail multiple

surgical procedures, each one of which,occurring by itself, could result inassignment of the case to a differentDRG within the MDC to which theprincipal diagnosis is assigned.Therefore, it is necessary to have adecision rule by which these cases areassigned to a single DRG. The surgicalhierarchy, an ordering of surgicalclasses from most to least resourceintensive, performs that function. Itsapplication ensures that cases involvingmultiple surgical procedures areassigned to the DRG associated with themost resource-intensive surgical class.

Because the relative resource intensityof surgical classes can shift as a functionof DRG reclassification andrecalibration, we reviewed the surgicalhierarchy of each MDC, as we have forprevious reclassifications, to determineif the ordering of classes coincided withthe intensity of resource utilization, asmeasured by the same billing data usedto compute the DRG relative weights.

A surgical class can be composed ofone or more DRGs. For example, inMDC 11, the surgical class ‘‘kidneytransplant’’ consists of a single DRG(DRG 302) and the class ‘‘kidney, ureterand major bladder procedures’’ consistsof three DRGs (DRGs 303, 304, and 305).Consequently, in many cases, thesurgical hierarchy has an impact onmore than one DRG. The methodologyfor determining the most resource-intensive surgical class involvesweighting each DRG for frequency todetermine the average resources for eachsurgical class. For example, assumesurgical class A includes DRGs 1 and 2and surgical class B includes DRGs 3, 4,and 5. Assume also that the averagecharge of DRG 1 is higher than that ofDRG 3, but the average charges of DRGs4 and 5 are higher than the averagecharge of DRG 2. To determine whethersurgical class A should be higher orlower than surgical class B in thesurgical hierarchy, we would weight theaverage charge of each DRG by

frequency (that is, by the number ofcases in the DRG) to determine averageresource consumption for the surgicalclass. The surgical classes would thenbe ordered from the class with thehighest average resource utilization tothat with the lowest, with the exceptionof ‘‘other OR procedures’’ as discussedbelow.

This methodology may occasionallyresult in a case involving multipleprocedures being assigned to the lower-weighted DRG (in the highest, mostresource-intensive surgical class) of theavailable alternatives. However, giventhat the logic underlying the surgicalhierarchy provides that the GROUPERsearches for the procedure in the mostresource-intensive surgical class, thisresult is unavoidable.

We note that, notwithstanding theforegoing discussion, there are a fewinstances when a surgical class with alower average relative weight is orderedabove a surgical class with a higheraverage relative weight. For example,the ‘‘other OR procedures’’ surgicalclass is uniformly ordered last in thesurgical hierarchy of each MDC inwhich it occurs, regardless of the factthat the relative weight for the DRG orDRGs in that surgical class may behigher than that for other surgicalclasses in the MDC. The ‘‘other ORprocedures’’ class is a group ofprocedures that are least likely to berelated to the diagnoses in the MDC butare occasionally performed on patientswith these diagnoses. Therefore, theseprocedures should only be considered ifno other procedure more closely relatedto the diagnoses in the MDC has beenperformed.

A second example occurs when thedifference between the average weightsfor two surgical classes is very small.We have found that small differencesgenerally do not warrant reordering ofthe hierarchy since, by virtue of thehierarchy change, the relative weightsare likely to shift such that the higher-ordered surgical class has a loweraverage weight than the class orderedbelow it.

Based on the preliminaryrecalibration of the DRGs, we proposedto modify the surgical hierarchy as setforth below. As we stated in theSeptember 1, 1989 final rule (54 FR36457), we were unable to test theeffects of proposed revisions to thesurgical hierarchy and to reflect thesechanges in the proposed relativeweights because the revised GROUPERsoftware was unavailable at the time theproposed rule was completed. Rather,we simulated most major classificationchanges to approximate the placementof cases under the proposed

reclassification, then determined theaverage charge for each DRG. Theseaverage charges then served as our bestestimate of relative resource use for eachsurgical class.

We proposed to revise the surgicalhierarchy for the pre-MDC DRGs, MDC8 (Diseases and Disorders of theMusculoskeletal System and ConnectiveTissue), and MDC 10 (Endocrine,Nutritional, and Metabolic Diseases andDisorders) as follows:

• In the pre-MDC DRGs, we proposedto move DRG 103 (Heart Transplant)from MDC 5 to pre-MDC. We proposedto reorder DRG 103 (Heart Transplant)above DRG 483 (Tracheostomy Exceptfor Face, Mouth, and Neck Diagnoses).

• In the pre-MDC DRGs, we proposedto reorder DRG 481 (Bone MarrowTransplant) above DRG 495 (LungTransplant).

• In MDC 8, we proposed to reorderDRG 230 (Local Excision and Removalof Internal Fixation Devices of Hip andFemur) above DRGs 226 and 227 (SoftTissue Procedures).

• In MDC 10, we proposed to reorderDRG 288 (OR Procedures for Obesity)above DRG 285 (Amputation of LowerLimb for Endocrine, Nutritional, andMetabolic Disorders).

Comment: One commenter supportedthe surgical hierarchy proposals.Another commenter opposed thereordering of DRG 230 above DRGs 226and 227 in MDC 8. The commenterstated that, if both procedures areperformed during the same operativeepisode, reordering DRGs 226 and 227above DRG 230 would moreappropriately capture facility resources.

Response: Although local excisionand removal of internal fixation devicesof hip and femur procedures may be lessresource intensive than many of thesurgical procedures in DRGs 226 and227, we proposed the surgical hierarchychange because our data indicated casesof local excision and removal of internalfixation devices of hip and femur aremore resource intensive than cases inDRGs 226 and 227. At the time of ourproposed surgical hierarchy change, theaverage standardized charges for casesin DRG 230 were approximately $1,000more than the average standardizedcharges for cases in DRGs 226 and 227.We are adopting the proposed surgicalhierarchy change as final so that caseswith multiple procedures will beassigned to the higher-weighted DRG.We will continue to monitor the MDC8 surgical hierarchy as part of ourongoing review.

Based on a test of the proposedrevisions using the most recent MedPARfile and the final GROUPER software,we have found that all the proposed



revisions are still supported by the dataand no additional changes are indicated.Therefore, we are adopting thesechanges in this final rule.

6. Refinement of Complications andComorbidities (CC) List

In the September 1, 1987 final notice(52 FR 33143) concerning changes to theDRG classification system, we modifiedthe GROUPER logic so that certaindiagnoses included on the standard listof CCs would not be considered a validCC in combination with a particularprincipal diagnosis. Thus, we createdthe CC Exclusions List. We made thesechanges for the following reasons: (1) Topreclude coding of CCs for closelyrelated conditions; (2) to precludeduplicative coding or inconsistentcoding from being treated as CCs; and(3) to ensure that cases are appropriatelyclassified between the complicated anduncomplicated DRGs in a pair. Wedeveloped this standard list ofdiagnoses using physician panels toinclude those diagnoses that, whenpresent as a secondary condition, wouldbe considered a substantialcomplication or comorbidity. Inprevious years, we have made changesto the standard list of CCs, either byadding new CCs or deleting CCs alreadyon the list. In the May 5, 2000 proposedrule, we proposed no deletions of thediagnosis codes on the CC list.

In the May 19, 1987 proposed notice(52 FR 18877) concerning changes to theDRG classification system, we explainedthat the excluded secondary diagnoseswere established using the followingfive principles:

• Chronic and acute manifestations ofthe same condition should not beconsidered CCs for one another (assubsequently corrected in theSeptember 1, 1987 final notice (52 FR33154)).

• Specific and nonspecific (that is,not otherwise specified (NOS))diagnosis codes for a condition shouldnot be considered CCs for one another.

• Conditions that may not coexist,such as partial/total, unilateral/bilateral,obstructed/unobstructed, and benign/malignant, should not be consideredCCs for one another.

• The same condition in anatomicallyproximal sites should not be consideredCCs for one another.

• Closely related conditions shouldnot be considered CCs for one another.

The creation of the CC Exclusions Listwas a major project involving hundredsof codes. The FY 1988 revisions wereintended only as a first step towardrefinement of the CC list in that thecriteria used for eliminating certaindiagnoses from consideration as CCs

were intended to identify only the mostobvious diagnoses that should not beconsidered complications orcomorbidities of another diagnosis. Forthat reason, and in light of commentsand questions on the CC list, we havecontinued to review the remaining CCsto identify additional exclusions and toremove diagnoses from the master listthat have been shown not to meet thedefinition of a CC. See the September30, 1988 final rule (53 FR 38485) for therevision made for the dischargesoccurring in FY 1989; the September 1,1989 final rule (54 FR 36552) for the FY1990 revision; the September 4, 1990final rule (55 FR 36126) for the FY 1991revision; the August 30, 1991 final rule(56 FR 43209) for the FY 1992 revision;the September 1, 1992 final rule (57 FR39753) for the FY 1993 revision; theSeptember 1, 1993 final rule (58 FR46278) for the FY 1994 revisions; theSeptember 1, 1994 final rule (59 FR45334) for the FY 1995 revisions; theSeptember 1, 1995 final rule (60 FR45782) for the FY 1996 revisions; theAugust 30, 1996 final rule (61 FR 46171)for the FY 1997 revisions; the August29, 1997 final rule (62 FR 45966) for theFY 1998 revisions; and the July 31, 1998final rule (63 FR 40954) for the FY 1999revisions. In the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41490), no modifications weremade to the CC Exclusions List for FY2000 because we made no changes tothe ICD–9–CM codes for FY 2000.

In this final rule, we are makinglimited revisions of the CC ExclusionsList to take into account the changesthat will be made in the ICD–9–CMdiagnosis coding system effectiveOctober 1, 2000. (See section II.B.8.below, for a discussion of ICD–9-CMchanges.) These changes are being madein accordance with the principlesestablished when we created the CCExclusions List in 1987.

Tables 6F and 6G in section V. of theAddendum to this final rule contain therevised CC Exclusions List that iseffective for discharges occurring on orafter October 1, 2000. Each table showsthe principal diagnoses along withchanges to the excluded CCs. Each ofthese principal diagnoses is shown withan asterisk and the additions ordeletions to the CC Exclusions List areprovided in an indented columnimmediately following the affectedprincipal diagnosis.

CCs that were added to the list appearin Table 6F—Additions to the CCExclusions List. Beginning withdischarges on or after October 1, 2000,the indented diagnoses will not berecognized by the GROUPER as validCCs for the asterisked principaldiagnosis.

CCs that were deleted from the list arein Table 6G—Deletions from the CCExclusions List. Beginning withdischarges on or after October 1, 2000,the indented diagnoses will berecognized by the GROUPER as validCCs for the asterisked principaldiagnosis.

Copies of the original CC ExclusionsList applicable to FY 1988 can beobtained from the National TechnicalInformation Service (NTIS) of theDepartment of Commerce. It is availablein hard copy for $92.00 plus $6.00shipping and handling and onmicrofiche for $20.50, plus $4.00 forshipping and handling. A request for theFY 1988 CC Exclusions List (whichshould include the identificationaccession number (PB) 88–133970)should be made to the followingaddress: National Technical InformationService, United States Department ofCommerce, 5285 Port Royal Road,Springfield, Virginia 22161; or bycalling (703) 487–4650.

Users should be aware of the fact thatall revisions to the CC Exclusions List(FYs 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993,1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, andthose in Tables 6F and 6G of thisdocument) must be incorporated intothe list purchased from NTIS in order toobtain the CC Exclusions List applicablefor discharges occurring on or afterOctober 1, 2000. (Note: There was no CCExclusions List in FY 2000 because wedid not make changes to the ICD–9–CMcodes for FY 2000.)

Alternatively, the completedocumentation of the GROUPER logic,including the current CC ExclusionsList, is available from 3M/HealthInformation Systems (HIS), which,under contract with HCFA, isresponsible for updating andmaintaining the GROUPER program.The current DRG Definitions Manual,Version 17.0, is available for $225.00,which includes $15.00 for shipping andhandling. Version 18.0 of this manual,which includes the final FY 2001 DRGchanges, will be available in October2000 for $225.00. These manuals may beobtained by writing 3M/HIS at thefollowing address: 100 Barnes Road,Wallingford, Connecticut 06492; or bycalling (203) 949–0303. Please specifythe revision or revisions requested.

We received no comments on the CCExclusions List in the proposed rule.

7. Review of Procedure Codes in DRGs468, 476, and 477

Each year, we review cases assignedto DRG 468 (Extensive OR ProcedureUnrelated to Principal Diagnosis), DRG476 (Prostatic OR Procedure Unrelatedto Principal Diagnosis), and DRG 477



(Nonextensive OR Procedure Unrelatedto Principal Diagnosis) to determinewhether it would be appropriate tochange the procedures assigned amongthese DRGs.

DRGs 468, 476, and 477 are reservedfor those cases in which none of the ORprocedures performed is related to theprincipal diagnosis. These DRGs areintended to capture atypical cases, thatis, those cases not occurring withsufficient frequency to represent adistinct, recognizable clinical group.DRG 476 is assigned to those dischargesin which one or more of the followingprostatic procedures are performed andare unrelated to the principal diagnosis:60.0 Incision of prostate60.12 Open biopsy of prostate60.15 Biopsy of periprostatic tissue60.18 Other diagnostic procedures on

prostate and periprostatic tissue60.21 Transurethral prostatectomy60.29 Other transurethral prostatectomy60.61 Local excision of lesion of prostate60.69 Prostatectomy NEC60.81 Incision of periprostatic tissue60.82 Excision of periprostatic tissue60.93 Repair of prostate60.94 Control of (postoperative) hemorrhage

of prostate60.94 Transurethral balloon dilation of the

prostatic urethra60.99 Other operations on prostate

All remaining OR procedures areassigned to DRGs 468 and 477, withDRG 477 assigned to those discharges inwhich the only procedures performedare nonextensive procedures that areunrelated to the principal diagnosis.The original list of the ICD–9–CMprocedure codes for the procedures weconsider nonextensive procedures, ifperformed with an unrelated principaldiagnosis, was published in Table 6C insection IV. of the Addendum to theSeptember 30, 1988 final rule (53 FR38591). As part of the final rulespublished on September 4, 1990 (55 FR36135), August 30, 1991 (56 FR 43212),September 1, 1992 (57 FR 23625),September 1, 1993 (58 FR 46279),September 1, 1994 (59 FR 45336),September 1, 1995 (60 FR 45783),August 30, 1996 (61 FR 46173), andAugust 29, 1997 (62 FR 45981), wemoved several other procedures fromDRG 468 to 477, and some proceduresfrom DRG 477 to 468. No procedureswere moved in FY 1999, as noted in theJuly 31, 1998 final rule (63 FR 40962),or in FY 2000, as noted in the July 30,1999 final rule (64 FR 41496).

a. Moving Procedure Codes fromDRGs 468 or 477 to MDCs. We annuallyconduct a review of proceduresproducing assignment to DRG 468 orDRG 477 on the basis of volume, byprocedure, to determine theappropriateness of moving procedure

codes out of these DRGs into one of thesurgical DRGs for the MDC into whichthe principal diagnosis falls. The dataare arrayed two ways for comparisonpurposes. We look at a frequency countof each major operative procedure code.We also compare procedures acrossMDCs by volume of procedure codeswithin each MDC. That is, usingprocedure code 57.49 (Othertransurethral excision or destruction oflesion or tissue of bladder) as anexample, we determined that thisparticular code accounted for thehighest number of major operativeprocedures (162 cases, or 9.8 percent ofall cases) reported in the sample of DRG477. In addition, we determined thatprocedure code 57.49 appeared in MDC4 (Diseases and Disorders of theRespiratory System) 28 times as well asin 9 other MDCs.

Using a 10-percent sample of the FY1999 MedPAR file, we determined thatthe quantity of cases in DRG 477 totaled1,650. There were 106 instances wherethe major operative procedure appearedonly once (6.4 percent of the time),resulting in assignment to DRG 477.

Using the same 10-percent sample ofthe FY 1999 MedPAR file, we reviewedDRG 468. There were a total of 3,858cases, with one major operative codecausing the DRG assignment 311 times(or 8 percent) and 230 instances wherethe major operative procedure appearedonly once (or 6 percent of the time).

Our medical consultants thenidentified those procedures occurring inconjunction with certain principaldiagnoses with sufficient frequency tojustify adding them to one of thesurgical DRGs for the MDC in which thediagnosis falls. Based on this year’sreview, we did not identify anynecessary changes in procedures undereither DRG 468 or 477 and, therefore,did not propose to move any proceduresfrom either DRG 468 or DRG 477 to oneof the surgical DRGs. We received nocomments on our review results and,therefore, we will not move anyprocedures from these DRGs for FY2001.

b. Reassignment of Procedures AmongDRGs 468, 476, and 477. We alsoconduct an annual review of a list ofICD–9–CM procedures that, when incombination with their principaldiagnosis code, result in assignment toDRGs 468, 476, and 477, to ascertain ifany of those procedures should bemoved from one of these DRGs toanother of these DRGs based on averagecharges and length of stay. We analyzethe data for trends such as shifts intreatment practice or reporting practicethat would make the resulting DRGassignment inappropriate. If our

medical consultants were to find theseshifts, we would propose moving casesto keep the DRGs clinically similar or toprovide payment for the cases in asimilar manner. Generally, we moveonly those procedures for which wehave an adequate number of dischargesto analyze the data. Based on this year’sreview, we proposed not to move anyprocedures from DRG 468 to DRGs 476or 477, from DRG 476 to DRGs 468 or477, or from DRG 477 to DRGs 468 or476. We received no comments on thisproposal, and therefore are not movingany procedures from the DRGsindicated.

c. Adding Diagnosis Codes to MDCs.It has been brought to our attention thatan ICD–9–CM diagnosis code should beadded to DRG 482 (Tracheostomy forFace, Mouth and Neck Diagnoses) topreserve clinical coherence andhomogeneity of the system. In the caseof a patient who has a facial infection(diagnosis code 682.0 (Other cellulitisand abscess, Face)), the face maybecome extremely swollen and thepatient’s ability to breathe might beimpaired. It might be deemed medicallynecessary to perform a temporarytracheostomy (procedure code 31.1) onthe patient until the swelling subsidesenough for the patient to once againbreathe on his or her own.

The combination of diagnosis code682.0 and procedure code 31.1 resultedin assignment to DRG 483(Tracheostomy Except for Face, Mouthand Neck Diagnoses). The absence ofdiagnosis code 682.0 in DRG 483 forcesthe GROUPER algorithm to assign thecase based solely on the procedure code,without taking this diagnosis intoaccount. Clearly this was not the intent,as diagnosis code 682.0 should beincluded with other face, mouth andneck diagnosis. We believe that casessuch as these would appropriately beassigned to DRG 482. Therefore, weproposed to add diagnosis code 682.0 tothe list of other face, mouth and neckdiagnoses already in the principaldiagnosis list in DRG 482.

We received one comment in supportof the proposed change, and areadopting as final the proposal to adddiagnosis code 682.0 to DRG 482.

8. Changes to the ICD–9–CM CodingSystem

As described in section II.B.1 of thispreamble, the ICD–9–CM is a codingsystem that is used for the reporting ofdiagnoses and procedures performed ona patient. In September 1985, the ICD–9–CM Coordination and MaintenanceCommittee was formed. This is aFederal interdepartmental committee,co-chaired by the National Center for



Health Statistics (NCHS) and HCFA,charged with maintaining and updatingthe ICD–9–CM system. The Committeeis jointly responsible for approvingcoding changes, and developing errata,addenda, and other modifications to theICD–9–CM to reflect newly developedprocedures and technologies and newlyidentified diseases. The Committee isalso responsible for promoting the useof Federal and non-Federal educationalprograms and other communicationtechniques with a view towardstandardizing coding applications andupgrading the quality of theclassification system.

The NCHS has lead responsibility forthe ICD–9–CM diagnosis codes includedin the Tabular List and AlphabeticIndex for Diseases, while HCFA has leadresponsibility for the ICD–9–CMprocedure codes included in theTabular List and Alphabetic Index forProcedures.

The Committee encouragesparticipation in the above process byhealth-related organizations. In thisregard, the Committee holds publicmeetings for discussion of educationalissues and proposed coding changes.These meetings provide an opportunityfor representatives of recognizedorganizations in the coding field, suchas the American Health InformationManagement Association (AHIMA)(formerly American Medical RecordAssociation (AMRA)), the AHA), andvarious physician specialty groups aswell as physicians, medical recordadministrators, health informationmanagement professionals, and othermembers of the public to contributeideas on coding matters. Afterconsidering the opinions expressed atthe public meetings and in writing, theCommittee formulatesrecommendations, which then must beapproved by the agencies.

The Committee presented proposalsfor coding changes for FY 2000 at publicmeetings held on June 4, 1998 andNovember 2, 1998. Even though the

Committee conducted public meetingsand considered approval of codingchanges for FY 2000 implementation,we did not implement any changes toICD–9–CM codes for FY 2000 because ofour major efforts to ensure that all of theMedicare computer systems werecompliant with the year 2000.Therefore, the code proposals presentedat the public meetings held on June 4,1998 and November 2, 1998, that (ifapproved) ordinarily would have beenincluded as new codes for October 1,1999, were held for consideration forinclusion in the annual update for FY2001.

The Committee also presentedproposals for coding changes forimplementation in FY 2001 at publicmeetings held on May 13, 1999 andNovember 12, 1999, and finalized thecoding changes after consideration ofcomments received at the meetings andin writing by January 7, 2000.

Copies of the Coordination andMaintenance Committee minutes of the1999 meetings can be obtained from theHCFA Home Page by typing http://www.hcfa.gov/medicare/icd9cm.htm.Paper copies of these minutes are nolonger available and the mailing list hasbeen discontinued.

The ICD–9–CM code changes thathave been approved will becomeeffective October 1, 2000. The new ICD–9–CM codes are listed, along with theirDRG classifications, in Tables 6A and6B (New Diagnosis Codes and NewProcedure Codes, respectively) insection VI. of the Addendum to thisfinal rule. As we stated above, the codenumbers and their titles were presentedfor public comment at the ICD–9–CMCoordination and MaintenanceCommittee meetings. Both oral andwritten comments were consideredbefore the codes were approved. In theMay 5, 2000 proposed rule, we solicitedcomments only on the proposed DRGclassification of these new codes.

Further, the Committee has approvedthe expansion of certain ICD–9–CM

codes to require an additional digit forvalid code assignment. Diagnosis codesthat have been replaced by expandedcodes or other codes, or have beendeleted are in Table 6C (InvalidDiagnosis Codes). These invaliddiagnosis codes will not be recognizedby the GROUPER beginning withdischarges occurring on or after October1, 2000. For codes that have beenreplaced by new or expanded codes, thecorresponding new or expandeddiagnosis codes are included in Table6A (New Diagnosis Codes). Noprocedure codes were replaced byexpanded codes or other codes, and noprocedure codes were deleted.Revisions to diagnosis code titles appearin Table 6D (Revised Diagnosis CodeTitles), which also includes the DRGassignments for these revised codes.Revisions to procedure code titlesappear in Table 6E (Revised ProcedureCodes Titles).

Comment: One commenter questionedthe DRG assignments in Table 6A fornew ICD–9–CM codes V45.74, V45.76,V45.77, V45.78 and V45.79. Thecommenter pointed out that it has beenHCFA’s longstanding practice to assigna new code to the same DRG or DRGsas its predecessor code. The commenterhad seen a draft conversion tableprepared by the NCHS for codes beingrevised October 1, 2000, and indicatedthat the conversion table did notsupport the DRG assignments for thesespecific codes.

Response: The commenter is correct.HCFA bases DRG assignments on theDRG assignment of the predecessorcode. Tables 6A through 6E in theproposed rule were prepared prior toNCHS’ completion of the conversiontable. The DRG assignments were basedon a mapping of codes V45.74, V45.76,V45.77, and V45.78 from code V45.89.However, the correct mapping on theconversion table now shows thefollowing predecessor codes:

New Code PreviousCode Previous DRG

V45.74 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 593.89 331, 332, 333596.8 331, 332, 333

V45.76 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 518.89 101, 102V45.77 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 602.8 352

607.89 352608.89 352620.8 358, 359, 369621.8 358, 359, 369622.8 358, 359, 369

V45.78 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 360.89 46, 47, 48V45.79 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 255.8 300, 301

289.59 398, 399388.8 73, 74569.49 188, 189, 190577.8 204



New Code PreviousCode Previous DRG

V45.89 467

We have modified the DRGassignments for V45.74, V45.76, V45.77,and V45.78 in Table 6A of this final ruleaccording to the mapping indicated inthe third column in the preceding table.However, V45.79 has a number ofpredecessor codes appearing in multipleMDCs and, thus, would not relate to anyspecific MDC. After discussions withNCHS, we determined that this codeshould continue to use V45.89 as itspredecessor code for purposes of DRGassignment, since it is not restricted toa specific body system. Therefore, theDRG assignment for V45.79 was notchanged in Table 6A.

9. Other Issuesa. Immunotherapy. Effective October

1, 1994, procedure code 99.28 (Injectionor infusion of biologic responsemodifier (BRM) as an antineoplasticagent) was created and designated as anon-OR procedure that does not affectDRG assignment. This cancer treatmentinvolving biological response modifiersis also known as BRM therapy orimmunotherapy.

In response to a comment on the May7, 1999 proposed rule, for the FY 2000final rule we analyzed cases for whichprocedure code 99.28 was reportedusing the 100 percent FY 1998 MedPARfile. The commenter requested that wecreate a new DRG for BRM therapy orassign cases in which BRM therapy isperformed to an existing DRG with ahigh relative weight. The commentersuggested that DRG 403 (Lymphoma andNonacute Leukemia with CC) would bean appropriate DRG.

For the proposed rule, we analyzed allcases for which procedure code 99.28was reported. We identified 1,179 casesin 136 DRGs in 22 MDCs. No more than141 cases were assigned to any oneparticular DRG.

Of the 1,179 cases, 141 cases(approximately 12 percent) wereassigned to DRG 403 in MDC 17. Wefound approximately one-half of thesecases had other procedures performedin addition to receivingimmunotherapy, such as chemotherapy,bone marrow biopsy, insertion of totallyimplantable vascular access device,thoracentesis, or percutaneousabdominal drainage, which may accountfor the increased charges. There were123 immunotherapy cases assigned toDRG 82 (Respiratory Neoplasms) inMDC 4 (Diseases and Disorders of theRespiratory System). We noted that, in

some cases, in addition toimmunotherapy, other procedures wereperformed, such as insertion of anintercostal catheter for drainage,thoracentesis, or chemotherapy.

There were 84 cases assigned to DRG416 (Septicemia, Age >17) in MDC 18(Infectious and Parasitic Diseases(Systemic or Unspecified Sites)). Theprincipal diagnosis for this DRG issepticemia and, in addition to receivingtreatment for septicemia,immunotherapy was also given. Therewere 79 cases assigned to DRG 410(Chemotherapy without AcuteLeukemia as Secondary Diagnosis) inMDC 17.

The cost of immunotherapy isaveraged into the weight for these DRGSand, based on our analysis, we did notbelieve a reclassification of these caseswas warranted. Due to the limitednumber of cases that were distributedthroughout 136 DRGs in 22 MDCs andthe variation of charges, we concludedthat it would be inappropriate toclassify these cases into a single DRG.

Although there were 141 casesassigned to DRG 403, it would beinappropriate to place allimmunotherapy cases, regardless ofdiagnosis, into a DRG that is designatedfor lymphoma and nonacute leukemia.We establish DRGs based on clinicalcoherence and resource utilization. EachDRG encompasses a variety of cases,reflecting a range of services and a rangeof resources. Generally, then, each DRGreflects some higher cost cases and somelower cost cases. To the extent a newtechnology is extremely costly relativeto the cases reflected in the DRG relativeweight, the hospital might qualify foroutlier payments, that is, additionalpayments over and above the standardprospective payment rate.

We did not receive any commentsregarding payment for immunotherapycases.

b. Pancreas Transplant. Effective July1, 1999, Medicare covers whole organpancreas transplantation if thetransplantation is performedsimultaneously with or after a kidneytransplant (procedure codes 55.69,Other kidney transplantation, andV42.0, Organ or tissue replaced bytransplant, Kidney) (Transmittal No.115, April 1999). We noted that whenwe published the notification of thiscoverage in the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41497), we inadvertently madean error in announcing the covered

codes. We cited the incorrect codes forpancreas transplantation as procedurecode 52.80 (Pancreatic transplant, nototherwise specified) and 52.83(Heterotransplant of pancreas). Thecorrect procedure codes for pancreastransplantation are 52.80 (Pancreatictransplant, not otherwise specified) and52.82 (Homotransplant of pancreas).The Coverage Issues Manual wasrevised to reflect this change viaTransmittal 124, April 2000, effectiveOctober 1, 2000.

Pancreas transplantation is generallylimited to those patients with severesecondary complications of diabetes,including kidney failure. However,pancreas transplantation is sometimesperformed on patients with labilediabetes and hypoglycemicunawareness. Pancreas transplantationfor diabetic patients who have notexperienced end-stage renal failuresecondary to diabetes is excluded fromcoverage. Medicare also excludescoverage of transplantation of partialpancreatic tissue or islet cells.

In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41497), we indicated that we planned toreview discharge data to determinewhether a new DRG should be created,or existing DRGs modified, to furtherclassify pancreas transplantation incombination with kidneytransplantation.

Under the current DRG classification,if a kidney transplant and a pancreastransplant are performedsimultaneously on a patient withchronic renal failure secondary todiabetes with renal manifestations(diagnosis codes 250.40 through250.43), the case is assigned to DRG 302(Kidney Transplant) in MDC 11(Diseases and Disorders of the Kidneyand Urinary Tract). If a pancreastransplant is performed following akidney transplant (that is, during adifferent hospital admission) on apatient with chronic renal failuresecondary to diabetes with renalmanifestations, the case is assigned toDRG 468 (Extensive OR ProcedureUnrelated to Principal Diagnosis). Thisis because pancreas transplant is notassigned to MDC 11, the MDC to whicha principal diagnosis of chronic renalfailure secondary to diabetes isassigned.

For the proposed rule, using 100percent of the data in the FY 1999MedPAR file (which contains hospitalbills received for FY 1999 through



December 31, 1999), we analyzed thecases for which procedure codes 52.80and 52.83 were reported. We identifieda total of 79 cases in 8 DRGs, in 3 MDCs,and in 1 pre-MDC. Of the 79 casesidentified, 49 cases were assigned toDRG 302, 14 cases were assigned to DRG468, and 8 cases were assigned to DRG191 (Pancreas, Liver and ShuntProcedures with CC). The additional 8cases were distributed over 5 otherassorted DRGs, and due to theirdisparity, were not considered in ourevaluation.

We examined our data to determinewhether it was appropriate to propose anew kidney and pancreas transplantDRG. We identified 49 such dualtransplant cases in the FY 1999MedPAR file. We do not believe this tobe a sufficient sample size to warrantthe creation of a new DRG. Furthermore,we noted that nearly half of these casesoccurred at a hospital in Maryland,which is not paid under the prospectivepayment system. The rest of the casesare spread across multiple hospitals,with no single hospital having morethan 5 cases in the FY 1999 MedPAR.

We received 261 comments on thisissue, 244 of which were form letters.

We will continue to monitor thesedual transplant cases to determinewhether it may be appropriate in thefuture to establish a new DRG. However,we are not establishing a new DRG forthese cases for FY 2001 and the currentprocedure code classification willremain in effect.

Comment: All commenters called forthe establishment of a unique DRGrecognizing the combined transplant ofkidney and pancreas in the sameoperative episode. Some commenterscited increased utilization of hospitalresources, especially operating-roomtime, recovery time, andimmunosuppressive drugs asjustification for a separate DRG for acombined pancreas-kidney transplant.One commenter forwarded to us facility-specific charge data for four dual-transplant patients seen at that centerthrough December 1997.

Response: We stated in the proposedrule that there does appear to be adifference between the charges for dualkidney-pancreas transplant patientsassigned to DRG 302 (KidneyTransplant) and those patients whoreceived only a kidney transplant.However, the numbers of dualtransplant cases in our database wereinsufficient to warrant establishing anew DRG for dual transplants.

We point out that, given the lowvolume of these cases and theirinfrequent occurrence in any particularhospital, we believe our outlier policy

will provide adequate protection for anyextraordinarily costly cases.Furthermore, there is always variationin terms of the costs for cases within aDRG relative to the payments under theprospective payment system for thatDRG. Although examining these cases inisolation from other DRG 302 casesappears to suggest that dual transplantsare more expensive, the nature of theprospective payment system is such thathospitals are expected to be able tooffset cases where costs are greater thanpayments with those cases wherepayments exceed costs.

We further point out that additionalMedicare coverage of a transplantedorgan does not necessarily andimmediately result in creation of aunique DRG. A specific example of notcreating a unique DRG is the combinedheart-lung transplant procedure.Effective for discharges occurring on orafter October 1, 1990, Medicare was ableto identify combined heart-lungtransplant using ICD–9–CM code 33.6(Combined heart-lung transplantation).Instead of assigning this new code to itsown specific DRG, however, it wascombined with heart transplant in DRG103 (Heart Transplant). When DRG 495(Lung Transplant) was created for casesdischarged on or after October 1, 1994,review of our data revealed thatassignment of code 33.6 was moreclinically coherent with DRG 103 thanDRG 495. Therefore, code 33.6 was notmoved into the new lung transplantDRG. Although this does not indicatewe will not create a distinct DRG forcombined kidney and pancreastransplants, it does show a precedent forallowing a sufficient sample of cases toaccumulate before deciding whether anew DRG is necessary.

Finally, one of the risks ofestablishing a new DRG based on fewdocumentable cases is that a fewextremely low-cost cases coulddramatically reduce the average chargesin a year, thereby lowering the relativeweight and potentially underpayingcases in this DRG by a significantamount.

Comment: Several commenters arguedthat combined pancreas and kidneytransplants are underpaid every timethey are performed and expressedconcern that this lack of fundingprovides limited access to thisprocedure for Medicare beneficiaries.

Response: We do not believe thatbeneficiaries’ access will be limited byour decision. In addition, it is aviolation of a hospital’s Medicareprovider agreement to place restrictionson the number of Medicare beneficiariesit accepts for treatment unless it places

the same restrictions on all otherpatients.

Comment: One commenter arguedthat the incremental cost of the pancreastransplant was insufficient to cause theclaim to move into outlier status.

Response: Our data show coveredcharges submitted by hospitals rangingfrom a low of approximately $42,000 toa high in excess of $182,000 for cases inDRG 302. Outlier payments are meant toalleviate the financial effects of treatingextraordinarily high-cost cases.Therefore, the commenter may becorrect in saying that some of the caseswith lower charges might not be furthercompensated by outlier payments.However, other cases are furthercompensated to mitigate lossesexperienced by hospitals.

Comment: One commenter stated weunderrepresented the volume of futuredual transplants under Medicare, citingmid-year approval of Medicare coveragefor pancreas transplants, and noting thatthis is not enough time to accuratelyreflect the numbers of procedures sincepatients normally must accrue longerwait times before they receive organoffers for transplant.

Response: It is true that we did notattempt to project the future volume ofcombined kidney and pancreastransplant procedures. We reported thenumber of actual hospital claims in ourMedPAR data base, submitted throughDecember 1999, when we published theproposed rule in the May 5, 2000Federal Register (65 FR 26294). DRGcategories and payment are alwaysbased on actual historical hospitalcharge data, not projected data. Whatmust also be considered, however, isthat dual transplants would only appearin statistics concerning DRG 302, whileHCFA also covers pancreas transplantsperformed in separate operativeepisodes, subsequent to kidneytransplantation. Those pancreatictransplants occurring after kidneytransplant would appear in DRG 468, orpotentially other DRGs as well,depending on the principal diagnosis.

Comment: Several commenters notedthat the 1998 Annual Report of UnitedNetwork for Organ Sharing (UNOS)indicated there were 966 simultaneouskidney-pancreas transplants, andquestioned HCFA’s reported 49 casesappearing in DRG 302 as being too low.One commenter, citing the inability ofHCFA to be able to identify cases ofdual kidney-pancreas transplants,pointed out the need for a specific DRGfor this category of patients. Anothercommenter noted that data were lostbecause of the incorrect publication ofICD–9–CM code 52.83 (Heterotransplant



of pancreas) as being a coveredprocedure.

Response: Most patients who areexperiencing end-stage renal diseaseshould be eligible for Medicare benefits.We note, however, that none of thecommenters submitted specificevidence contrary to our finding that,outside of a single hospital in Maryland,no individual hospital had more thanfive Medicare dual transplant casesduring FY 1999.

Obviously one issue is the timing ofthe creation of the coverage benefit,which was conferred for casesdischarged on or after July 1, 1999.Cases transplanted prior to that dateshould not have appeared in our data ascovered procedures.

We recognize that 52.83 is anincorrect code, and have corrected thistypographical error in the MedicareCoverage Issues Manual, as noted above.Interestingly, the original data reportedin the proposed notice contained 79cases of pancreas transplant, but therewere only 7 instances in which code52.83 was reported. We believe thathospital coders recognized the error inthe original coverage instruction, andchose to submit the less specific code52.80 instead.

Comment: Several commentersasserted that it was contradictory for usto argue that 49 cases is too few toestablish a DRG but we indicated in theMay 5, 2000 proposed rule that therewere 40 DRGs with fewer than 10 casesper year.

Response: These low-volume DRGsare not new, but in most cases werecreated very early during or even priorto the implementation of theprospective payment system. Many ofthese DRGs are related to patientcategories that are rare in the Medicarepopulation, such as age less than 17 orlabor and delivery during childbirth.The DRG relative-weights for theseDRGs are adjusted based on the overallchange in the DRG weights rather thanthrough normal recalibration.

We do not believe our policy not toestablish a new dual transplant DRG forcombined kidney and pancreastransplants is contradicted by theexistence of these low-volume DRGs. Asthe commenters indicated, the numberof combined kidney and pancreastransplants is likely to increase in thenext few years, and therefore it isimportant to ensure an accurate andstable DRG payment is established.

Comment: Several commentersoffered to work closely with HCFA toidentify cases and costs associated withthis category of patients.

Response: We appreciate these offersand the cooperative spirit in which they

were presented. Our ability to evaluateand implement potential DRG changesdepends on the availability of validated,representative data. We remain open tousing non-MedPAR data if the data arereliable and validated and enable us toappropriately measure relative resourceuse. We will continue to monitor thiscategory of patients, and will addressthis issue in the FY 2002 proposed rule.

C. Recalibration of DRG WeightsWe proposed to use the same basic

methodology for the FY 2001recalibration as we did for FY 2000 (July30, 1999 final rule (64 FR 41498)). Thatis, we recalibrated the weights based oncharge data for Medicare discharges.However, we used the most currentcharge information available, the FY1999 MedPAR file. (For the FY 2000recalibration, we used the FY 1998MedPAR file.) The MedPAR file is basedon fully coded diagnostic and proceduredata for all Medicare inpatient hospitalbills.

The final recalibrated DRG relativeweights are constructed from FY 1999MedPAR data (discharges occurringbetween October 1, 1998 and September30, 1999), based on bills received byHCFA through March 2000, from allhospitals subject to the prospectivepayment system and short-term acutecare hospitals in waiver States. The FY1999 MedPAR file includes data forapproximately 11.0 million Medicaredischarges.

The methodology used to calculatethe DRG relative weights from the FY1999 MedPAR file is as follows:

• To the extent possible, all theclaims were regrouped using theproposed DRG classification revisionsdiscussed in section II.B. of thispreamble.

• Charges were standardized toremove the effects of differences in areawage levels, indirect medical educationand disproportionate share payments,and, for hospitals in Alaska and Hawaii,the applicable cost-of-living adjustment.

• The average standardized chargeper DRG was calculated by summing thestandardized charges for all cases in theDRG and dividing that amount by thenumber of cases classified in the DRG.

• We then eliminated statisticaloutliers, using the same criteria used incomputing the current weights. That is,all cases that are outside of 3.0 standarddeviations from the mean of the logdistribution of both the charges per caseand the charges per day for each DRGare eliminated.

• The average charge for each DRGwas then recomputed (excluding thestatistical outliers) and divided by thenational average standardized charge

per case to determine the relativeweight. A transfer case is counted as afraction of a case based on the ratio ofits transfer payment under the per diempayment methodology to the full DRGpayment for nontransfer cases. That is,transfer cases paid under the transfermethodology equal to half of what thecase would receive as a nontransferwould be counted as 0.5 of a total case.

• We established the relative weightfor heart and heart-lung, liver, and lungtransplants (DRGs 103, 480, and 495) ina manner consistent with themethodology for all other DRGs exceptthat the transplant cases that were usedto establish the weights were limited tothose Medicare-approved heart, heart-lung, liver, and lung transplant centersthat have cases in the FY 1999 MedPARfile. (Medicare coverage for heart, heart-lung, liver, and lung transplants islimited to those facilities that havereceived approval from HCFA astransplant centers.)

• Acquisition costs for kidney, heart,heart-lung, liver, lung, and pancreastransplants continue to be paid on areasonable cost basis. Unlike otherexcluded costs, the acquisition costs areconcentrated in specific DRGs (DRG 302(Kidney Transplant); DRG 103 (HeartTransplant); DRG 480 (LiverTransplant); DRG 495 (LungTransplant); and DRG 468 (Pancreas)).Because these costs are paid separatelyfrom the prospective payment rate, it isnecessary to make an adjustment toprevent the relative weights for theseDRGs from including the acquisitioncosts. Therefore, we subtracted theacquisition charges from the totalcharges on each transplant bill thatshowed acquisition charges beforecomputing the average charge for theDRG and before eliminating statisticaloutliers.

When we recalibrated the DRGweights for previous years, we set athreshold of 10 cases as the minimumnumber of cases required to compute areasonable weight. We proposed to usethe same case threshold in recalibratingthe DRG weights for FY 2001. Using theFY 1999 MedPAR data set, there were40 DRGs containing fewer than 10 cases.We computed the weights for these 40low-volume DRGs by adjusting the FY2000 weights of these DRGs by thepercentage change in the average weightof the cases in the other DRGs.

The weights developed according tothe methodology described above, usingthe DRG classification changes, resultedin an average case weight that differsfrom the average case weight beforerecalibration. Therefore, the newweights are normalized by anadjustment factor (1.45507) so that the



average case weight after recalibration isequal to the average case weight beforerecalibration. This adjustment isintended to ensure that recalibration byitself neither increases nor decreasestotal payments under the prospectivepayment system.

We received no comments on DRGrecalibration.

Section 1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) of the Actrequires that, beginning with FY 1991,reclassification and recalibrationchanges be made in a manner thatassures that the aggregate payments areneither greater than nor less than theaggregate payments that would havebeen made without the changes.Although normalization is intended toachieve this effect, equating the averagecase weight after recalibration to theaverage case weight before recalibrationdoes not necessarily achieve budgetneutrality with respect to aggregatepayments to hospitals because paymentto hospitals is affected by factors otherthan average case weight. Therefore, aswe have done in past years and asdiscussed in section II.A.4.a. of theAddendum to this final rule, we makea budget neutrality adjustment to assurethat the requirement of section1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) of the Act is met.

III. Changes to the Hospital Wage Index

A. Background

Section 1886(d)(3)(E) of the Actrequires that, as part of the methodologyfor determining prospective payments tohospitals, the Secretary must adjust thestandardized amounts ‘‘for areadifferences in hospital wage levels by afactor (established by the Secretary)reflecting the relative hospital wagelevel in the geographic area of thehospital compared to the nationalaverage hospital wage level.’’ Inaccordance with the broad discretionconferred under the Act, we currentlydefine hospital labor market areas basedon the definitions of MetropolitanStatistical Areas (MSAs), Primary MSAs(PMSAs), and New England CountyMetropolitan Areas (NECMAs) issued bythe Office of Management and Budget(OMB). The OMB also designatesConsolidated MSAs (CMSAs). A CMSAis a metropolitan area with a populationof one million or more, comprising twoor more PMSAs (identified by theirseparate economic and social character).For purposes of the hospital wage index,we use the PMSAs rather than CMSAssince they allow a more precisebreakdown of labor costs. If ametropolitan area is not designated aspart of a PMSA, we use the applicableMSA. Rural areas are areas outside adesignated MSA, PMSA, or NECMA.

For purposes of the wage index, wecombine all of the rural counties in aState to calculate a rural wage index forthat State.

We note that, effective April 1, 1990,the term Metropolitan Area (MA)replaced the term MSA (which had beenused since June 30, 1983) to describe theset of metropolitan areas consisting ofMSAs, PMSAs, and CMSAs. Theterminology was changed by OMB inthe March 30, 1990 Federal Register todistinguish between the individualmetropolitan areas known as MSAs andthe set of all metropolitan areas (MSAs,PMSAs, and CMSAs) (55 FR 12154). Forpurposes of the prospective paymentsystem, we will continue to refer tothese areas as MSAs.

Beginning October 1, 1993, section1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act requires that weupdate the wage index annually.Furthermore, this section provides thatthe Secretary base the update on asurvey of wages and wage-related costsof short-term, acute care hospitals. Thesurvey should measure, to the extentfeasible, the earnings and paid hours ofemployment by occupational category,and must exclude the wages and wage-related costs incurred in furnishingskilled nursing services. As discussedbelow in section III.F of this preamble,we also take into account the geographicreclassification of hospitals inaccordance with sections 1886(d)(8)(B)and 1886(d)(10) of the Act whencalculating the wage index.

B. FY 2001 Wage Index Update

The FY 2001 wage index values insection VI of the Addendum to this finalrule (effective for hospital dischargesoccurring on or after October 1, 2000and before October 1, 2001) are based onthe data collected from the Medicarecost reports submitted by hospitals forcost reporting periods beginning in FY1997 (the FY 2000 wage index wasbased on FY 1996 wage data).

The FY 2001 wage index includes thefollowing categories of data associatedwith costs paid under the hospitalinpatient prospective payment system(as well as outpatient costs), which werealso included in the FY 2000 wageindex:

• Salaries and hours from short-term,acute care hospitals.

• Home office costs and hours.• Certain contract labor costs and

hours.• Wage-related costs.

Consistent with the wage indexmethodology for FY 2000, the wageindex for FY 2001 also continues toexclude the direct and overhead salariesand hours for services not paid through

the inpatient prospective paymentsystem such as skilled nursing facilityservices, home health services, or othersubprovider components that are notsubject to the prospective paymentsystem.

We calculate a separate Puerto Rico-specific wage index and apply it to thePuerto Rico standardized amount. (See62 FR 45984 and 46041.) This wageindex is based solely on Puerto Rico’sdata. Finally, section 4410 of PublicLaw 105–33 provides that, fordischarges on or after October 1, 1997,the area wage index applicable to anyhospital that is not located in a ruralarea may not be less than the area wageindex applicable to hospitals located inrural areas in that State.

Comment: One commenter believedthat the FY 2001 wage calculation doesnot allow for inflationary effects orexisting contractual increases, andrecommended that we consider using amore recent Medicare cost reportingyear and allow for inflationary wageadjustments.

Response: Due to the time periodallowed for: (1) hospitals to completeand submit their cost reports to theirintermediaries, (2) intermediaries toreview and submit the cost reports toHCFA, (3) intermediaries to perform aseparate, detailed review of all wagedata and submit the results to HCFA,and (4) HCFA to compile a complete setof all hospitals’ wage data from a givenFederal fiscal year, we do not haveavailable more recent reliable data tocalculate the wage index. As describedin the proposed rule (65 FR 26299) andsection III.E. of this final rule, we adjustthe wage data to a common period thatreflects the latest cost reporting periodfor the filing year. Because the wageindex is a relative measure, comparingarea average hourly wages to a nationalaverage hourly wage, we believe thewage index is minimally impacted byinflationary effects beyond thoseaccounted for by adjusting the data to acommon period.

C. FY 2001 Wage IndexBecause the hospital wage index is

used to adjust payments to hospitalsunder the prospective payment system,it should, to the extent possible, reflectthe wage costs associated with the areasof the hospital included under thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem. In response to concerns withinthe hospital community related to theremoval from the wage indexcalculation costs related to GME(teaching physicians and residents) andcertified registered nurse anesthetists(CRNAs), which are paid by Medicareseparately from the prospective



payment system, in 1998 the AHAconvened a workgroup to develop aconsensus recommendation on thisissue. The workgroup recommendedthat costs related to GME and CRNAs bephased out of the wage indexcalculation over a 5-year period. Basedupon our analysis of hospitals’ FY 1996wage data, and consistent with the AHAworkgroup’s recommendation, wespecified in the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41505) that we would phase-outthese costs from the calculation of thewage index over a 5-year period,beginning in FY 2000. In keeping withthe decision to phase-out costs relatedto GME and CRNAs, the final FY 2001wage index is based on a blend of 60percent of an average hourly wageincluding these costs, and 40 percent ofan average hourly wage excluding thesecosts.

Comment: We received one commentin support of our continued transition ofremoving GME and CRNA costs fromthe wage index calculation. We alsoreceived a comment from a nationalassociation representing nurseanesthetists expressing concern that, asa result of disparities in cost reportingsystems and vague fiscal intermediaryinstructions, CRNA costs that should bepaid under Part B might still be reportedin hospitals’ FY 1997 cost reports. Thecommenter also stated that removingCRNA costs from the wage indexeliminates a payment mechanism for theindirect patient care activitiesperformed by CRNAs, resulting in adisincentive for hospitals to employCRNAs. To avoid any disruption in the‘‘continuous operations of hospitals,’’the commenter recommended that, priorto implementing any changes to thewage index calculation, HCFA shouldrefine the Part A cost data collectionand cost reporting process and instructthe fiscal intermediaries to provide allhospitals with ‘‘explicit instructions asto the appropriate reporting of CRNAcosts.’’ The commenter believed thisrefinement to the cost data will identifyand exclude only the CRNA salary costsrelated to the rural hospital cost pass-through provisions and allow Part Areimbursement for indirect patient carewhich are not reimbursed underMedicare Part B. In keeping with thegeneral policy to exclude costs that arenot paid through the Medicareprospective payment system, thecommenter also recommended thatHCFA exclude salaries reported underMedicare Part A for anesthesiaassistants.

Response: We note that the FY 2001wage index is the second year of thetransition to eliminating Part A CRNAcosts from the wage index. As

evidenced in the impact analysis in theMay 5, 2000 proposed rule (65 FR26415), eliminating these CRNA andGME costs has an insignificant impact,with no category of hospitals impactedby more than 0.1 percent. Therefore, wedo not believe it is necessary to delayfurther removal of CRNA costs.

Payment for CRNA services is madeunder a fee schedule under MedicarePart B (Supplementary medicalinsurance), with the sole exception ofpayments to hospitals under the ruralpass-through provision. Although ahospital contracting for CRNA serviceswould include the costs on its costreport, the fiscal intermediary forwardsthe information to the carrier forpayment under the fee schedule. As thecommenter noted, this paymentstructure has been in place sinceJanuary 1, 1989. We believe thatintermediaries and carriers are generallywell informed and experienced in thehandling of these costs. However, wewill consider whether furtherclarification of our instructions isnecessary.

The commenter also stated thatMedicare does not specifically excludeanesthesia assistants, who are alsoreimbursed under Part B, from the wageindex. The cost report instructions forWorksheet A, Line 20, refer tononphysician anesthetists, whichinclude both CRNAs and anesthesiaassistants. We will consider whether ourWorksheet S–3 instructions need to berevised to explicitly instruct hospitals toremove the Part B costs associated withanesthesia assistants as well.

1. Teaching Physician Costs and HoursSurvey

As discussed in the July 30, 1999 finalrule, because the FY 1996 cost reportingdata did not separate teaching physiciancosts from other physician Part A costs,we instructed our fiscal intermediariesto survey teaching hospitals to collectdata on teaching physician costs andhours payable under the per residentamounts (§ 413.86) and reported onWorksheet A, Line 23 of the hospitals’cost report.

The FY 1997 cost reports also do notseparately report teaching physiciancosts. Therefore, we once againconducted a special survey to collectdata on these costs. (For the FY 1998cost reports, we have revised theWorksheet S–3, Part II so that hospitalscan separately report teaching physicianPart A costs. Therefore, after this year,it will no longer be necessary for us toconduct this special survey.)

The survey data collected as of mid-January 2000 were included in thepreliminary public use data file made

available on the Internet in February2000 at HCFA’s home page (http://www.hcfa.gov). At that time, we hadreceived teaching physician data for 459out of 770 teaching hospitals reportingphysician Part A costs on theirWorksheet S–3, Part II. Also, in somecases, fiscal intermediaries reported thatteaching hospitals did not incurteaching physician costs. In earlyJanuary 2000, we instructed fiscalintermediaries to review the survey datafor consistency with the SupplementalWorksheet A–8–2 of the hospitals’ costreports. Supplemental Worksheet A–8–2 is used to apply the reasonablecompensation equivalency limits to thecosts of provider-based physicians,itemizing these costs by thecorresponding line number onWorksheet A.

When we notified the hospitals,through our fiscal intermediaries, thatthey could review the survey data onthe Internet, we also notified hospitalsthat requests for changes to the teachingsurvey data had to be submitted byMarch 6, 2000. We instructed fiscalintermediaries to review the requests forchanges received from hospitals andsubmit necessary data revisions toHCFA by April 3, 2000. We removedfrom the wage data the physician Part Ateaching costs and hours reported on thesurvey form for every hospital thatcompleted the survey. These data hadbeen verified by the fiscal intermediarybefore submission to HCFA.

For the FY 2000 wage index, the AHAworkgroup recommended that, ifreliable teaching physician data werenot available for removing teachingcosts from hospitals’ total physician PartA costs, HCFA should remove 80percent of the costs and hours reportedby hospitals attributable to physicians’Part A services. In calculating the FY2000 wage index, if we did not receivesurvey data for a teaching hospital, weremoved 80 percent of the hospital’sreported total physician Part A costsand hours from the calculation. In theMay 5, 2000 proposed rule, for the FY2001 wage index, we proposed adifferent approach. In some instances,fiscal intermediaries had verified thatteaching hospitals do not have teachingphysician costs; for these hospitals, it isnot necessary to adjust the hospitals’physician Part A costs. We conferredwith the fiscal intermediaries todistinguish teaching hospitals that didnot have teaching physician costs fromteaching hospitals that had notidentified the portion of their physicianPart A costs associated with teachingphysicians (that is, hospitals that didnot complete the teaching survey).



In calculating the final FY 2001 wageindex, we removed 100 percent of thephysician Part A costs and hours(reported on Worksheet S–3, Lines 4, 10,12, and 18) in the FY 2001 wage indexcalculation for those hospitals where thefiscal intermediary verifies that thehospital has otherwise unidentifiedteaching physician costs included inphysician Part A costs and hours. Forthose teaching hospitals whose fiscalintermediaries identified as having costsattributable to teaching physicians butreported no physician Part A costs onthe Worksheet S–3, we removed 100percent of Worksheet A, Line 23,Column 1. To determine the hours to beremoved, the costs reported on Line 23of the Worksheet A, Column 1 aredivided by the national average hourlywage for teaching physicians of $59.17based upon the survey.

We note that Line 23 of Worksheet A,Column 1, flows directly into hospitals’total salaries on Worksheet S–3, Part II.Line 23 contains GME costs not directlyattributable to residents’ salaries orfringe benefits. Therefore, these coststend to be costs associated with teachingphysicians. To the extent a hospital failsto separately identify the proportion ofits Line 23, Worksheet A costsassociated with teaching physicians, webelieve it is reasonable to remove all ofthese costs under the presumption thatthey are all associated with teachingphysicians.

Thus, as we proposed in the May 5proposed rule, for the FY 2001 wageindex, we are either using the datasubmitted on the teaching physiciansurvey (837 hospitals), or, in theabsence of such data, removing 100percent of physician Part A costsreported on Worksheet S–3 (287hospitals), or removing the amountreported on Line 23 of Worksheet A,Column 1 (18 hospitals).

We received one comment in supportof removing 100 percent of physicianPart A costs and hours from teachinghospitals where the fiscal intermediaryverifies that the hospital has otherwiseunidentifiable teaching costs includedin physician Part A costs and hours.

2. Nurse Practitioner and Clinical NurseSpecialist Costs

The current wage index includessalaries and wage-related costs for nursepractitioners (NPs) and clinical nursespecialists (CNSs) who, similar tophysician assistants and CRNAs (unlessat hospitals under the rural pass-through exception for CRNAs), are paidunder the physician fee schedule. Overthe past year, we have received severalinquiries from hospitals and fiscalintermediaries regarding NP costs and

how they should be handled forpurposes of the hospital wage index.Because Medicare generally pays for NPand CNS costs under Part B outside thehospital prospective payment system,removing NP and CNS Part B costs fromthe wage index calculation would beconsistent with our general policy toexclude, to the extent possible, coststhat are not paid through the hospitalprospective payment system. BecauseNP and CNS costs are not separatelyreported on the Worksheet S–3 for FYs1997, 1998, and 1999, the FY 2000Worksheet S–3 and cost reportinginstructions will be revised to allow forseparate reporting of NP and CNS PartA and Part B costs. We plan to excludethe Part B costs beginning with the FY2004 wage index. These services arepervasive in both rural and urbansettings. As such, because the wageindex is a relative measure, we believethere will be no significant overallimpact resulting from the removal ofPart B costs for NPs and CNSs.

We did not receive any publiccomments on our plan to exclude NPand CNS Part B costs from the wageindex calculation, beginning with theFY 2004 wage index.

3. Severance and Bonus Pay CostsOn October 6, 1999, we issued a

memorandum to hospitals and fiscalintermediaries regarding our policy ontreatment of severance and bonus paycosts in developing the wage index,effective beginning with the FY 2001wage index. (The hospital cost reportinstructions also will be amended toreflect our policy on these costs.) Westated that severance pay costs may beincluded on Worksheet S–3 as salarieson Part II, Line 1, only if the associatedhours are included. If the hospital hasno accounting of the hours, or if thecosts are not based on hours, theseverance pay costs may not beincluded in the wage index. On theother hand, bonus pay costs may beincluded in the cost report on Line 1 ofWorksheet S–3 with no correspondinghours. Due to the inquiries we continueto receive from hospitals regarding theinclusion of severance pay costs on costreports, in the May 5 proposed rule, weclarified our policy in this area.

Hospitals vary in their accounting ofseverance pay costs. Some hospitalsbase the amounts to be paid on hours,for example, 80 hours worth of pay.Others do not; for example, a 15-yearemployee may be offered a $25,000buyout package. Some hospitals recordassociated hours; others do not. TheWage Index Workgroup has suggestedthat we not include any severance paycosts in the wage index calculation, that

these costs are for terminatedemployees, and, therefore, they shouldbe considered an administrative ratherthan a salary expense.

Severance pay costs can be substantialamounts, particularly in periods ofdownsizing. In the proposed rule, westate our view that, if severance paycosts are included with no associatedhours, the wage index, which is arelative measure of wage costs acrosslabor market areas, would be distorted.

We included severance pay costs inthe proposed FY 2001 wage index as asalary cost to the extent that associatedhours also were reported. However, wesolicited public comments on this issue.We received two comments on thisissue.

Comment: Two national hospitalassociations disagree with our policyclarification that severance pay costsmay be included on Worksheet S–3, PartII, Line 1 as salaries only if associatedhours are included. These commentersargued that HCFA’s wage index policyis that wages and benefits are to bedetermined in accordance withgenerally accepted accountingprinciples (GAAP) rather than Medicarecost reimbursement principles and thatunder GAAP severance pay is classifiedas salaries and wages. They also arguedthat, unless a terminated employeecontinues to work or is still consideredto be employed by the provider after thelast regular pay period that additionalhours should not be reported forseverance pay. Further, for employeesreceiving severance pay, ‘‘there are nohours to report’’ because ‘‘their job hasbeen eliminated and they are no longeremployed by the provider.’’

Response: As indicated in theproposed rule, we exclude severancepay costs from the wage indexcalculation if there are no associatedhours because we believe that inclusionof such costs might lead to a distortionof the wage index. The wage index is arelative measure of average hourlywages across geographic areas, and webelieve that severance pay costs (whichmight be significant) without associatedhours might inappropriately inflate theaverage hourly wage for a given hospitalor area for a given time period (whichin turn would distort the relativemeasure of wages across areas). Forexample, if we included severance paycosts with no associated hours, then ahospital might be more likely to qualifyfor geographic reclassification forpurposes of the wage index simplybecause it incurred significant severancepay costs in a given year. In light of thecomments, we will continue to examinethis issue to determine whetherinclusion of severance pay costs with no



associated hours would lead to a bettermeasure of relative wages as opposed toa distortion in the measure and todetermine whether it is feasible andappropriate to revise our policy onseverance pay costs in the future.

4. Health Insurance and Health-RelatedCosts

In the September 1, 1994 final rule (59FR 45356), we stated that healthinsurance, purchased or self-insurance,is a core wage-related cost. Over the pastyear, we have received several inquiriesfrom hospitals and hospital associationsrequesting that we define ‘‘purchasedhealth insurance costs.’’ In response, inthe May 5 proposed rule, we clarifiedthat, for wage index purposes, we define‘‘purchased health insurance costs’’ asthe premiums and administrative costsa hospital pays on behalf of itsemployees for health insurancecoverage. ‘‘Self-insurance’’ includes thehospital’s costs (not charges) for coveredservices delivered to its employees, lessany amounts paid by the employees,and less the personnel costs for hospitalstaff who delivered the services (thesecosts are already included in the wageindex). For purchased health insuranceand self-health insurance, the includedcosts must be for services covered in ahealth insurance plan.

Also, in the September 1, 1994 finalrule (59 FR 45357), we addressed acomment about the inclusion of health-related costs in the calculation of thewage index. Such health-related costsinclude employee physicalexaminations, flu shots, and clinicvisits, and other services that are notcovered by employees’ health insuranceplans but are provided at no cost or atdiscounted rates to employees of thehospital. In the May 5 proposed rule, weproposed to clarify that the costs forthese services may be included as an‘‘other’’ wage-related cost if (amongother criteria), when all such health-related costs are combined, the total ofsuch costs is greater than one percent ofthe hospital’s total salaries (lessexcluded area salaries). As discussed inthe September 1, 1994 final rule, a costmay be allowable as an ‘‘other wage-related cost’’ if it meets certain criteria.Under one criterion, the wage-relatedcost must be greater than one percent oftotal salaries (less excluded areasalaries). For purposes of applying this1-percent test with respect to the health-related costs at issue here, we look atthe combined total of the health-relatedcosts (not charges) for services deliveredto its employees, less any amountsemployees paid, and less the personnelcosts for hospital staff who delivered the

services (as these costs are alreadyincluded in the wage index).

Comment: We received severalcomments regarding our policy anddefinitions for health insurance andhealth-related costs. Some commentersinterpreted the policy clarification inthe proposed rule as stating that self-insurance will no longer be included ascore wage-related costs. They believethat not including these costs isinconsistent with the fundamentalconcept of core wage-related costs. Onecommenter pointed to the 1994 HCFA/Industry workgroup which establishedthe list of core wage-related costs still inuse, and contended that ‘‘(t)heseproposed changes are inconsistent withthe agreements reached in those originalworkgroup meetings.’’

Response: As noted in the May 5proposed rule, we previously stated ourpolicy regarding health insurance andhealth-related costs in the FY 1995 finalrule. We emphasize again in this finalrule that, health insurance costs,whether purchased or self-insured, is,and will continue to be, a core wage-related cost. We did not propose achange in this policy, nor are weimplementing a change in this policy inthis final rule.

Comment: Some commenters objectedto our statement in the proposed rulethat only health self-insurance costs (notcharges, and exclusive of any amountspaid by covered employees and less thepersonnel costs for hospital staff whodelivered the services) are allowablecore wage-related costs, and also arguedthat health self-insurance costs shouldbe determined in accordance withGAAP which would include chargesand personnel costs. They suggestedthat excluding costs that are determinedin accordance with GAAP would createmajor inconsistencies among hospitalsand inevitably result in major swings inthe wage index for individual MSAs.

Two commenters recommended thatHCFA review this policy to avoidcreating disincentives to hospitals thatdevelop cost-effective health-insurancebenefits; they asserted that there shouldbe no differentiation between purchasedhealth insurance and self-funded healthinsurance.

Response: We disagree with thecommenters that we are unfairly andinconsistently treating hospitals thatself-insure by not allowing as a wage-related cost the salary costs foremployees who deliver the healthservices. The personnel costs ofdelivering health care to all of ahospital’s patients are already includedin the wage index through line 1 ofWorksheet S–3, Part II. Accounting forthese hospital personnel costs on lines

13 or 14 for wage-related costs wouldfalsely overstate a hospital’s averagehourly wage. Unless a hospital actuallyincurs the personnel costs twice, it isinappropriate to include the costs twice.Our policy does not require theexclusion of staff personnel costs fromthe premium costs for hospitals thatpurchase health insurance. As definedabove and in the proposed rule,purchased health insurance costsinclude the premiums andadministrative costs a hospital pays onbehalf of its employees for healthinsurance coverage. The commenterssuggested that the premium costs mayinclude a hospital’s staff personnelcosts. We believe it is appropriate toallow the entire premium cost to ahospital as a wage-related cost if theintermediary verifies that the amount isan actual cost to the hospital.

Nevertheless, we agree with thecommenters that, overall, for ‘‘wage-related costs’’, the application of GAAPcreates a more static wage index and abetter measure of relative wages acrossareas. For the FY 2002 wage index, wewill advise hospitals to apply GAAP forwage-related costs, including healthinsurance and health-related costs.However, for self-health insurance andhealth-related costs, personnel costsassociated with hospital staff thatdeliver the services to the employeesmust continue to be excluded fromwage-related costs, if the costs arealready included in the wage data assalaries on Worksheet S–3, Part II, LineI.

Comment: One commenterrecommended that the insurance planrequirements be eliminated from ourdefinition of health insurance costs,stating that hospitals should be requiredto maintain adequate records in supportof the services they provide to theiremployees at either no cost or belowcost. In expressing the concern thatemployee health benefits are ever-changing, the commenter recommendedthat not only must HCFA’s definition ofinsurance plans be specific but it shouldalso be implemented prospectively withsufficient clarification to reduceinconsistency in interpretation by thefiscal intermediaries.

Response: We are concerned thatadopting this recommendation wouldmake it difficult for intermediaries toaccurately track benefits provided to ahospital’s employees, leading to greaterdisparity in the treatment of these costsacross hospitals. We will give furtherconsideration to the implications of thisrecommendation, however.

Comment: One commenterrecommended that health-related costs,for such items as ‘‘employee physicals,



flu shots, and clinic visits’’ should beincluded as a core wage-related cost;therefore, the 1-percent thresholdcriteria for health related costs shouldbe eliminated.

Response: In the September 1, 1994final rule, when we published the list ofcore wage-related costs agreed upon bythe workgroup, we responded tocomments specifically suggesting thathealth-related services (as opposed toself-insured health services, which wasclearly on the original core list) beadded to the core list. In our response,we pointed out that the core list wasdeveloped in conjunction with thehospital industry, to establish a list ofcommonly recognized costs thatcontribute significantly to the wagecosts of a hospital and are readilyidentifiable in the hospital’s records.Health-related benefits was not includedon the core list at that time. Wecontinue to believe these health-relatedbenefits do not fit the criteriaestablished by the workgroup foridentifying core wage-related costs.

5. Elimination of Wage Costs AssociatedWith Rural Health Clinics and FederallyQualified Health Centers

The current hospital wage indexincludes the salaries and wage-relatedcosts of hospital-based rural healthclinics (RHCs) and federally qualifiedhealth centers (FQHCs). However,Medicare pays for these costs outsidethe hospital inpatient prospectivepayment system. Effective January 1,1998, under section 1833(f) of the Act,as amended by section 4205 of PublicLaw 105–33, Medicare pays bothhospital-based and freestanding RHCsand FQHCs on a cost-per-visit basis.Medicare cost reporting forms for RHCsand FQHCs were revised to reflect thislegislative change, beginning with costreporting periods ending on or afterSeptember 30, 1998 (the FY 1998 costreport). Other cost-reimbursedoutpatient departments, such asambulatory surgical centers, communitymental health centers, andcomprehensive outpatient rehabilitationfacilities, are presently excluded fromthe wage index. Therefore, consistentwith our wage index refinements thatexclude, to the extent possible, costsassociated with services not paid underthe hospital inpatient prospectivepayment system, we believe it would beappropriate to exclude all salary costsassociated with RHCs and FQHCs fromthe wage index calculation if we hadfeasible, reliable data for suchexclusion.

Because RHC and FQHC costs are notseparately reported on the Worksheet S–3 for FYs 1997, 1998, and 1999, we

cannot exclude these costs from the FY2001, FY 2002, or FY 2003 wageindexes. Therefore, we will revise theFY 2000 Worksheet S–3 to beginproviding for the separate reporting ofRHC and FQHC salaries, wage-relatedcosts, and hours. We will evaluate thewage data for RHCs and FQHCs indeveloping the FY 2004 wage index.

We received no public comments onthis issue.

D. Verification of Wage Data From theMedicare Cost Report

The data for the FY 2001 wage indexwere obtained from Worksheet S–3,Parts II and III of the FY 1997 Medicarecost reports. The data file used toconstruct the wage index includes FY1997 data submitted to HCFA as of mid-July 2000. As in past years, weperformed an intensive review of thewage data, mostly through the use ofedits designed to identify aberrant data.

We asked our fiscal intermediaries torevise or verify data elements thatresulted in specific edit failures. Theunresolved data elements that wereincluded in the calculation of theproposed FY 2001 wage index havebeen resolved and are reflected incalculation of the final FY 2001 wageindex. We note that, as part of thisprocess to identify aberrant data andcorrect any errors prior to thecalculation of the final FY 2001 wageindex, we notified by letter thosehospitals that were leading to largevariations in the wage indexes of theirlabor market areas compared to the FY2000 wage index. These hospitals wereinstructed to review their data toidentify the reason for the largeincreases or decreases and notify theirfiscal intermediary of any necessarycorrections. This resulted in severalrevisions to the data.

Also, as part of our editing process, inthe final wage index, we removed datafor 15 hospitals that failed edits. Foreight of these hospitals, we were unableto obtain sufficient documentation toverify or revise the data because thehospitals are no longer participating inthe Medicare program or are inbankruptcy status. Two hospitals haderroneous average hourly wages(negative and zero) after allocatingoverhead to their excluded areas and,therefore, were removed from thecalculation. The data from theremaining five hospitals also failed theedits and were removed. As a result, thefinal FY 2001 wage index is calculatedbased on FY 1997 wage data for 4,950hospitals.

E. Computation of the FY 2001 WageIndex

The method used to compute the FY2001 wage index follows. We note onetechnical change to the formula used tocalculate the proposed wage index. Forthe first time, in the proposed rule wesubtracted line 13 of Worksheet S–3,Part III from total hours whendetermining the excluded hours ratioused to estimate the amount of overheadattributed to excluded areas. Althoughwe continue to believe this is the correctformula for determining this ratio, itresulted in very large and inappropriateincreases in the average hourly wagesfor some hospitals. Therefore, incalculating the final FY 2001 wageindex, we are not subtracting line 13 ofWorksheet S–3, Part III in thecalculation.

Step 1—As noted above, we based theFY 2001 wage index on wage datareported on the FY 1997 Medicare costreports. We gathered data from each ofthe non-Federal, short-term, acute carehospitals for which data were reportedon the Worksheet S–3, Parts II and III ofthe Medicare cost report for thehospital’s cost reporting periodbeginning on or after October 1, 1996and before October 1, 1997. In addition,we included data from a few hospitalsthat had cost reporting periodsbeginning in September 1996 andreported a cost reporting periodexceeding 52 weeks. These data wereincluded because they did not have acost report begin during the perioddescribed above. However, we generallydescribe these wage data as FY 1997data. We note that, if a hospital hadmore than one cost reporting periodbeginning during FY 1997 (for example,a hospital had two short cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,1996 and before October 1, 1997), weincluded wage data from only one of thecost reporting periods, the longest, inthe wage index calculation. If there wasmore than one cost reporting period andthe periods were equal in length, weincluded the wage data from the latestperiod in the wage index calculation.

Step 2—Salaries—The method used tocompute a hospital’s average hourlywage is a blend of 60 percent of thehospital’s average hourly wageincluding all GME and CRNA costs, and40 percent of the hospital’s averagehourly wage after eliminating all GMEand CRNA costs.

In calculating a hospital’s averagesalaries plus wage-related costs,including all GME and CRNA costs, wesubtracted from Line 1 (total salaries)the Part B salaries reported on Lines 3and 5, home office salaries reported on



Line 7, and excluded salaries reportedon Lines 8 and 8.01 (that is, directsalaries attributable to skilled nursingfacility services, home health services,and other subprovider components notsubject to the prospective paymentsystem). We also subtracted from Line 1the salaries for which no hours werereported on Lines 2, 4, and 6. Todetermine total salaries plus wage-related costs, we added to the nethospital salaries the costs of contractlabor for direct patient care, certain topmanagement, and physician Part Aservices (Lines 9 and 10), home officesalaries and wage-related costs reportedby the hospital on Lines 11 and 12, andnonexcluded area wage-related costs(Lines 13, 14, 16, 18, and 20).

We note that contract labor and homeoffice salaries for which nocorresponding hours are reported werenot included. In addition, wage-relatedcosts for specific categories ofemployees (Lines 16, 18, and 20) areexcluded if no corresponding salariesare reported for those employees (Lines2, 4, and 6, respectively).

We then calculated a hospital’ssalaries plus wage-related costs bysubtracting from total salaries thesalaries plus wage-related costs forteaching physicians, Part A CRNAs(Lines 2 and 16), and residents (Lines 6and 20).

Step 3—Hours—With the exception ofwage-related costs, for which there areno associated hours, we computed totalhours using the same methods asdescribed for salaries in Step 2.

Step 4—For each hospital reportingboth total overhead salaries and totaloverhead hours greater than zero, wethen allocated overhead costs. First, wedetermined the ratio of excluded areahours (sum of Lines 8 and 8.01 ofWorksheet S-3, Part II) to revised totalhours (Line 1 minus the sum of Part II,Lines 3, 5, and 7). We then computedthe amounts of overhead salaries andhours to be allocated to excluded areasby multiplying the above ratio by thetotal overhead salaries and hoursreported on Line 13 of Worksheet S–3,Part III. Finally, we subtracted thecomputed overhead salaries and hoursassociated with excluded areas from thetotal salaries and hours derived in Steps2 and 3.

Step 5—For each hospital, weadjusted the total salaries plus wage-related costs to a common period todetermine total adjusted salaries pluswage-related costs. To make the wageadjustment, we estimated the percentagechange in the employment cost index(ECI) for compensation for each 30-dayincrement from October 14, 1996through April 15, 1998 for private

industry hospital workers from theBureau of Labor Statistics’Compensation and Working Conditions.We use the ECI because it reflects theprice increase associated with totalcompensation (salaries plus fringes)rather than just the increase in salaries.In addition, the ECI includes managersas well as other hospital workers. Thismethodology to compute the monthlyupdate factors uses actual quarterly ECIdata and assures that the update factorsmatch the actual quarterly and annualpercent changes. The factors used toadjust the hospital’s data were based onthe midpoint of the cost reportingperiod, as indicated below.

MIDPOINT OF COST REPORTINGPERIOD

After Before Adjustmentfactor

10/14/96 ........ 11/15/96 ........ 1.0284811/14/96 ........ 12/15/96 ........ 1.0274812/14/96 ........ 01/15/97 ........ 1.0264101/14/97 ........ 02/15/97 ........ 1.0252102/14/97 ........ 03/15/97 ........ 1.0238703/14/97 ........ 04/15/97 ........ 1.0223604/14/97 ........ 05/15/97 ........ 1.0206805/14/97 ........ 06/15/97 ........ 1.0188306/14/97 ........ 07/15/97 ........ 1.0169507/14/97 ........ 08/15/97 ........ 1.0152008/14/97 ........ 09/15/97 ........ 1.0135709/14/97 ........ 10/15/97 ........ 1.0118210/14/97 ........ 11/15/97 ........ 1.0096611/14/97 ........ 12/15/97 ........ 1.0071212/14/97 ........ 01/15/98 ........ 1.0045101/14/98 ........ 02/15/98 ........ 1.0021302/14/98 ........ 03/15/98 ........ 1.0000003/14/98 ........ 04/15/98 ........ 0.99798

For example, the midpoint of a costreporting period beginning January 1,1997 and ending December 31, 1997 isJune 30, 1997. An adjustment factor of1.01695 would be applied to the wagesof a hospital with such a cost reportingperiod. In addition, for the data for anycost reporting period that began in FY1997 and covers a period of less than360 days or more than 370 days, weannualized the data to reflect a 1-yearcost report. Annualization isaccomplished by dividing the data bythe number of days in the cost reportand then multiplying the results by 365.

Step 6—Each hospital was assigned toits appropriate urban or rural labormarket area before any reclassificationsunder section 1886(d)(8)(B) or section1886(d)(10) of the Act. Within eachurban or rural labor market area, weadded the total adjusted salaries pluswage-related costs obtained in Step 5(with and without GME and CRNAcosts) for all hospitals in that area todetermine the total adjusted salariesplus wage-related costs for the labormarket area.

Step 7—We divided the total adjustedsalaries plus wage-related costs obtainedunder both methods in Step 6 by thesum of the corresponding total hours(from Step 4) for all hospitals in eachlabor market area to determine anaverage hourly wage for the area.

Because the FY 2001 wage index isbased on a blend of average hourlywages, we then added 60 percent of theaverage hourly wage calculated withoutremoving GME and CRNA costs, and 40percent of the average hourly wagecalculated with these costs excluded.

Step 8—We added the total adjustedsalaries plus wage-related costs obtainedin Step 5 for all hospitals in the nationand then divided the sum by thenational sum of total hours from Step 4to arrive at a national average hourlywage (using the same blendingmethodology described in Step 7). Usingthe data as described above, the nationalaverage hourly wage is $21.7702.

Step 9—For each urban or rural labormarket area, we calculated the hospitalwage index value by dividing the areaaverage hourly wage obtained in Step 7by the national average hourly wagecomputed in Step 8.

Step 10—Following the process setforth above, we developed a separatePuerto Rico-specific wage index forpurposes of adjusting the Puerto Ricostandardized amounts. (The nationalPuerto Rico standardized amount isadjusted by a wage index calculated forall Puerto Rico labor market areas basedon the national average hourly wage asdescribed above.) We added the totaladjusted salaries plus wage-related costs(as calculated in Step 5) for all hospitalsin Puerto Rico and divided the sum bythe total hours for Puerto Rico (ascalculated in Step 4) to arrive at anoverall average hourly wage of $10.1902for Puerto Rico.

For each labor market area in PuertoRico, we calculated the Puerto Rico-specific wage index value by dividingthe area average hourly wage (ascalculated in Step 7) by the overallPuerto Rico average hourly wage.

Step 11—Section 4410 of Public Law105–33 provides that, for discharges onor after October 1, 1997, the area wageindex applicable to any hospital that islocated in an urban area may not be lessthan the area wage index applicable tohospitals located in rural areas in thatState. Furthermore, this wage indexfloor is to be implemented in such amanner as to assure that aggregateprospective payment system paymentsare not greater or less than those thatwould have been made in the year ifthis section did not apply. For FY 2001,this change affects 193 hospitals in 34MSAs. The MSAs affected by this



provision are identified in Table 4A bya footnote.

F. Revisions to the Wage Index Based onHospital Redesignation

Under section 1886(d)(8)(B) of theAct, hospitals in certain rural countiesadjacent to one or more MSAs areconsidered to be located in one of theadjacent MSAs if certain standards aremet. Under section 1886(d)(10) of theAct, the Medicare GeographicClassification Review Board (MGCRB)considers applications by hospitals forgeographic reclassification for purposesof payment under the prospectivepayment system. Applications forMGCRB reclassification are now on theinternet at http://www.hcfa.gov/regs/appeals.

1. Provisions of Public Law 106–113

Under section 152(b) of Public Law106–113, hospitals in certain countiesare deemed to be located in specifiedareas for purposes of payment under thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem, for discharges occurring on orafter October 1, 2000. For paymentpurposes, these hospitals are to betreated as though they were reclassifiedfor purposes of both the standardizedamount and the wage index. In the May5 proposed rule we calculated FY 2001wage indexes for hospitals in theaffected counties as if they werereclassified to the specified area.

For purposes of making paymentsunder section 1886(d) of the Act for FY2001, section 152(b) provides thefollowing:

• Iredell County, North Carolina isdeemed to be located in the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina MSA;

• Orange County, New York isdeemed to be located in the New York,New York MSA;

• Lake County, Indiana and LeeCounty, Illinois are deemed to belocated in the Chicago, Illinois MSA;

• Hamilton-Middletown, Ohio isdeemed to be located in the Cincinnati,Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana MSA;

• Brazoria County, Texas is deemedto be located in the Houston, TexasMSA;

• Chittenden County, Vermont isdeemed to be located in the Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Lowell-Brockton,Massachusetts-New Hampshire MSA.

Section 152(b) also requires that thesereclassifications be treated for FY 2001as though they are reclassificationdecisions by the MGCRB. Therefore, inthe May 5 proposed rule, we proposedthat the wage indexes for the areas towhich these hospitals are reclassifying,

as well as the wage indexes for the areasin which they are located, would besubject to all of the normal rules forcalculating wage indexes for hospitalsaffected by reclassification decisions bythe MGCRB, as described below.

In addition, we proposed that thereclassifications enacted by section152(b) pertain only to the hospitalslocated in the specified counties, not tohospitals in other counties within theMSA or hospitals reclassified into theMSA by the MGCRB.

Under section 154(b) of Public Law106–113, the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, Pennsylvania MSA wage indexwas calculated including the wage datafor Lehigh Valley Hospital. Section154(b) states that, for FY 2001,‘‘[n]otwithstanding any other provisionof section 1886(d) of the Social SecurityAct (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)), incalculating and applying the wageindices under that section for dischargesoccurring during fiscal year 2001,Lehigh Valley Hospital shall be treatedas being classified in the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton MetropolitanStatistical Area.’’ We stated in theproposed rule that this statutorylanguage directs us to include LehighValley Hospital’s wage data in the wageindex calculation for the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton MSA for FY 2000 andFY 2001.

Section 1886(d)(8)(B) of the Actestablished that a hospital located in arural county adjacent to one or moreurban areas is treated as being locatedin the MSA to which the greatestnumber of workers in the countycommute, if the rural county wouldotherwise be considered part of an MSA(or NECMAs), if the commuting ratesused in determining outlying countieswere determined on the basis of theaggregate number of resident workerswho commute to (and, if applicableunder the standards, from) the centralcounty or counties of all contiguousMSAs. Through FY 2000, hospitals arerequired to use standards published inthe Federal Register on January 3, 1980,by the Office of Management andBudget. For FY 2000, there were 27hospitals affected by this provision.

Section 402 of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(d)(8)(B) of theAct to allow hospitals to elect to use thestandards published in the FederalRegister on January 3, 1980 (1980decennial census data) or March 30,1990 (1990 decennial census data)during FY 2001 and FY 2002. As of FY2003, hospitals will be required to usethe standards published in the FederalRegister by the Director of the Office ofManagement and Budget based on the

most recent available decennialpopulation data.

We are in the process of working withthe Office of Management and Budget toidentify the hospitals that would beaffected by this amendment. We willrevise payments to hospitals in theaffected counties as soon as data isavailable. Hospitals will have thisoption during FY 2001 and FY 2002.After FY 2002, hospitals will berequired to use data based on the 2000decennial census. We refer the reader tothe September 30, 1988 final rule (53 FR38499) for a complete discussion of ourapproach to identify the outlyingcounties using the standards publishedin the January 3, 1980 Federal Register.

Comment: We received threecomments on our proposed policy totreat hospitals reclassifying into an areacontaining one of the countiesreclassified by section 152(b) in amanner similar to any other situationwhere a hospital reclassifies into an areawhere hospitals in that area have beenreclassified into another area. Thecommenters, all hospitals that havebeen granted a reclassification into anarea containing a county reclassified bysection 152(b), requested that theyshould be permitted to reclassify alongwith the county identified by section152(b). They added that, in the event itwas determined that their preferredsolution was not permissible, the wageindex of the area to which they werereclassified should be calculated byincluding the wage data for thehospitals reclassified by section 152(b).

The commenters noted that theywould be at a competitive disadvantageby the section 152(b) reclassifications ifthey were treated similar to otherdecisions by the MGCRB. In addition,they believed that the Secretary hassome discretion with respect tocalculating the wage indexes for areaswith hospitals that have beenreclassified, noting that the legislationdoes not specifically direct the Secretaryto exclude reclassified hospitals fromthe calculation for the area in which ahospital is actually located.

Response: We have reconsidered themethodology for calculating the wageindex applicable to hospitalsreclassified into the MSAs that containthe counties specified in section 152(b)of Public Law 106–113. We continue tobelieve that the hospitals located in thecounties specified in section 152(b)should be distinguished from thehospitals that were reclassified by theMGCRB into the MSAs containing thosecounties. Congress provided specialtreatment for hospitals in the countiesspecified in the statute, but it did notprovide special treatment for hospitals



reclassified to the MSAs that containthose counties. Moreover, under theMGCRB process, hospitals arereclassified into MSAs as a whole, notinto specific counties within an MSA;for example, some hospitals werereclassified by the MGCRB into theNewburgh, NY–PA MSA, whichcontains Orange County, NY and oneother county, but those hospitals werenot reclassified into Orange Countyitself. Thus, the benefits of section152(b) apply only to the hospitalslocated in the counties specified byCongress.

Consistent with one of the suggestionsof the commenters, however, we arerevising the methodology reflected inthe proposed rule with respect to thecalculation of the wage index values forthe MSAs containing the countiesspecified in section 152(b). Theproposed rule reflected our normallyapplicable policy with respect toreclassifications, under which the wagesof hospitals reclassified out of an MSAwould be excluded from the calculationof the wage index value for that MSA;application of our normal rules mightlead to an unexpected decrease in thewage index value for an MSA arisingfrom the provisions of section 152(b). Toaddress the unexpected decrease thatmight otherwise occur, we believe thatit is appropriate to calculate the wageindex values for the MSAs that containthe counties specified in section 152(b)(e.g., the Newburgh MSA) by includingthe wages of hospitals that werereclassified out of the area by section152(b). We believe that we should notexclude the wages of those hospitalsbecause Congress has provided specialtreatment for those hospitals, and webelieve that including the wages of thereclassified hospitals appropriatelyreconciles the provisions of section152(b) of Public Law 106–113, theMGCRB statutory and regulatoryscheme, section 1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act,as well as the expectations of thehospitals prior to the enactment ofsection 152(b).

Comment: We received one commentrelated to our proposed treatment ofLehigh Valley Hospital’s wage dataunder section 154(b) of Public Law 106–113. For FY 2001, Lehigh ValleyHospital was reclassified by the MGCRBto the Philadelphia MSA. Thecommenter argued that it was notCongress’ intent that Lehigh ValleyHospital should be precluded fromreclassifying.

The commenter also contended thatthe statutory language of section 154(b)could allow HCFA to permit LehighValley Hospital to reclassify toPhiladelphia, while the hospital’s wage

data would still be used to calculate theAllentown-Bethlehem-Easton MSAwage index. The commenter stated thatby indicating this provision that LehighValley ‘‘shall be treated’’ as being in theAllentown MSA, Congress did notintend to prohibit Lehigh Valley fromreclassifying. If this had been Congress’intent, it would have been stated assuch.

Response: In the proposed rule, weincluded Lehigh Valley Hospital’s wagedata in the wage index calculation forthe Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton MSA.We also indicated that we believed thestatutory language of section 154(b)required us to apply the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton MSA wage index toLehigh Valley Hospital for paymentsduring FY 2001. However, we note that,despite the language of section 154(b),the MGCRB did reclassify Lehigh ValleyHospital to the Philadelphia MSA forFY 2001, and the HCFA Administratordid not reverse that decision. This hasthe effect of leaving stand the decisionby the MGCRB to reclassify LehighValley Hospital into the PhiladelphiaMSA for purposes of calculating andapplying the Philadelphia wage index.

With respect to calculating theAllentown-Bethlehem-Easton MSAwage index, section 154(b) requires thatwe include Lehigh Valley Hospital’swage data in calculating the wage indexfor this MSA. We note that the provisionis effective ‘‘(n)otwithstanding any otherprovision of section 1886(d) of theSocial Security Act.’’ Therefore,although our normal policy is to removethe wage data of a hospital reclassifiedout of an area when calculating thatarea’s wage index, section 154(b) directsus to include Lehigh’s wage data incalculating the wage index for the A–B–E MSA.

2. Effects of ReclassificationThe methodology for determining the

wage index values for redesignatedhospitals is applied jointly to thehospitals located in those rural countiesthat were deemed urban under section1886(d)(8)(B) of the Act and thosehospitals that were reclassified as aresult of the MGCRB decisions undersection 1886(d)(10) of the Act. Section1886(d)(8)(C) of the Act provides thatthe application of the wage index toredesignated hospitals is dependent onthe hypothetical impact that the wagedata from these hospitals would have onthe wage index value for the area towhich they have been redesignated.Therefore, except as discussed above, asprovided in section 1886(d)(8)(C) of theAct, the wage index values weredetermined by considering thefollowing:

• If including the wage data for theredesignated hospitals would reduce thewage index value for the area to whichthe hospitals are redesignated by 1percentage point or less, the area wageindex value determined exclusive of thewage data for the redesignated hospitalsapplies to the redesignated hospitals.

• If including the wage data for theredesignated hospitals reduces the wageindex value for the area to which thehospitals are redesignated by more than1 percentage point, the redesignatedhospitals are subject to that combinedwage index value.

• If including the wage data for theredesignated hospitals increases thewage index value for the area to whichthe hospitals are redesignated, both thearea and the redesignated hospitalsreceive the combined wage index value.

• The wage index value for aredesignated urban or rural hospitalcannot be reduced below the wageindex value for the rural areas of theState in which the hospital is located.

• Rural areas whose wage indexvalues would be reduced by excludingthe wage data for hospitals that havebeen redesignated to another areacontinue to have their wage indexvalues calculated as if no redesignationhad occurred.

• Rural areas whose wage indexvalues increase as a result of excludingthe wage data for the hospitals that havebeen redesignated to another area havetheir wage index values calculatedexclusive of the wage data of theredesignated hospitals.

• The wage index value for an urbanarea is calculated exclusive of the wagedata for hospitals that have beenreclassified to another area. However,geographic reclassification may notreduce the wage index value for anurban area below the statewide ruralwage index value.

We note that, except for those ruralareas in which redesignation wouldreduce the rural wage index value, thewage index value for each area iscomputed exclusive of the wage data forhospitals that have been redesignatedfrom the area for purposes of their wageindex. As a result, several urban areaslisted in Table 4A have no hospitalsremaining in the area. This is becauseall the hospitals originally in theseurban areas have been reclassified toanother area by the MGCRB. These areaswith no remaining hospitals receive theprereclassified wage index value. Theprereclassified wage index value willapply as long as the area remains empty.

The final wage index values for FY2001 are shown in Tables 4A, 4B, 4C,and 4F in the Addendum to this finalrule. Hospitals that are redesignated



should use the wage index valuesshown in Table 4C. Areas in Table 4Cmay have more than one wage indexvalue because the wage index value fora redesignated urban or rural hospitalcannot be reduced below the wageindex value for the rural area of theState in which the hospital is located.When the wage index value of the areato which a hospital is redesignated islower than the wage index value for therural area of the State in which thehospital is located, the redesignatedhospital receives the higher wage indexvalue; that is, the wage index value forthe rural area of the State in which it islocated, rather than the wage indexvalue otherwise applicable to theredesignated hospitals.

Tables 4D and 4E list the averagehourly wage for each labor market area,before the redesignation of hospitals,based on the FY 1997 wage data. Inaddition, Table 3C in the Addendum tothis final rule includes the adjustedaverage hourly wage for each hospitalbased on the FY 1997 data as of July2000 (reflecting the phase-out of GMEand CRNA wages as described at sectionIII.C of this preamble). The MGCRB willuse the average hourly wage publishedin this final rule to evaluate a hospital’sapplication for reclassification for FY2002 (unless that average hourly wage islater revised in accordance with thewage data correction policy described in§ 412.63(w)(2)). We note that inadjudicating these wage indexreclassifications the MGCRB will usethe average hourly wages for eachhospital and labor market area that arereflected in the final FY 2001 wageindex.

We indicated in the proposed rulethat, at the time the proposed wageindex was constructed, the MGCRB hadcompleted its review of FY 2001reclassification requests. The final FY2001 wage index values incorporate all493 hospitals redesignated for purposesof the wage index (hospitalsredesignated under section1886(d)(8)(B) or 1886(d)(10) of the Act,and section 152(b) Public Law 106–113)for FY 2001). Since publication of theMay 5 proposed rule, the number ofreclassifications has changed becausesome MGCRB decisions were still underreview by the Administrator andbecause some hospitals decided towithdraw their requests forreclassification.

Changes to the wage index thatresulted from withdrawals of requestsfor reclassification, wage indexcorrections, appeals, and theAdministrator’s review process havebeen incorporated into the wage indexvalues published in this final rule. The

changes affect not only the wage indexvalue for specific geographic areas, butalso the wage index value redesignatedhospitals receive; that is, whether theyreceive the wage index value for thearea to which they are redesignated, ora wage index value that includes thedata for both the hospitals already in thearea and the redesignated hospitals.Further, the wage index value for thearea from which the hospitals areredesignated is affected.

Comment: One commenterrecommended that the average hourlywages shown in Tables 4D and 4Eshould be consistent with the valuesshown in Tables 4A and 4B. In supportof this recommendation, the commentersuggested that, because our policy forcomputing the wage index values forurban areas excludes wages for hospitalsthat have reclassified to another area,the average hourly wages shown inTable 4D should be computed exclusiveof the reclassified hospitals. Thecommenter believed the recommendedchange has the potential of impacting ahospital’s efforts to reclassify becausethe hospital may not qualify based onthe ‘‘unadjusted’’ hourly wage currentlyshown in Table 4D.

Response: As discussed above and inthe May 5 proposed rule (65 FR 26301),the average hourly wages in Tables 4Dand 4E reflect the labor market areaaverage hourly wages before hospitalredesignations. We provide theunadjusted rather than adjusted averagehourly wages because the MGCRB mustuse unadjusted average hourly wages indetermining a hospital’s eligibility forreclassification. A hospital that wishesto apply for reclassification for the FY2002 wage index (deadline is September1, 2000) should use the average hourlywage data in Tables 3C, 4D, and 4E ofthe FY 2001 proposed and final rules todetermine whether it meets therequirements for reclassification. Withthe exception of urban areas that receivethe statewide rural wage index value, anurban area’s adjusted average hourlywage may be calculated by multiplyingthe area wage index value in Table 4Aby the national average hourly wage.

Comment: One commenter questionedwhether the number of hospitalsreclassified for the wage index for FY2001 cited in the proposed rule (586)was accurate.

Response: The correct number ofwage index reclassifications for FY 2001at the time the proposed rule waspublished was 386. As stated above, thefinal number of wage indexreclassifications is 490.

A. Wage Data Corrections

In the proposed rule, we stated that,to allow hospitals time to evaluate thewage data used to construct theproposed FY 2001 hospital wage index,we would make available in May 2000a final public data file containing the FY1997 hospital wage data.

The final wage data file was releasedon May 5, 2000. As noted above insection III.C. of this preamble, this fileincluded hospitals’ teaching survey dataas well as cost report data. As with thefile made available in February 2000, wemade the final wage data file released inMay 2000 available to hospitalassociations and the public (on theInternet). However, this file was madeavailable only for the limited purpose ofidentifying any potential errors made byHCFA or the fiscal intermediary in theentry of the final wage data that thehospital could not have known aboutbefore the release of the final wage datapublic use file. It is not for the initiationof new wage data correction requests.

If, after reviewing the May 2000 finaldata file, a hospital believed that itswage data were incorrect due to a fiscalintermediary or HCFA error in the entryor tabulation of the final wage data, itwas provided an opportunity to send aletter to both its fiscal intermediary andHCFA, outlining why the hospitalbelieved an error exists and provide allsupporting information, including dates.These requests had to be received by usand the intermediaries no later thanJune 5, 2000.

Changes to the hospital wage datawere made only in those very limitedsituations involving an error by theintermediary or HCFA that the hospitalcould not have known about before itsreview of the final wage data file.Specifically, neither the intermediarynor HCFA accepted the following typesof requests at this stage of the process:

• Requests for wage data correctionsthat were submitted too late to beincluded in the data transmitted toHCRIS on or before April 3, 2000.

• Requests for correction of errorsthat were not, but could have been,identified during the hospital’s reviewof the February 2000 wage data file.

• Requests to revisit factualdeterminations or policy interpretationsmade by the intermediary or HCFAduring the wage data correction process.

• Verified corrections to the wageindex received timely (that is, by June5, 2000) are incorporated into the finalwage index in this final rule, to beeffective October 1, 2000.

We believe the wage data correctionprocess provides hospitals withsufficient opportunity to bring errors in



their wage data to the intermediary’sattention. Moreover, because hospitalshad access to the final wage data byearly May 2000, they had theopportunity to detect any data entry ortabulation errors made by theintermediary or HCFA before thedevelopment and publication of the FY2001 wage index and itsimplementation on October 1, 2000. Ifhospitals avail themselves of thisopportunity, the FY 2001 wage indeximplemented on October 1 should befree of these errors. Nevertheless, weretain the right to make midyearchanges to the wage index under verylimited circumstances.

Specifically, in accordance with§ 412.63(w)(2), we may make midyearcorrections to the wage index only inthose limited circumstances in which ahospital can show (1) that theintermediary or HCFA made an error intabulating its data; and (2) that thehospital could not have known aboutthe error, or did not have an opportunityto correct the error, before the beginningof FY 2001 (that is, by the June 5, 2000deadline). As indicated earlier, since ahospital had the opportunity to verifyits data, and the intermediary notifiedthe hospital of any changes, we do notforesee any specific circumstancesunder which midyear corrections wouldbe made. However, should a midyearcorrection be necessary, the wage indexchange for the affected area will beeffective prospectively from the date thecorrection is made.

Comment: One commenter expressedconcern about the process used inpreparing the final wage index data,especially teaching survey data. Thecommenter was concerned that errorswould not be corrected before thepublication of the final rule. Withoutproviding specific information, thecommenter further stated that it stillbelieved that there were a number of‘‘omission errors in the data’’ and thatthe situation would have been betterhandled if the data were corrected andreposted.

Response: We acknowledge thecommenter’s concern and reiterate thatthe purpose of making the wage dataavailable for review on the Internet is toallow hospitals time to evaluate thewage data used in constructing thehospital wage index. We encouragehospitals to review their data and toaddress and resolve issues in disputeprior to the publication of the final wageindex data file. We acknowledge thatthe teaching physician data submittedby several providers were not accuratelyreported in the public use wage indexdata file published on May 5, 2000.Once we became aware of the errors, we

took the necessary steps to review andincorporate the appropriate data. Theupdated file was then made available onour Internet website at: http://www.hcfa.gov/medicare/ippsmain.htm.

IV. Other Decisions and Changes to theProspective Payment System forInpatient Operating Costs and GraduateMedical Education Costs

A. Expanding the Transfer Definition toInclude Postacute Care Discharges(§ 412.4)

In accordance with section1886(d)(5)(I) of the Act, the prospectivepayment system distinguishes between‘‘discharges,’’ situations in which apatient leaves an acute care (prospectivepayment) hospital after receivingcomplete acute care treatment, and‘‘transfers,’’ situations in which thepatient is transferred to another acutecare hospital for related care. Ourpolicy, as set forth in the regulations at§ 412.4, provides that, in a transfersituation, full payment is made to thefinal discharging hospital and eachtransferring hospital is paid a per diemrate for each day of the stay, not toexceed the full DRG payment thatwould have been made if the patienthad been discharged without beingtransferred.

Effective with discharges on or afterOctober 1, 1998, section 1886(d)(5)(J) ofthe Act required the Secretary to defineand pay as transfers all cases assignedto one of 10 DRGs (identified below)selected by the Secretary if theindividuals are discharged to one of thefollowing settings:

• A hospital or hospital unit that isnot a subsection 1886(d) hospital.(Section 1886(d)(1)(B) of the Actidentifies the hospitals and hospitalunits that are excluded from the term‘‘subsection (d) hospital’’ as psychiatrichospitals and units, rehabilitationhospitals and units, children’s hospitals,long-term care hospitals, and cancerhospitals.)

• A skilled nursing facility (asdefined at section 1819(a) of the Act).

• Home health services provided by ahome health agency, if the servicesrelate to the condition or diagnosis forwhich the individual received inpatienthospital services, and if the home healthservices are provided within anappropriate period (as determined bythe Secretary).

Therefore, any discharge from aprospective payment hospital from oneof the selected 10 DRGs that is admittedto a hospital excluded from theprospective payment system on the dateof discharge from the acute carehospital, on or after October 1, 1998,

would be considered a transfer and paidaccordingly under the prospectivepayment systems (operating and capital)for inpatient hospital services.Similarly, a discharge from an acutecare inpatient hospital paid under theprospective payment system to a skillednursing facility on the same date wouldbe defined as a transfer and paid assuch. We consider situations in whichhome health services related to thecondition or diagnosis of the inpatientadmission are received within 3 daysafter the discharge as a transfer.

The statute specifies that theSecretary select 10 DRGs based upon ahigh volume of discharges to postacutecare and a disproportionate use ofpostacute care services. We identifiedthe following DRGs with the highestpercentage of postacute care:

• DRG 14 (Specific CerebrovascularDisorders Except Transient IschemicAttack (Medical))

• DRG 113 (Amputation forCirculatory System Disorders ExceptUpper Limb and Toe (Surgical))

• DRG 209 (Major Joint LimbReattachment Procedures of LowerExtremity (Surgical))

• DRG 210 (Hip and FemurProcedures Except Major JointProcedures Age >17 with CC (Surgical))

• DRG 211 (Hip and FemurProcedures Except Major JointProcedures Age >17 without CC(Surgical))

• DRG 236 (Fractures of Hip andPelvis (Medical))

• DRG 263 (Skin Graft and/orDebridement for Skin Ulcer or Cellulitiswith CC (Surgical))

• DRG 264 (Skin Graft and/orDebridement for Skin Ulcer or Cellulitiswithout CC (Surgical))

• DRG 429 (Organic Disturbances andMental Retardation (Medical))

• DRG 483 (Tracheostomy Except forFace, Mouth and Neck Diagnoses(Surgical))

Generally, we pay for transfers basedon a per diem payment, determined bydividing the DRG payment by theaverage length of stay for that DRG. Thetransferring hospital receives twice theper diem rate the first day and the perdiem rate for each following day, up tothe full DRG payment. Of the 10selected DRGs, 7 are paid under thismethod. However, three DRGs exhibit adisproportionate share of costs veryearly in the hospital stay. For thesethree DRGs, hospitals receive one-half ofthe DRG payment for the first day of thestay and one-half of the payment theywould receive under the current transferpayment method, up to the full DRGpayment.



As required by section1886(d)(5)(J)(iv) of the Act, we includedin the FY 2001 proposed rule publishedon May 5, 2000 (65 FR 26302), adescription of the effect of the provisionto treat as transfers cases that areassigned to one of the 10 selected DRGsand receive postacute care upon theirdischarge from the hospital. Undercontract with HCFA (Contract No. 500–95–0006), Health Economics Research,Inc. (HER) conducted an analysis of theimpact on hospitals and hospitalpayments of the postacute transferprovision. The analysis sought to obtaininformation on four primary areas: Howhospitals responded in terms of theirtransfer practices; a comparison ofpayments and costs for these cases;whether hospitals are attempting tocircumvent the policy by delayingpostacute care or coding the patient’sdischarge status as something other thana transfer; and what the next possiblestep is for expanding the transferpayment policy beyond the current 10selected DRGs or the current postacutedestinations.

In addition, in accordance withsection 1886(d)(5)(J)(iv)(I) of the Act, weincluded in the May 5, 2000 proposedrule for FY 2001 a discussion of whetherother postdischarge services should beadded to this postacute care transferprovision. Since FY 1999 was the firstyear this policy was effective andbecause of pending changes to paymentpolicies for other postacute care settingssuch as hospital outpatient departments,we have limited data to assess whetheradditional postacute care settingsshould be included. We will continue toclosely monitor this issue as more databecome available.

In its analysis, HER relied on HCFA’sStandard Analytic Files containingclaims submission data throughSeptember 1999. However, the secondand third quarter submissions forcalendar year 1999 were not complete.It was decided that transfer cases wouldbe identified by linking acute hospitaldischarges with postacute records basedon Medicare beneficiary numbers anddates of discharge from the acutehospital with dates of admission orprovision of service by the postacuteprovider. This method was used ratherthan selecting cases based on thedischarge status code on the claim eventhough this code is being used forpayment to these cases because wewanted to also assess how accuratelyhospitals are coding this status.However, the need to link acute andpostacute episodes further limited theanalytic data, due to the greater time lagfor collecting postacute records.Therefore, much of HER’s analysis

focused on only the first two quarters ofFY 1999. The two preceding fiscal yearsserved as a baseline for purposes ofcomparison.

Since the publication of the May 5,2000 proposed rule for FY 2001, HERhas updated the results of its study ofthe impact on hospitals and hospitalpayments of the postacute transferprovision. In its revised analysis, HERfound that the volume of postacutetransfers qualifying for the lower perdiem payment during the first 6 monthsof FY 1999 fell from 28 percent of totaldischarges under the 10 DRGs before theimplementation of the payment changeto 18 percent. It appears this declinewas largely the result of a drop in thegeometric mean length of stay in twohigh-volume DRGs (DRGs 14 and 209)that reduced the number of daysqualifying a case for the per diempayment. In FY 1998, the geometricmean length of stay was 5.1 days forDRG 14 and 5.3 days for DRG 209. Thegeometric mean length of stay for bothDRGs in FY 1999 was 4.9 days. Toqualify for a per diem payment, a case’slength of stay must be less than theDRG’s geometric mean length of stayminus one day. Therefore, cases in thesetwo DRGs with lengths of stay of fivedays were counted as qualified for perdiem payments under the postacute caretransfer rules in FY 1998 but not in FY1999. Because DRGs 14 and 209 accountfor approximately 65 percent of thecases in the 10 DRGs, the drop in thethreshold for qualifying casescontributed significantly to themagnitude of the decline in qualifyingcases overall.

Correspondingly, HER found anincrease in the volume and share ofpostacute transfers that did not qualifyfor the lower per diem payment. Theshare of long-stay postacute transferspaid under the full DRG amount (e.g.,those with a length of stay equal to atleast one day less than the geometricmean length of stay minus one day)increased from 35 percent during thefirst half of FY 1998 to 43 percentduring the first 6 months of FY 1999.Again, some of this increase isattributable to the drop in the geometricmean lengths of stay in DRGs 14 and209.

According to HER, to some extent, theshift in the distribution of postacutetransfers from qualifying tononqualifying cases may suggest thathospitals have responded to the policychange by holding patients longer beforereleasing them to a postacute careprovider. Total postacute transfers fellby 13 percent between the two paymentperiods, suggesting that hospitals mayalso have responded by resuming the

provision of services that werepreviously performed by postacute careproviders, resulting in an elimination ofsome postacute transfers. However,additional analysis would be necessaryto separate the effects of the drop in thegeometric mean length of stay from thehospital behavioral effects.

The study shows that the averagelength of stay of qualifying postacutetransfers rose slightly between the twopayment periods, from 4.16 days beforethe policy change to 4.33 days after. Incontrast, the average length of stay oflong-stay transfers and nontransfers forthe same set of DRGs fell between thetwo 6-month study periods, by 15.9 and16.6 percent, respectively. Thisindicates that, overall, hospitals werekeeping cases slightly longer prior totransfer.

The figures on the impact of‘‘delayed’’ transfers (for example, thosepatients transferred to a postacute careprovider beyond the 1 or 3 dayqualifying time period) remainunchanged. HER found little evidencethat hospitals are responding to thepolicy change by increasing the timeinterval between prospective paymentsystem discharge and postacute careadmission or visit.

The study also did not find evidencethat changes in prospective paymentsystem hospital treatment and dischargebehavior are resulting in increasedlengths of stay or numbers of visitsduring the subsequent postacute careepisode. Average lengths of stay andnumber of visits at postacute careproviders following provider paymentsystem discharge actually fell betweenthe two payment periods. It is likely thatany adverse effects of hospital behavioron patient care would have manifesteditself in greater postacute care lengths ofstay and number of visits following theimplementation of the payment reform.HER found no evidence of this.

The average cost of qualifyingpostacute transfers rose in real terms by2.4 percent after the policy change.According to HER, average profits forqualifying postacute transfers fell from$3,496 per case prior to the transferpolicy change to $2,255 following theimplementation of the payment reform.Average payments with adjustments forIME, DSH and outliers declined in realterms by 9.6 percent.

HER found that the postacute transferpolicy resulted in a reduction inexpenditures of $239 million during thefirst half of FY 1999. Annualized overa 1-year period, the policy reformlowered annual payments by anestimated $478 million. (In our estimateof the impacts of this policy, weestimated the total impact to be $480



million (63 FR 40977).) The estimatedannual savings resulting from the policychange is equivalent to a 4.5 percentreduction in program expenditures inthe 10 pilot DRGs and a 0.5 percentreduction in overall prospectivepayment system expenditures. The‘‘price’’ effect (for example, holdinghospital treatment and admissionpatterns constant) resulted in a savingsof $276 million during the first half ofFY 1999 (or an estimated $552 millionannually). However, the decline in thenumber of transfers qualifying for thelower per diem, as well as the longerlengths of stay of short-stay postacutetransfer cases, resulted in an offsettingreduction in savings of $37 millionduring the first 6 months of FY 1999 (or$74 million annually). As stated above,the combination of the positive ‘‘price’’effect and the negative ‘‘volume’’ effectled to a net savings of $239 millionduring the first half of FY 1999 (or anestimated $478 million annually).

The study also examined thedischarge destination codes as reportedon the acute care hospital claims againstpostacute care transfers identified onthe basis of a postacute care claimindicating the patient qualifies as atransfer. This analysis found that, in1998, only 74 percent of transfer caseshad discharge destination codes on theacute care hospital claim that wereconsistent with whether there was apostacute care claim for the casematching the date of discharge. In FY1999, the year the postacute caretransfer policy went into effect, this raterose to 79 percent. This indicates thathospitals are improving the accuracy ofcoding transfer cases.

Transfers to hospitals or unitsexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem must have a dischargedestination code (Patient Status) of 05.Transfers to a skilled nursing facilitymust have a discharge destination codeof 03. Transfers to a home health agencymust have a discharge destination codeof 06. If the hospital’s continuing careplan for the patient is not related to thepurpose of the inpatient hospitaladmission, a condition code 42 must beentered on the claim. If the continuingcare plan is related to the purpose of theinpatient hospital admission, but caredid not start within 3 days after the dateof discharge, a condition code 43 mustbe entered on the claim. The presenceof either of these condition codes inconjunction with discharge destinationcode 06 will result in full paymentrather than the transfer paymentamount. We intend to closely monitorthe accuracy of hospitals’ dischargedestination coding in this regard andtake whatever steps are necessary to

ensure that accurate payment is madeunder this policy.

Section 1886(d)(5)(J)(iv)(II) of the Actauthorized but did not require theSecretary to include as part of theproposed rule additional DRGs toinclude under the postacute caretransfer provision. As part of ‘‘ThePresident’s Plan to Modernize andStrengthen Medicare for the 21stCentury’’ (July 2, 1999), theAdministration committed to notexpanding the number of DRGsincluded in the policy until FY 2003.Therefore, we did not propose anychange to the postacute care settings orthe 10 DRGs.

HER did undertake an analysis of howadditional DRGs might be consideredfor inclusion under the policy. Theanalysis supports the initial 10 DRGsselected as being consistent with thenature of the Congressional mandate.According to HER, ‘‘[t]he top 10 DRGschosen initially by HCFA exhibit verylarge PAC [postacute care] levels andPAC discharge rates (except for DRG264, Skin Graft and/or Debridement forSkin Ulcer or Cellulitis without CC,which was paired with DRG 263). All 10appear to be excellent choices based onthe other criteria as well. Most havefairly high short-stay PAC [postacutecare] rates (except possibly for Strokes,DRG 14, and Mental Retardation, DRG429).’’

Extending the policy beyond theseinitial DRGs, however, may well requiremore extensive analysis and grouping oflike-DRGs. One concern raised in theanalysis relates to single DRGsincluding multiple procedures withvarying lengths of stay. Because thetransfer payment methodology onlyconsiders the DRG overall geometricmean length of stay for a DRG, certainprocedures with short lengths of stayrelative to other procedures in the sameDRG may be more likely to be treated astransfers. The analysis also considerspairs of DRGs, such as DRGs 263 and264, as well as larger bundles of DRGs(grouped by common elements such astrauma, infections, and major organprocedures). According to HER, ‘‘[i]nextending the PAC transfer policy, it isnecessary to go beyond the flawedconcept of a single DRG to discovermultiple DRGs with a common link thatexhibit similar PAC statistics.Aggregation of this sort provides alogical bridge in expanding the PACtransfer policy that is easily justified toCongress and that avoids unintendedinequities in the way DRGs-andpotentially hospitals-are treated underthis policy. Hospitals can beinadvertently penalized or not under the

current implementation criteria due tosystematic differences in the DRG mix.’’

Finally, the HER report concludeswith a discussion of the issues relatedto potentially expanding the postacutecare transfer policy to all DRGs. On thepositive side, HER points to the benefitsof expanding the policy to include allDRGs:

• A simple, uniform formula-drivenpolicy;

• Same policy rationale exists for allDRGs-the statutory provision requiringthe Secretary to select only 10 DRGs wasa political compromise;

• DRGs with little utilization of short-stay postacute care would not beharmed by the policy;

• Less confusion in dischargedestination coding; and

• Hospitals that happen to bedisproportionately treating the current10 DRGs may be harmed more thanhospitals with an aggressive short-staypostacute care transfer policy for otherDRGs.

According to HER, the negativeimplications of expanding the policy toall DRGs include:

• The postacute care transfer policy isirrelevant for many DRGs;

• Added burden for the fiscalintermediaries to verify dischargedestination codes;

• Diluted program savings beyond theinitial 10 DRGs;

• Difficulty in identifying ongoingpostacute care that resumes afterdischarge; and

• Heterogeneous procedures withinsingle DRGs having varying lengths ofstay.

The HER report in final format may beobtained from the HCFA website at:http://www.hcfa.gov/medicare/ippsmain.htm

Comment: One commenter observedthat in our discussion in the proposedrule (65 FR 26303) of postacute caretransfers to a skilled facility, we statedthat ‘‘(t)his would include casesdischarged from one of the 10 selectedDRGs to a designated swing bed forskilled nursing facilities.’’ Thecommenter believed that HCFA clearlyexcluded swing bed transfers from thepostacute care transfer policy in the July31, 1998 final rule and asked forclarification.

Response: The commenter is correctthat we excluded swing bed transfersfrom the postacute care transfer policyin the July 31, 1998 final rule (63 FR40977). We are not changing the policyto include swing beds at this time. Thesentence in question was inadvertentlyincluded in the proposed rule.

Comment: One commenter believedthe transfer policy is contrary to the



design of the prospective paymentsystem and penalizes clinical decisionmaking by physicians in dischargingtheir patients to the appropriate level ofcare. The commenter suggested that theHER study shows that the net outcomeof the policy has been to pay hospitalsless and increase the complexity andadministrative costs of the inpatientprospective payment system. Thecommenter cited the disadvantages ofexpanding the policy to all DRGs setforth in the HER report andrecommended that the Administrationrevisit this policy in light of the findingsof the researchers that care, notfinances, is driving the length of stay inthese cases.

Response: We disagree with thecommenter that the postacute transferpolicy penalizes clinicaldecisionmaking by physicians indischarging their patients to theappropriate level of care, but ratherbelieve that the policy appropriatelyadjusts payments to hospitals to reflectthe amount of care actually provided inthe acute care setting. Furthermore, thispolicy does not require a change inphysician clinical decisionmaking norin the manner in which physicians andhospitals practice medicine. It simplyaddresses the appropriate level ofpayments once those decisions havebeen made.

With respect to whether the provisionis contrary to the original intent of theprospective payment system, we believeit is entirely consistent with thefollowing statement made in the FederalRegister during the first year of theprospective payment system in responseto a comment concerning the hospital-to-hospital transfer policy: ‘‘(t)herationale for per diem payments as partof our transfer policy is that thetransferring hospital generally providesonly a limited amount of treatment.Therefore, payment of the fullprospective payment rate would beunwarranted’’ (49 FR 244). We also notethat in its earliest updaterecommendations, the ProspectivePayment Assessment Commission(MedPAC’s predecessor organization)included what it called a site-of-servicesubstitution adjustment to account forthe shifting of portions of inpatient careto other settings. We believe thisprovision is an appropriate andconsistent response to the changingtreatment practice of the hospitalindustry.

Though we are not expanding thepolicy to include all DRGs at this time,HER points to advantages as well as thedisadvantages cited by the commenterof doing so, including:

• A simple, uniform formula-drivenpolicy;

• Same policy rationale exists for allDRGs—the statutory provision requiringthe Secretary to select only 10 DRGs wasa political compromise;

• DRGs with little utilization of short-stay postacute care would not beharmed by the policy;

• Less confusion in dischargedestination coding; and

• Hospitals that happen to bedisproportionately treating the current10 DRGs may be harmed more thanhospitals with an aggressive short-staypostacute care transfer policy for otherDRGs.

Finally, we also believe that care, notfinances, should drive the length of stayand all other clinical decisions in thesecases, and that payments should bealigned with the care given in eachprovider setting.

Comment: One commenter agreedwith our decision to not expand thenumber of DRGs subject to the postacutetransfer policy. The commenter believedthat the policy should be revokedbecause the cost savings have farexceeded the estimates relied on indeveloping the policy and, morefundamentally, because it violates thenotion of averaging that is at the heartof an appropriate prospective paymentsystem. The commenter also believedthat the introduction of prospectivepayment in virtually all postacutesettings obviates the need for thisexpansion of transfer policy.

The commenter stated that the use ofthe geometric mean length of stay todetermine the payment amount does notfully consider the medical practicepatterns of physicians in differentregions of the country and appears topenalize those areas that alreadyachieved a lower length of stay.

Response: Since updating its studyafter the proposed rule was published,HER reports that the policy resulted insavings of $478 million, remarkablyclose to our estimate of $480 millionpublished in the July 31, 1998 final rule(63 FR 40977). Furthermore, as westated in our previous response, webelieve that the policy is entirelyconsistent with the original intent of theprospective payment system.

We disagree with the commenter’sbelief that the introduction ofprospective payment systems topostacute settings obviates the need forthe transfer policy. The purpose of thepolicy is to align payments with the careactually provided in the inpatientsetting. The policy is particularlyappropriate for areas of the countrywhere care has been more aggressivelyshifted from acute to postacute settings.

B. Sole Community Hospitals(SCHs)(§§ 412.63, 412.73, and 413.75,proposed new § 412.77, and § 412.92)

Under the hospital inpatientprospective payment system, specialpayment protections are provided tosole community hospitals (SCHs).Section 1886(d)(5)(D)(iii) of the Actdefines an SCH as, among other things,a hospital that, by reason of factors suchas isolated location, weather conditions,travel conditions, or absence of otherhospitals (as determined by theSecretary), is the sole source of inpatienthospital services reasonably available toMedicare beneficiaries. The regulationsthat set forth the criteria a hospital mustmeet to be classified as an SCH arelocated at § 412.92(a).

Currently SCHs are paid based onwhichever of the following rates yieldsthe greatest aggregate payment to thehospital for the cost reporting period:The Federal national rate applicable tothe hospital; or the hospital’s ‘‘targetamount’’—that is, either the updatedhospital-specific rate based on FY 1982costs per discharge, or the updatedhospital-specific rate based on FY 1987costs per discharge.

Section 405 of Public Law 106–113,which amended section 1886(b)(3) ofthe Act, provides that an SCH that waspaid for its cost reporting periodbeginning during 1999 on the basis ofeither its FY 1982 or FY 1987 targetamount (the hospital-specific rate asopposed to the Federal rate) may electto receive payment under amethodology using a third hospital-specific rate based on the hospital’s FY1996 costs per discharge. Thisamendment to the statute means that,for cost reporting periods beginning onor after October 1, 2000, eligible SCHscan elect to use the allowable FY 1996operating costs for inpatient hospitalservices as the basis for their targetamount, rather than either their FY 1982or FY 1987 costs.

We are aware that language in theConference Report accompanying PublicLaw 106–113 indicates that the Housebill (H.R. 3075) would have permittedSCHs that were being paid the Federalrate to rebase, not SCHs that were paidon the basis of either their FY 1982 orFY 1987 target amount (H.R. Conf. Rep.No. 106–479, 106th Cong., 1st Sess. at890 (1999)). The language of the section405 amendment to section 1886(b)(3)(which added new subparagraph (I)(ii))clearly limits the option to substitutethe FY 1996 base year to SCHs that werepaid for their cost reporting periodsbeginning during 1999 on the basis ofthe target amount applicable to thehospital under section 1886(b)(3)(C).



In the May 5 proposed rule, weproposed that, when calculating aneligible SCH’s FY 1996 hospital-specificrate, we utilize the same basicmethodology used to calculate FY 1982and FY 1987 bases. That methodology isset forth in §§ 412.71 through 412.75 ofthe regulations and discussed in detailin several prospective payment systemdocuments published in the FederalRegister on September 1, 1983 (48 FR3977); January 3, 1984 (49 FR 256); June1, 1984 (49 FR 23010); and April 20,1990 (55 FR 15150).

Since we anticipate that eligiblehospitals will elect the option to rebaseusing their FY 1996 cost reportingperiods, we proposed that our fiscalintermediaries would identify thoseSCHs that were paid for their costreporting periods beginning during 1999on the basis of their target amounts. Forthese hospitals, fiscal intermediarieswould calculate the FY 1996 hospital-specific rate as described below in thissection IV.B. If this rate exceeds ahospital’s current target amount basedon the greater of the FY 1982 or FY 1987hospital-specific rate, the hospital willreceive payment based on the FY 1996hospital-specific rate (based on theblended amounts described at section1886(b)(3)(I)(i) of the Act) unless thehospital notifies its fiscal intermediaryin writing prior to the end of the costreporting period that it does not wish tobe paid on the basis of the FY 1996hospital-specific rate. Thus, if a hospitaldoes not notify its fiscal intermediarybefore the end of the cost reportingperiod that it declines the rebasingoption, we would deem the lack of suchnotification as an election to havesection 1886(b)(3)(I) of the Act apply tothe hospital.

We further proposed that an SCH’sdecision to decline this option for a costreporting period will remain in effect forsubsequent periods until such time asthe hospital notifies its fiscalintermediary otherwise.

The FY 1996 hospital-specific ratewill be based on FY 1996 cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,1995 and before October 1, 1996, thatare 12 months or longer. If the hospital’slast cost reporting period ending on orbefore September 30, 1996 is less than12 months, the hospital’s most recent12-month or longer cost reportingperiod ending before the short periodreport would be utilized in thecomputations. If a hospital has no costreporting period beginning in FY 1996,it would not have a hospital-specificrate based on FY 1996.

For each hospital eligible for FY 1996rebasing, the fiscal intermediary willcalculate a hospital-specific rate based

on the hospital’s FY 1996 cost report asfollows:

• Determine the hospital’s totalallowable Medicare inpatient operatingcost, as stated on the FY 1996 costreport.

• Divide the total Medicare operatingcost by the number of Medicaredischarges in the cost reporting periodto determine the FY 1996 base periodcost per case. For this purpose, transfersare considered to be discharges.

• In order to take into considerationthe hospital’s individual case-mix,divide the base year cost per case by thehospital’s case-mix index applicable tothe FY 1996 cost reporting period. Thisstep is necessary to standardize thehospital’s base period cost for case-mixand is consistent with our treatment ofboth FY 1982 and FY 1987 base-periodcosts per case. A hospital’s case-mix iscomputed based on its Medicare patientdischarges subject to DRG-basedpayment.

We proposed that the fiscalintermediary will notify eligiblehospitals of their FY 1996 hospital-specific rate prior to October 1, 2000.Consistent with our policies relating toFY 1982 and FY 1987 hospital-specificrates, we proposed to permit hospitalsto appeal a fiscal intermediary’sdetermination of the FY 1996 hospital-specific rate under the procedures setforth in 42 CFR part 405, subpart R,which concern provider paymentdeterminations and appeals. In theevent of a modification of base periodcosts for FY 1996 rebasing due to a finalnonappealable court judgment or certainadministrative actions (as defined in§ 412.72(a)(3)(i)), the adjustment wouldbe retroactive to the time of theintermediary’s initial calculation of thebase period costs, consistent with thepolicy for rates based on FY 1982 andFY 1987 costs.

Section 405 prescribes the followingformula to determine the payment forSCHs that elect rebasing:

For discharges during FY 2001:• 75 percent of the updated FY 1982

or FY 1987 former target (identified inthe statute as the ‘‘subparagraph (C)target amount’’), plus

• 25 percent of the updated FY 1996amount (identified in the statute as the‘‘rebased target amount’’).

For discharges during FY 2002:• 50 percent of the updated FY 1982

or FY 1987 former target, plus• 50 percent of the updated FY 1996

amount.For discharges during FY 2003:• 25 percent of the updated FY 1982

or FY 1987 former target, plus• 75 percent of the updated FY 1996

amount.

For discharges during FY 2004 or anysubsequent fiscal year, the hospital-specific rate would be determined basedon 100 percent of the updated FY 1996amount.

We proposed to add a new § 412.77and amend § 412.92(d) to incorporatethe provisions of section 1886(b)(3)(I) ofthe Act, as added by section 405 ofPublic Law 106–113.

Section 406 of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(b)(3)(B)(i)(XVI) ofthe Act to provide, for fiscal year 2001,for full market basket updates to boththe Federal and hospital-specificpayment rates applicable to solecommunity hospitals. In the May 5proposed rule, we proposed to amend§§ 412.63, 412.73, and 412.75 toincorporate the amendment made bysection 406 of Public Law 106–113.

We received several public commentson our proposal.

Comment: Several commentersdiscussed the difference between thelanguage in the statutory provision,which limits the updated 1996-rebasingoption to SCHs that were paid on thebasis of their target amount (hospitalspecific rate) in 1999, and the languageof the accompanying Conference report(H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106–479, 106thCong., 1st Sess. at 890 (1999)). TheConference report indicated that theHouse bill (H.R. 3075) would havepermitted SCHs that were being paid theFederal rate to rebase rather than SCHsthat were paid on the basis of eithertheir FY 1982 or FY 1987 target amount.One commenter, in particular, believedthat despite the clear statutory language,HCFA had the ability to allow leeway indetermining which hospitals wereeligible to elect 1996 rebasing. Insupport of this view, the commentermade the assertion that the Federal rateused in SCH payment computationsincluded outlier and disproportionateshare payments (DSH) as well as otherspecial provisions. Therefore, thehospital-specific rate should becompared to the base Federal rate of thegeographic area, without the add-ons, todetermine which amount would yieldthe largest payment. Additionally, thetotal Federal payments on the hospital’scost report may exceed the hospital-specific payments in some years, whilefalling below them in other yearsbecause of the potential fluctuations ofoutliers and DSH payments. Thecommenter argued, therefore, that todetermine whether an SCH is to be paidon the basis of the target amount,hospital-specific payments should becompared to the base Federal paymentswithout the addition of outliers andDSH payments.



Response: We disagree with thecommenter’s argument. The commenteris correct in saying that in any one year,the target amount may be exceeded bycalculations of the Federal rate. This isthe reason why the calculation is doneyearly, so that the hospital may receivethe highest possible payment for thatspecific year based on a comparison ofwhat each payment scheme wouldgenerate for the hospital. The statuteclearly states the rebasing option isavailable to an SCH that, for its costreporting period beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2000, is paid on the basis ofthe target amount. As we stated in theproposed rule, we are aware of thedifference between this rebasing planset forth in section 405 of Public Law106–113 and the one described in theConference Report, but theunambiguous language of the statutecontrols over the language of theConference Report.

Comment: One commenter pointed toan inconsistency between the text ofproposed § 412.77 and the preamble tothe proposed rule. The preamble statedthat, in the absence of notification to thecontrary from the hospital, theintermediary will base payment on the1996 hospital specific rate, if this rateexceeds the 1982 or 1987 hospital-specific rate. The proposed regulationlanguage at § 412.77(a) indicated that, inthe absence of notification, the hospitalpayment would be based on the 1996hospital specific rate without thequalification that this rate would needto exceed the 1982 or 1987 base yearrates.

Response: We believe that thecommenter’s concern aboutinconsistency may stem from atypographical error that appeared in thetext of proposed § 412.77 in theproposed rule, that incorrectlyreferenced § 412.72, rather than revised§ 412.92. The payment determinationformula used for SCHs is set forth in§ 412.92(d), which has been revised toinclude the 1996 rebasing option. Thatformula clearly states that an SCH ispaid based on whichever yields thegreatest aggregate payment for the costreporting period: the Federal paymentrate, the 1982 or 1987 hospital-specificrate, or the 1996 hospital-specific rate.We have deleted the incorrect referenceto § 412.72. In addition, for the sake ofclarity, we have added a sentence to§ 412.77(a)(1), further modified§ 412.92(d)(1), and added a new§ 412.92(d)(2) (the existing paragraph(d)(2) is redesignated as paragraph(d)(3)).

Comment: One commenter disagreedwith the proposal that the intermediaryshould include the 1996 hospital

specific rate in its payment calculationsit if it is higher than either the 1982 or1987 hospital specific rates, in theabsence of notification to the contrary.Rather, the commenter suggested that aneligible hospital be required to state itschoice to be paid on this basis.

Response: We believe that it is moreefficient from an administrativestandpoint to require a hospital to notifyits fiscal intermediary if it chooses notto receive payment based on the (higher)FY 1996 hospital-specific rate. The onlytime that a hospital that is eligible forrebasing will be paid based on its 1996amount is if that amount is higher thaneither the 1982 or 1987 hospital specificrates and also higher than the Federalrate. We do not know why a hospitalwould elect not to receive paymentbased on the highest of its possiblechoices. Therefore, rather than requiringa hospital to provide writtennotification to the fiscal intermediarywhen its FY 1996 hospital-specific rateis higher than its FY 1982 and FY 1987hospital-specific rates, we deem thehospital to have made an election to bepaid based on the FY 1996 hospital-specific rate, unless it notifies its fiscalintermediary otherwise.

Comment: Two commenters requesteda clarification as to the proposed timingfor a hospital that is eligible for paymentbased on its 1996 hospital-specific rateto notify its intermediary of its intentionnot to elect payment based on this rate.

Response: We agree that in theproposed rule the preamble and theproposed regulation language werecontradictory. Accordingly, we arerevising § 412.77(a)(2) to require that aneligible hospital must notify itsintermediary of its intent not to electpayment based on its FY 1996 hospital-specific rate prior to the end of the costreporting period for which the paymentswould otherwise be made. Thisschedule will allow hospitals anopportunity to consider their options.

C. Rural Referral Centers (§ 412.96)

Under the authority of section1886(d)(5)(C)(i) of the Act, theregulations at § 412.96 set forth thecriteria a hospital must meet in order toreceive special treatment under theprospective payment system as a ruralreferral center (RRC). For dischargesoccurring before October 1, 1994, RRCsreceived the benefit of payment basedon the other urban amount rather thanthe rural standardized amount.Although the other urban and ruralstandardized amounts were the same fordischarges beginning with that date,RRCs would continue to receive specialtreatment under both the DSH payment

adjustment and the criteria forgeographic reclassification.

As discussed in 62 FR 45999 and 63FR 26317, under section 4202 of PublicLaw 105–33, a hospital that wasclassified as an RRC for FY 1991 is tobe classified as an RRC for FY 1998 andlater years so long as that hospitalcontinued to be located in a rural areaand did not voluntarily terminate itsRRC status. Otherwise, a hospitalseeking RRC status must satisfyapplicable criteria. One of the criteriaunder which a hospital may qualify asan RRC is to have 275 or more bedsavailable for use. A rural hospital thatdoes not meet the bed size requirementcan qualify as an RRC if the hospitalmeets two mandatory prerequisites(specifying a minimum case-mix indexand a minimum number of discharges)and at least one of three optional criteria(relating to specialty composition ofmedical staff, source of inpatients, orreferral volume). With respect to the twomandatory prerequisites, a hospital maybe classified as an RRC if its—

• Case-mix index is at least equal tothe lower of the median case-mix indexfor urban hospitals in its census region,excluding hospitals with approvedteaching programs, or the median case-mix index for all urban hospitalsnationally; and

• Number of discharges is at least5,000 per year, or if fewer, the mediannumber of discharges for urbanhospitals in the census region in whichthe hospital is located. (The number ofdischarges criterion for an osteopathichospital is at least 3,000 discharges peryear.)

1. Case-Mix Index

Section 412.96(c)(1) provides thatHCFA will establish updated nationaland regional case-mix index values ineach year’s annual notice of prospectivepayment rates for purposes ofdetermining RRC status. Themethodology we use to determine thenational and regional case-mix indexvalues is set forth in regulations at§ 412.96(c)(1)(ii). The proposed nationalcase-mix index value for FY 2001 in theMay 5 proposed rule included all urbanhospitals nationwide, and the regionalvalues are the median values of urbanhospitals within each census region,excluding those with approved teachingprograms (that is, those hospitalsreceiving indirect medical educationpayments as provided in § 412.105).These values were based on dischargesoccurring during FY 1999 (October 1,1998 through September 30, 1999) andinclude bills posted to HCFA’s recordsthrough March 2000.



We proposed that, in addition tomeeting other criteria, hospitals withfewer than 275 beds, if they are toqualify for initial RRC status for costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2000, must have a case-mixindex value for FY 1999 that is at least—

• 1.3408; or• The median case-mix index value

for urban hospitals (excluding hospitalswith approved teaching programs asidentified in § 412.105) calculated byHCFA for the census region in whichthe hospital is located. (See the table setforth in the May 5, 2000 proposed ruleat 65 FR 26306.)

Based on the latest data available (FY1999 bills received through March 31,2000), the median case-mix values byregion are set forth in the table below.

Region Case-mixindex value

1. New England (CT, ME, MA,NH, RI, VT) ........................... 1.2289

2. Middle Atlantic (PA, NJ, NY) 1.23853. South Atlantic (DE, DC, FL,

GA, MD, NC, SC, VA, WV) .. 1.31134. East North Central (IL, IN,

MI, OH, WI) ........................... 1.26235. East South Central (AL, KY,

MS, TN) ................................. 1.26616. West North Central (IA, KS,

MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) .......... 1.18227. West South Central (AR, LA,

OK, TX) ................................. 1.28138. Mountain (AZ, CO, ID, MT,

NV, NM, UT, WY) ................. 1.32509. Pacific (AK, CA, HI, OR,

WA) ....................................... 1.3036

For the benefit of hospitals seeking toqualify as RRCs or those wishing toknow how their case-mix index valuecompares to the criteria, we arepublishing each hospital’s FY 1999case-mix index value in Table 3C insection VI. of the Addendum to thisfinal rule. In keeping with our policy ondischarges, these case-mix index valuesare computed based on all Medicarepatient discharges subject to DRG-basedpayment.

2. DischargesSection 412.96(c)(2)(i) provides that

HCFA will set forth the national andregional numbers of discharges in eachyear’s annual notice of prospectivepayment rates for purposes ofdetermining RRC status. As specified insection 1886(d)(5)(C)(ii) of the Act, thenational standard is set at 5,000discharges. However, in the May 5proposed rule, we proposed to updatethe regional standards. The proposedregional standards were based ondischarges for urban hospitals’ costreporting periods that began during FY1998 (that is, October 1, 1997 through

September 30, 1998). That is the latestyear for which we have completedischarge data available.

Therefore, we proposed that, inaddition to meeting other criteria, ahospital, if it is to qualify for initial RRCstatus for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000,must have as the number of dischargesfor its cost reporting period that beganduring FY 1999 a figure that is at least—

• 5,000; or• The median number of discharges

for urban hospitals in the census regionin which the hospital is located. (Seethe table set forth in the May 5, 2000proposed rule at 65 FR 26307.)

Based on the latest discharge dataavailable for FY 1999, the final mediannumber of discharges for urbanhospitals by census region areas are asfollows:

Region Number ofdischarges

1. New England (CT, ME, MA,NH, RI, VT) ........................... 6,725

2. Middle Atlantic (PA, NJ, NY) 8,7363. South Atlantic (DE, DC, FL,

GA, MD, NC, SC, VA, WV) .. 7,9114. East North Central (IL, IN,

MI, OH, WI) ........................... 7,6615. East South Central (AL, KY,

MS, TN) ................................. 6,8836. West North Central (IA, KS,

MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) .......... 5,8297. West South Central (AR, LA,

OK, TX) ................................. 5,3858. Mountain (AZ, CO, ID, MT,

NV, NM, UT, WY) ................. 8,0269. Pacific (AK, CA, HI, OR,

WA) ....................................... 6,268

We note that the number of dischargesfor hospitals in each census region isgreater than the national standard of5,000 discharges. Therefore, 5,000discharges is the minimum criterion forall hospitals.

We reiterate that an osteopathichospital, if it is to qualify for RRC statusfor cost reporting periods beginning onor after October 1, 2000, must have atleast 3,000 discharges for its costreporting period that began during FY1999.

We did not receive any comments onthe RRC criteria.

D. Indirect Medical Education (IME)Adjustment(§ 412.105)

Section 1886(d)(5)(B) of the Actprovides that prospective paymenthospitals that have residents in anapproved graduate medical education(GME) program receive an additionalpayment to reflect the higher indirectoperating costs associated with GME.The regulations regarding thecalculation of this additional payment,

known as the indirect medicaleducation (IME) adjustment, are locatedat § 412.105.

Section 111 of Public Law 106–113modified the transition for the IMEadjustment that was established byPublic Law 105–33. We are publishingthese changes in a separate interim finalrule with comment period that appearselsewhere in this issue of the FederalRegister. However, for dischargesoccurring during FY 2001, theadjustment formula equation used tocalculate the IME adjustment factor is1.54 × [(1+r) .405¥1]. (The variable rrepresents the hospital’s resident-to-bedratio.)

In the proposed rule, we inadvertentlyomitted the revised transition for theIME adjustment for FYs 2002 andthereafter. Specifically, for dischargesoccurring on or after October 1, 2001,the adjustment formula equation used tocalculate the IME adjustment factor is1.35 × [(1+r).405¥1]. We are adding anew § 412.105(d)(3)(vi) to reflect thischange.

In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41517), we set forth certain policies thataffected payment for both direct andindirect GME. These policies related toadjustments to full-time equivalent(FTE) resident caps for new medicalresidency programs affecting both directand indirect GME programs; theadjustment to GME caps for certainhospitals under construction prior toAugust 5, 1997 (the enactment date ofPublic Law 105–33) to account forresidents in new medical residencytraining programs; and the temporaryadjustment to FTE caps to reflectresidents affected by hospital closures.When we amended the regulationsunder § 413.86 for direct GME, weinadvertently did not make thecorresponding changes in § 412.105 forIME. In the May 5 proposed rule, weproposed to make the followingconforming changes:

• To amend § 412.105(f)(1)(vii) toprovide for an adjustment to the FTEcaps for new medical residencyprograms as specified under§ 413.86(g)(6).

• To add a new § 412.105(f)(1)(viii)related to the adjustment to the FTEcaps for newly constructed hospitalsthat sponsor new residency programs ineffect on or after January 1, 1995, andon or before August 5, 1997, that eitherreceived initial accreditation by theappropriate accrediting body ortemporarily trained residents at anotherhospital(s) until the facility wascompleted, to conform to the provisionsof § 413.86(g)(7).

• To add a new § 412.105(f)(1)(ix) tospecify that a hospital may receive a



temporary adjustment to its FTE cap totake into account residents addedbecause of another hospital’s closure ifthe hospital meets the criteria listedunder § 413.86(g)(8).

In addition, we proposed to add across-reference to ‘‘§ 413.86(d)(3)(i)through (v)’’ in § 412.105(g), and tocorrect the applicable period in both§§ 412.105(g) and 413.86(d)(3) byrevising the phrase ‘‘For portions of costreporting periods beginning on or afterJanuary 1, 1998’’ to read ‘‘For portionsof cost reporting periods occurring on orafter January 1, 1998’’.

We received one public comment onthe proposed changes to the IMEregulations.

Comment: One commenterrecommended that the temporaryadjustment allowed to a hospital’s FTEcap under the proposed§ 412.105(f)(1)(ix) to account forresidents added because of anotherhospital’s closure should be apermanent adjustment to maintain thecurrent level of trainees.

Response: In the proposed rule, wewere merely making a conformingchange to the IME regulations based ona change in the GME regulations in theJuly 30, 1999 final rule. As indicated inthe July 30, 1999 final rule (65 FR41522), we continue to believe that,when a hospital assumes the training ofadditional residents because of anotherhospital’s closure, an adjustment to thehospital’s FTE cap should only beavailable for the period of timenecessary to train those displacedresidents. At that time we provided forthe temporary adjustment because ofhospitals’ reluctance to acceptadditional residents from a closedhospital without a temporaryadjustment to their caps. We do notbelieve currently there is justificationfor a permanent adjustment because ofthe temporary training provisions forthe displaced residents.

E. Payments to DSH Hospitals(§ 412.106)

1. Changes to the DSH Formula

Effective for discharges beginning onor after May 1, 1986, hospitals that treata disproportionately large number oflow-income patients (as defined insection 1886(d)(5)(F) of the Act) receiveadditional payments through the DSHadjustment. Section 4403(a) of PublicLaw 105–33 amended section1886(d)(5)(F) of the Act to reduce thepayment a hospital would otherwisereceive under the current DSH formulaby 1 percent for FY 1998, 2 percent forFY 1999, 3 percent for FY 2000, 4percent for FY 2001, 5 percent for 2002,

and 0 percent for FY 2003 and eachsubsequent fiscal year. Subsequently,section 112 of Public Law 106–113modified the amount of the reductionsunder Public Law 105–33 by changingthe reduction to 3 percent for FY 2001and 4 percent for FY 2002. Thereduction continues to be 0 percent forFY 2003 and each subsequent fiscalyear. In the May 5 proposed rule, weproposed to revise § 412.106(e) to reflectthe changes in the statute made byPublic Law 106–113.

Section 112 of Public Law 106–113also directs the Secretary to requireprospective payment system hospitals tosubmit data on the costs incurred by thehospitals for providing inpatient andoutpatient hospital services for whichthe hospitals are not compensated,including non-Medicare bad debt,charity care, and charges for medicaland indigent care to the Secretary aspart of hospitals’ cost reports. Thesedata are required for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2001. We will be revising ourinstructions to hospitals for cost reportsfor FY 2002 to capture these data.

Comment: Several commentersprovided positive reinforcementconcerning the impending collection ofuncompensated care data via offers ofassistance in this effort. Also,commenters made the point that, at thistime, uncompensated care does not havea common national definition.

Response: We are aware thatuncompensated care does not currentlyhave a common national definition. Oneof our tasks will be to define thereporting parameters so that the datawill be reported in a uniform manner.This is the main reason that we have notsought to use uncompensated care datain the Medicare DSH adjustmentcalculation in the past. We will keepthese comments in mind as we proceed.

Comment: One commenter wasconcerned about the pendingpublication of the Report to Congress onthe Medicare DSH formula. Thiscommenter asked HCFA to complementits data collection efforts by issuing thereport as required by Public Law 105–33.

Response: We are in the process ofcompleting this report and intend tosubmit it to Congress in the near future.

2. DSH Adjustment Calculation: Changein the Treatment of Certain MedicaidPatient Days in States With Section1115 Expansion Waivers

On January 20, 2000, we published inthe Federal Register an interim finalrule with comment period (65 FR 3136)to implement a change in the MedicareDSH adjustment calculation policy in

reference to section 1115 expansionwaiver days. That interim final rule setforth criteria to use in calculating theMedicare DSH adjustment for hospitalsfor purposes of payment under theprospective payment system.

Under section 1886(d)(5)(F) of theAct, an adjustment is made to thehospital’s inpatient prospectivepayment system payment for serving adisproportionate share of low-income orMedicaid and Medicare patients. Thesize of a hospital’s Medicare DSHadjustment is based on the sum of thepercentage of patient days attributableto patients eligible for both MedicarePart A and Supplemental SecurityIncome (SSI) and the percentage ofpatient days attributable to patientseligible for Medicaid but not MedicarePart A.

Some States provide medicalassistance (Medicaid) under ademonstration project (also referred toas a section 1115 waiver).

Under policy in existence before theJanuary 20, 2000 interim final rule,hospitals were to include in theMedicare DSH calculation only thosedays for populations under the section1115 waiver who were or could havebeen made eligible under a StateMedicaid plan. Patient days of theexpanded eligibility groups, however,were not to be included in the MedicareDSH calculation.

In the January 20, 2000 interim finalrule with comment period, we revisedthe policy, effective with dischargesoccurring on or after January 20, 2000,to allow hospitals to include the patientdays of all populations eligible for TitleXIX matching payments in a State’ssection 1115 waiver in calculating thehospital’s Medicare DSH adjustment.This policy was reflected in a revisionto § 412.106 of the regulations.

We received 11 public comments onthe inclusion of Section 1115 waiverdays in the Medicare disproportionateshare adjustment calculation.

Comment: Several commenters wereconcerned with the inclusion in theJanuary 20, 2000 interim final rule withcomment period of expansion waiverdays in the Medicaid portion of theMedicare DSH adjustment calculation.States without a Medicaid expansionwaiver in place believed that States thatdid have a Medicaid expansion waiverin place received an unfair advantage. Inaddition, comments from Pennsylvaniahospitals supported the continuedinclusion of general assistance days inthe Medicaid portion of the MedicareDSH adjustment calculation as well asexpansion waiver days. Finally, somecommenters urged HCFA to revise the



Medicare DSH adjustment calculation toinclude charity care days.

Response: While we initiallydetermined that States under aMedicaid expansion waiver could notinclude those expansion waiver days aspart of the Medicare DSH adjustmentcalculation, we have since consultedextensively with Medicaid staff andhave determined that section 1115expansion waiver days are utilized bypatients whose care is considered to bean approved expenditure under TitleXIX. While this does advantage Statesthat have a section 1115 expansionwaiver in place, these days areconsidered to be Title XIX days byMedicaid standards.

Some States operate under a section1115 waiver without an expansion (forexample, Arizona). The days that areutilized by patients under the section1115 waiver are already part of theMedicaid portion of the Medicare DSHadjustment calculation because thesection 1115 waiver includes patientswho otherwise would have been eligiblefor Medicaid Title XIX.

General assistance days are days forpatients covered under a State-only orcounty-only general assistance program,whether or not any payment is availablefor health care services under theprogram. Charity care days are thosedays that are utilized by patients whocannot afford to pay and whose care isnot covered or paid by any healthinsurance program. While we recognizethat these days may be included in thecalculation of a State’s Medicaid DSHpayments, these patients are notMedicaid-eligible under the State planand are not considered Title XIXbeneficiaries. Therefore, Pennsylvania,and other States that have erroneouslyincluded these days in the Medicaredisproportionate share adjustmentcalculation in the past, will beprecluded from including such days inthe future. We would like to point outthat these States were held harmlessfrom adverse action in this matter forany cost reporting period beginningprior to December 31, 1999. We are inthe process of preparing a Report toCongress on the Medicare DSHadjustment calculation which presentsvarious options for calculating theadjustment.

Comment: One commenter wasconcerned about the inclusion of daysin the Medicaid portion of the MedicareDSH adjustment calculation foradditional States that are approved forexpansion waivers in the future. Also,this commenter questioned whether ornot the expenditures related to theexpansion waiver days for MedicareDSH would be considered in the budget

neutrality evaluation prior to approvalof the expansion waiver application.

Response: As stated in the January 20,2000 interim final rule with commentperiod, days utilized under section 1115expansion waivers will be included inthe Medicaid portion of the MedicareDSH adjustment calculation. As a result,the days utilized under any approvedsection 1115 expansion waiver in thefuture would be included in thiscalculation. However, the State will notbe held accountable for theexpenditures associated with MedicareDSH in the budget neutrality test for thesection 1115 expansion waiver, as thosepayments are made from the Medicareprogram, not the Medicaid program.

Comment: Several commenters wereconcerned that the inclusion of section1115 expansion waiver days waseffective on January 20, 2000, ratherthan on January 1, 2000. These samecommenters pointed out that the holdharmless provisions of ProgramMemorandum A–99–62 (December1999) concern hospitals whose costreporting periods begin on or prior toDecember 31, 1999. Therefore, manyhospitals may be paid differently duringdifferent periods of the same cost report.

Response: We understand thatdischarges prior to January 20, 2000 willbe handled one way, and discharges asof January 20, 2000 may be paiddifferently. While we can enforce anexisting policy for a previous timeperiod, we do not believe we canretroactively institute new policy.

F. Medicare Geographic ClassificationReview Board (§§ 412.256 and 412.276)

With the creation of the MedicareGeographic Classification Review Board(MGCRB), beginning in FY 1991, undersection 1886(d)(10) of the Act, hospitalscould request reclassification from onegeographic location to another for thepurpose of using the other area’sstandardized amount for inpatientoperating costs or the wage index value,or both (September 6, 1990 interim finalrule with comment period (55 FR36754), June 4, 1991 final rule withcomment period (56 FR 25458), andJune 4, 1992 proposed rule (57 FR23631)). Implementing regulations inSubpart L of Part 412 (§ 412.230 et seq.)set forth criteria and conditions forredesignations from rural to urban, ruralto rural, or from an urban area toanother urban area with special rules forSCHs and RRCs.

1. Provisions of Public Law 106–113Section 401 of Public Law 106–113

amended section 1886(d)(8) of the Actby adding subparagraph (E), whichcreates a mechanism, separate and apart

from the MGCRB, permitting an urbanhospital to apply to the Secretary to betreated as being located in the rural areaof the State in which the hospital islocated. The statute directs the Secretaryto treat a qualifying hospital as beinglocated in a rural area for purposes ofprovisions under section 1886(d) of theAct. In addition, section 401 of PublicLaw 106–113 went on to provide forsuch reclassifications from urban torural for purposes of Medicare paymentsto outpatient departments and tohospitals that would qualify to becomecritical access hospitals.

Regulations implementing section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act are included inan interim final rule with commentperiod implementing certain provisionsof Public Law 106–111 publishedelsewhere in this issue of the FederalRegister. The statutory language ofsection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act does notaddress the issue of interactionsbetween changes in classification undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act and theMGCRB reclassification process undersection 1886(d)(10) of the Act. TheSecretary has extremely broad authorityunder section 1886(d)(10) of the Act toestablish criteria for reclassificationunder the MGCRB process. Section 401of Public Law 106–113 does not amendsection 1886(d)(10) of the Act to limitthe agency’s discretion under theprovision in any way, nor does section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act (as added bysection 401) refer to section 1886(d)(10)of the Act. However, we note that in theConference Report accompanying PublicLaw 106–113, the language discussingthe House bill (H.R. 3075, as passed)indicates that: ‘‘[H]ospitals qualifyingunder this section shall be eligible toqualify for all categories anddesignations available to rural hospitals,including sole community, Medicaredependent, critical access, and referralcenters. Additionally, qualifyinghospitals shall be eligible to apply to theMedicare Geographic ReclassificationReview Board for geographicreclassification to another area’’.

In the May 5, 2000 proposed rule, weindicated that we are concerned thatsection 1886(d)(8)(E) might create anopportunity for some urban hospitals totake advantage of the MGCRB processby first seeking to be reclassified as ruralunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) (andreceiving the benefits afforded to ruralhospitals) and in turn seekreclassification through the MGCRBback to the urban area for purposes oftheir standardized amount and wageindex and thus also receive the higherpayments that might result from beingtreated as being located in an urbanarea. That is, we were concerned that



some hospitals might inappropriatelyseek to be treated as being located in arural area for some purposes and asbeing located in an urban area for otherpurposes. In light of the ConferenceReport language noted above discussingthe House bill and what appears to bethe potential for inappropriatelyinconsistent treatment of the samehospital on the other hand, in the May5 proposed rule, we solicited publiccomment on this issue, and indicatedthat we might impose a limitation onsuch MGCRB reclassifications in thisfinal rule for FY 2001, if such actionappears warranted. We also soughtspecific comments on how such alimitation, if any, should be imposedand provided several examples andalternatives.

We received seven public commentson the interaction of urban to ruralreclassification under section1886(d)(8)(E) and reclassification underthe MGCRB. Several additionalcomments were received regardingspecific aspects of implementation ofsection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act (addedby section 401 of Public Law 106–113).These issues are addressed in theinterim final rule with comment period,published elsewhere in this issue of theFederal Register, that implementscertain provisions of Public Law 106–113.

Comment: Several of our commentersurged HCFA to place no restrictions onaccess to MGCRB reclassification forurban hospitals that have elected toreclassify to rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act, citing theConference Report as evidence of theCongressional intent in enacting thisprovision. These commenters arguedthat these now-rural hospitals shouldreceive the same treatment asgeographically rural hospitals, notingthat current Medicare policy permitsgeographically rural hospitals toreclassify, under the MGCRB, to urbanareas for their wage index or standardpayment amounts, or both. This meansthat geographically rural hospitals cantake advantage of both rural as well asurban payment amounts. This sameoption, these commenters asserted,should be available to urban hospitalsthat petition for reclassification undersection 1886(d)(8)(E).

Response: Under section 1886(d)(8)(E)of the Act, as added by section 401 ofthe Public Law 106–113, a hospitallocated in an urban area may file anapplication to be treated as beinglocated in a rural area for purposes ofpayment under section 1886(d) of theAct. The issue here is whether ahospital that has been reclassified froman urban area to a rural area under

section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act shouldbe permitted to subsequently bereclassified under the MGCRB processfrom the rural area to another area. Asdiscussed below, we believe that, forpurposes of the MGCRB process, it isappropriate to distinguish betweenhospitals that are reclassified as ruralunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Actand hospitals that are geographicallyrural. However, in light of ourunderstanding of the intent underlyingthe language in the Conference Reportfor Public Law 106–113, we are revisinga policy relating to RRCs so that certainurban hospitals that are not RRCs undercurrent policy will be granted RRCstatus and can receive special treatmentunder the MGCRB process.

Section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act, asadded by section 401 of Public Law106–113, provides that, for purposes ofsection 1886(d) of the Act, if a hospitalfiles an application and meetsapplicable criteria, the Secretary ‘‘shalltreat the hospital as being located in therural area * * * of the State in whichthe hospital is located.’’ As discussedabove and in the proposed rule, adescription of the House bill in theConference Report for Public Law 106–113 indicates that hospitals reclassifiedas rural under section 1886(d)(8)(E) ofthe Act would be ‘‘eligible to apply’’ tothe MGCRB for reclassification underthe MGCRB process. Significantly,however, the terms of section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act do not refer tosection 1886(d)(10) of the Act (whichaddresses the MGCRB reclassificationprocess), and section 401 of Public Law106–113 did not amend section1886(d)(10) of the Act to limit theagency’s discretion under that provisionin any way. Put another way, section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act does not containany language indicating that hospitalstreated as rural under that provision cansubsequently be treated as urban undersection 1886(d)(10) of the Act, andsection 1886(d)(10) does not containlanguage indicating that the Secretarymust permit reclassification to an urbanarea of hospitals treated as rural undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act. Thus,under the statute, the Secretary hasbroad discretion to determine whenMGCRB reclassification is appropriateand, in enacting section 401 of PublicLaw 106–113, Congress did not enactany statutory amendments to limit thatdiscretion in any way.

The statutory language of section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act directs theSecretary to treat qualifying hospitals,for purposes of section 1886(d) of theAct, ‘‘as being located in the rural area* * * of the State in which the hospitalis located’’. Section 1886(d) of the Act

encompasses the hospital wage indexand the standardized amount.Consistent with the statutory language,we are providing that a hospitalreclassified as rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act will be treatedas being located in a rural area forpurposes of section 1886(d) of the Act,and cannot subsequently be reclassifiedunder the MGCRB process to an urbanarea (in order to be treated as beinglocated in an urban area for certainpurposes under section 1886(d) of theAct).

This policy is consistent not onlywith the statutory language but alsowith the policy considerationsunderlying the MGCRB process. TheMGCRB process permits a hospital to bereclassified from one geographic area toanother if it is significantlydisadvantaged by its geographic locationand would be paid more appropriatelyif it were reclassified to another area.We believe that it would be illogical topermit a hospital that applied to bereclassified from urban to rural undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act becauseit was disadvantaged as an urbanhospital to then utilize a process thatwas established to enable hospitalssignificantly disadvantaged by theirrural or small urban location toreclassify to another urban location. Ifan urban hospital applies under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act in order to betreated as being located in a rural area,then it would be anomalous at best forthe urban hospital to subsequentlyclaim that it is significantlydisadvantaged by the rural status forwhich it applied and should bereclassified to an urban area.

Furthermore, permitting hospitals theoption of seeking rural reclassificationunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Actfor certain payment advantages, coupledwith the ability to pursue a subsequentMGCRB reclassification back to anurban area, could have implicationsbeyond those originally envisionedunder Public Law 106–113. Inparticular, we are concerned about thepotential interface between ruralreclassifications under section 401 andsection 407(b)(2) of Public Law 106–113, which authorizes a 30-percentexpansion in a rural hospital’s residentfull-time equivalent count for purposesof Medicare payment for the indirectcosts of medical education (IME) undersection 1886(d)(5)(B) of the Act.(Reclassification from urban to ruralunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Actcan affect IME payments to a hospital,which are made under section1886(d)(5)(B) of the Act, but notpayments for the direct costs of GME,



which are made under section 1886(h)of the Act.)

Congress clearly intended hospitalsthat become rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act to receive somebenefit as a result. For example, somehospitals currently located in very largeurban counties are in fact fairly small,isolated hospitals. Some of thesehospitals will now be able to bedesignated a rural hospital and becomeeligible to be designated a critical accesshospital.

In addition, one of the criteria undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act is thatthe hospital would qualify as an SCH oran RRC if it were located in a rural area.An SCH would be eligible to be paid onthe basis of the higher of its hospital-specific rate or the Federal rate. On theother hand, the only benefit undersection 1886(d) of the Act for an urbanhospital to become an RRC would bewaiver of the proximity requirementsthat are otherwise applicable under theMGCRB process, as set forth in§ 412.230(a)(3).

We agree with the commenters thatCongress contemplated that hospitalsmight seek to be reclassified as ruralunder section 1886(d)(E) of the Act inorder to become RRCs so that thehospital would be exempt from theMGCRB proximity requirement andcould be reclassified by the MGCRB toanother urban area. -

Therefore, we sought a policyapproach that would appropriatelyaccount for our concern that these urbanto rural redesignations not be utilizedinappropriately, but would benefithospitals seeking to reclassify under theMGCRB process by achieving RRCstatus. We decided to reconsider ourapplication of section 4202(b) of PublicLaw 105–33, which states, in part, ‘‘Anyhospital classified as a rural referralcenter by the Secretary * * * for FY1991 shall be classified as such a ruralreferral center for fiscal year 1998 andeach subsequent fiscal year.’’ In theAugust 29, 1997 final rule withcomment period, we reinstated RRCstatus for all hospitals that lost thestatus due to triennial review or MGCRBreclassification, but not to hospitals thatlost RRC status because they were nowurban for all purposes because of theOMB designation of their geographicarea as urban (62 FR 45999). Ourrationale at that time for not reinstatingRRC status for these hospitals was thata hospital had to be rural in order toqualify for reinstatement as an RRC, andthese hospitals were no longer locatedin rural areas.

We are aware of several specifichospitals that were RRCs for FY 1991,but subsequently lost their status when

the county in which they were locatedbecame urban, and have expressed theirwish to be redesignated as an RRC inorder to be eligible to reclassify. Webelieve that the language in theConference Report accompanying PublicLaw 106–113 was intended to addressthese hospitals; that is, we believe thatthe intent underlying this language (adescription of the House bill) was toallow certain urban hospitals to becomeRRCs (upon reclassifying from urban torural under section 1886(d)(8)(E) of theAct) and then reclassify under theMGCRB process (as RRCs, the hospitalswould be exempt from the MGCRB’sproximity requirements). Accordingly,in light of section 1886(d)(8)(E) of theAct and the language in the ConferenceReport, we have decided to revisit ourpolicy decision on section 4202(b) ofPublic Law 105–33. Effective as ofOctober 1, 2000, hospitals located inwhat is now an urban area, if they wereever an RRC, will be reinstated to RRCstatus under section 4202(b) of PublicLaw 105–33. (In the August 27, 1997final rule, we indicated that werecognized there were hospitals thatqualified for RRC status after 1991 thatlost their status in a subsequent yeardue to MGCRB reclassification.Therefore, we determined that wewould permit any hospital that qualifiedas an RRC at any point that had lost itsRRC status as a result of MGCRBreclassification to be reinstated,regardless of whether it was designatedan RRC in 1991. Similarly, for purposesof this policy, we will permit hospitalsthat previously qualified as an RRC andthat lost their status due to OMBredesignation of the county in whichthey are located from rural to urban tobe reinstated as an RRC.) Such hospitalswould benefit from the waiver of theMGCRB’s proximity requirements, aslong as they are designated as RRCs atthe time the MGCRB acts on theirapplication.

We are not permitting hospitalsredesignated as rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act to be eligible forsubsequent reclassification by theMGCRB, and are revising the regulationsgoverning MGCRB reclassifications(§ 412.230) accordingly.

Comment: Several commenterssuggested alternative policy optionsregarding the interaction of the distinctreclassification provisions found undersections 1886(d)(8)(E) and 1886(d)(10)of the Act. First, it was recommendedthat HCFA formulate a policy thatwould allow urban hospitalsreclassifying to rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act the same accessto urban reclassification under theMGCRB process that the law makes

available to geographically ruralhospitals. One commenter posits twopossible limitations on MGCRBreclassifications for these now-ruralhospitals. One possibility is that anurban hospital that reclassifies to ruralunder section 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act bepermitted to reclassify only to anotherMSA, but be precluded fromreclassifying back to the MSA in whichit is situated. Second, the commentersuggested that reclassifications underthe MGCRB process be restricted solelyto the wage index for formerly urbanhospitals that have elected to reclassifyto rural under section 1886(d)(8)(E) ofthe Act.

Response: Although the alternativessuggested by the commenters wouldlimit to some degree the possibleinappropriate incentives for hospitals tobecome rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act, we areconcerned that they would still allowthese hospitals to receive inappropriatepayments, albeit on a more limitedbasis. Therefore, we have not selectedthese alternative approaches.

Comment: One health system arguedthat preventing an urban hospital thathas reclassified to rural under section1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act fromreclassifying through restricting theMGCRB process would reduce thenumber of hospitals reclassifying asrural under section 1886(d)(8)(E) of theAct. The commenter further noted thateven if we permitted an urban hospitalthat reclassified to a rural area undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act toreclassify through the MGCRB process,the hospital would suffer financiallosses during the period between whenit was rural for all payment purposesand its reclassification back to urban.

Response: We wish to emphasize thaturban to rural reclassification undersection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act isentirely voluntary. Each hospitalanticipating that it may qualify underthis provision should determine theimpact of Medicare payment policies ifit were to reclassify. As discussedabove, we believe that our policies hereare consistent with the Secretary’s broadauthority under section 1886(d)(10) ofthe Act, the statutory language insection 1886(d)(8)(E) of the Act, as wellas our understanding of the intentunderlying the description of the Housebill in the Conference Report.

2. Revised Thresholds Applicable toRural Hospitals for Wage IndexReclassifications

Existing §§ 412.230(e)(1)(iii) and(e)(1)(iv) provide that hospitals mayobtain reclassification to another areafor purposes of calculating and applying



the wage index if the hospital’s averagehourly wages are at least 108 percent ofthe average hourly wages in the areawhere it is physically located, and atleast 84 percent of the average hourlywages in a proximate area to which thehospital seeks reclassification. Thesethresholds apply equally to urban andrural hospitals seeking reclassification.

Historically, the financialperformance of rural hospitals under theprospective payment system has laggedbehind that of urban hospitals. Despitean overall increase in recent years ofMedicare inpatient operating profitmargins, some rural hospitals continueto struggle financially (as measured byMedicare inpatient operatingprospective payment system paymentsminus costs, divided by payments). Forexample, during FY 1997, while thenational average hospital margin was15.1 percent, it was 8.9 percent for ruralhospitals. In addition, approximatelyone-third of rural hospitals continue toexperience negative Medicare inpatientmargins despite this relatively highaverage margin.

In response to the lower margins ofrural hospitals and the potential for anegative impact on beneficiaries’ accessto care if these hospitals were to close,we considered potential administrativechanges that could help improvepayments for rural hospitals. Oneapproach in that regard would be tomake it easier for rural hospitals toreclassify for purposes of receiving ahigher wage index. The currentthresholds for applying for wage indexreclassification are based on ourprevious analysis showing the averagehospital wage as a percentage of its areawage was 96 percent, and one standarddeviation from that average was equal to12 percentage points (see the June 4,1992 proposed rule (57 FR 23635) andthe September 1, 1992 final rule (57 FR39770)). Because rural hospitals’financial performance has consistentlyremained below that of urban hospitals,we now believe that rural hospitalsmerit special dispensation with respectto qualifying for reclassification forpurposes of the wage index. Therefore,we proposed to change those averagewage threshold percentages so morerural hospitals can be reclassified.Specifically, we proposed to lower theupper threshold for rural hospitals to106 percent and the lower threshold to82 percent. The thresholds for urbanhospitals seeking reclassification forpurposes of the wage index would beunchanged. We note that rural hospitalscomprised nearly 90 percent of FY 2000wage index reclassifications. Under theproposal, beginning October 1, 2000,rural hospitals would be able to

reclassify for the wage index if, amongother things, their average hourly wagesare at least 106 percent of the area inwhich they are physically located, andat least 82 percent of the average hourlywages in the proximate area to which itseeks reclassification.

Although it is difficult to estimateprecisely how many additionalhospitals might qualify by lowering thethresholds because we do not have dataindicating which hospitals meet all ofthe other reclassification criteria (e.g.,proximity), our analysis indicated that,if we were to raise the 108 percentthreshold to 109 percent, approximately20 rural hospitals would no longerqualify. If the upper threshold were tobe raised to 110 percent, another 16hospitals would not qualify. On theother hand, increasing the lowerthreshold from 84 percent to 85 percentwould result in only 2 rural hospitalsbecoming ineligible to reclassify. Only 1additional hospital would be affected byraising the threshold to 86 percent.Based on this analysis, we anticipatedapproximately 50 rural hospitals arelikely to benefit from the proposedchange.

We believe this proposal, as adopted,achieves an appropriate balancebetween allowing certain hospitals thatare currently just below the thresholdsto become eligible for reclassification,while not liberalizing the criteria somuch that an excessive number ofhospitals begin to reclassify. Becausethese reclassifications are budgetneutral, nonreclassified hospitals’payments are negatively impacted byreclassification.

We believe there are many factorsassociated with lower margins amongrural hospitals. We note that section 410of Public Law 106–113 requires theComptroller General of the UnitedStates to ‘‘conduct a study of the currentlaws and regulations for geographicreclassification of hospitals to determinewhether such reclassification isappropriate for purposes of applyingwage indices.’’ In addition, section 411of Public Law 106–113 requiresMedPAC to conduct a study on theadequacy and appropriateness of thespecial payment categories andmethodologies established for ruralhospitals. We anticipate that the resultsof these studies will help identify otherareas to help improve payments forrural hospitals, either throughreclassifications or other means.

Comment: Commenters were unclearabout the effective date for the changein wage index thresholds for ruralhospitals applying for reclassification.

Response: The revised thresholdsapply to applications submitted to the

MGCRB (by September 1, 2000) forreclassification for FY 2002. Theserevised guidelines do not apply todecisions that have already been issuedby the MGCRB for FY 2001.

G. Payment for Direct Costs of GraduateMedical Education (§ 413.86)

1. Background

Under section 1886(h) of the Act,Medicare pays hospitals for the directcosts of graduate medical education(GME). The payments are based on thenumber of residents trained by thehospital. Section 1886(h) of the Act, asamended by section 4623 of Public Law105–33, caps the number of residentsthat hospitals may count for direct GME.

Section 9202 of the ConsolidatedOmnibus Reconciliation Act (COBRA)of 1985 (Pub. L. 99–272) established amethodology for determining paymentsto hospitals for the costs of approvedGME programs at section 1886(h)(2) ofthe Act. Section 1886(h)(2) of the Act,as implemented in regulations at§ 413.86(e), sets forth a paymentmethodology for the determination of ahospital-specific, base-period perresident amount (PRA) that is calculatedby dividing a hospital’s allowable costsof GME for a base period by its numberof residents in the base period. The baseperiod is, for most hospitals, thehospital’s cost reporting periodbeginning in FY 1984 (that is, the periodof October 1, 1983 through September30, 1984). The PRA is multiplied by thenumber of full-time equivalent (FTE)residents working in all areas of thehospital complex (or non-hospital sites,when applicable), and the hospital’sMedicare share of total inpatient days todetermine Medicare’s direct GMEpayments. In addition, as specified insection 1886(h)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act, forcost reporting periods beginning on orafter October 1, 1993, throughSeptember 30, 1995, each hospital’sPRA for the previous cost reportingperiod is not adjusted for any FTEresidents who are not either a primarycare or an obstetrics and gynecologyresident. As a result, hospitals with bothprimary care/obstetrics and gynecologyresidents and non-primary careresidents have two separate PRAs for FY1994 and, thereafter, one for primarycare and one for non-primary care.(Thus, for purposes of this proposedrule, when we refer to a hospital’s PRA,this amount is inclusive of any CPI–Uadjustments the hospital may havereceived since the hospital’s base-year,including any CPI–U adjustments thehospital may have received because thehospital trains primary care/non-



primary care residents, as specifiedunder existing § 413.86(e)(3)(ii)).

2. Use of National Average Per ResidentAmount Methodology in ComputingDirect GME Payments

Section 311 of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(h)(2) of the Actto establish a methodology for the useof a national average PRA in computingdirect GME payments for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2000 and on or before September 30,2005. Generally, section 311 establishesa ‘‘floor’’ and a ‘‘ceiling’’ based on alocality-adjusted, updated, weightedaverage PRA. Each hospital’s PRA iscompared to the floor and ceiling todetermine whether its PRA should berevised. Accordingly, in the May 5, 2000proposed rule, we proposed toimplement section 311 by setting forththe prescribed methodology forcalculation of the weighted averagePRA. We then discussed the proposedsteps for determining whether ahospital’s PRA will be adjusted basedupon the proposed calculated weightedaverage PRA, in accordance with themethodology specified under section311 of Public Law 106–113.

We proposed to calculate theweighted average PRA based upon datafrom hospitals’ cost reporting periodsending during FY 1997 (October 1, 1996through September 30, 1997), asdirected by section 311 of Public Law106–113. We accessed these FY 1997cost reporting data from the HospitalCost Report Information System (HCRIS)and also obtained the necessary data forthose hospitals that are not included inHCRIS (because they file manual costreports), from those hospitals’ fiscalintermediaries. If a hospital had morethan one cost reporting period ending inFY 1997, we proposed to include all ofits cost reports ending in FY 1997 in ourcalculations. However, if a hospital didnot have a cost reporting period endingin FY 1997, such as a hospital with along cost reporting period beginning inFY 1996 and ending in FY 1998, thehospital is excluded from ourcalculations.

We have slightly revised the weightedaverage PRA in this final rule becauseof changes in the data that have cometo our attention since the publication ofthe proposed rule. In the proposed rule,one hospital was excluded from ourcalculations because it was a newteaching hospital with no establishedPRA (the first year of training for a newteaching hospital is paid for byMedicare on a cost basis; a PRA isapplied in calculating a hospital’spayment beginning with the hospital’ssecond year of residency training) even

though it did have a cost reportingperiod ending during FY 1997. In theweighted average calculation in thisfinal rule, we have excluded one morehospital because we learned that thishospital was also a new teachinghospital in FY 1997 with no establishedPRA. We also have added one hospitalto the weighted average calculationbecause it was inadvertently excludedin the calculation in the proposed rule.In addition, we found that the data oftwo hospitals that were used in theweighted average calculation in theproposed rule were incorrect, and wehave made the corrections for theweighted average calculation in thisfinal rule. The total number of hospitalsthat we include in our calculation isunchanged from the proposed rule andremains at 1,235. Thirty-five of thesehospitals are hospitals with more thanone cost report.

In accordance with section 311 ofPublic Law 106–113, we proposed tocalculate the weighted average PRA inthe following manner:

Step 1: We determine each hospital’ssingle PRA by adding each hospital’sprimary care and non-primary carePRAs, weighted by its respective FTEs,and dividing by the sum of the FTEs forprimary care and non-primary careresidents.

Step 2: We standardize each hospital’ssingle PRA by dividing it by the 1999geographic adjustment factor (GAF)(which is an average of the threegeographic index values (weighted bythe national average weight for the workcomponent, practice expensecomponent, and malpracticecomponent)) in accordance with section1848(e) of the Act and 42 CFR 414.26(which is used to adjust physicianpayments for the different wage areas),for the physician fee schedule area inwhich the hospital is located.

Step 3: We add all the standardizedhospital PRAs (as calculated in Step 2),each weighted by hospitals’ respectiveFTEs, and then divide by the totalnumber of FTEs.

Based upon this three-stepcalculation, we determined theweighted average PRA (for costreporting periods ending during FY1997) to be $68,464. (The weightedaverage PRA calculated for the proposedrule was $68,487.)

For cost reporting periods beginningon or after October 1, 2000 and on orbefore September 30, 2005 (FY 2001through FY 2005), the national averagePRA is applied using the following threesteps:

Step 1: Update the weighted averagePRA for inflation. Under section1886(h)(2) of the Act, as amended by

section 311 of Public Law 106–113, theweighted average PRA is updated by theestimated percentage increase in theconsumer price index for all urbanconsumers (CPI–U) during the periodbeginning with the month thatrepresents the midpoint of the costreporting periods ending during FY1997 and ending with the midpoint ofthe hospital’s cost reporting period thatbegins in FY 2001. Therefore, theweighted average standardized PRA($68,464) would be updated by theincrease in CPI–U for the periodbeginning with the midpoint of all costreporting periods for hospitals with costreporting periods ending during FY1997 (October 1, 1996), and ending withthe midpoint of the individualhospital’s cost reporting period thatbegins during FY 2001.

For example, Hospital A has acalendar year cost reporting period.Thus, for Hospital A, the weightedaverage PRA is updated from October 1,1996 to July 1, 2001, because July 1 isthe midpoint of its cost reporting periodbeginning on or after October 1, 2000.Or, for example, if Hospital B has a costreporting period starting October 1, theweighted average PRA is updated fromOctober 1, 1996 to April 1, 2001, themidpoint of the cost reporting period forHospital B. Therefore, the starting pointfor updating the weighted average PRAis the same date for all hospitals(October 1, 1996), but the ending date isdifferent because it is dependent uponthe cost reporting period for eachhospital.

Step 2: Adjust for locality. Inaccordance with section 1886(h)(2) ofthe Act, as amended by section 311 ofPublic Law 106–113, once the weightedaverage PRA is updated according toeach hospital’s cost reporting period,the updated weighted average PRA (thenational average PRA) is furtheradjusted to calculate a locality-adjustednational average PRA for each hospital.This is done by multiplying the updatednational average PRA by the 1999 GAF(as specified in the October 31, 1997Federal Register (62 FR 59257)) for thefee schedule area in which the hospitalis located.

Step 3: Determine possible revisionsto the PRA. For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and on or before September 30, 2005,the locality-adjusted national averagePRA, as calculated in Step 2, is thencompared to the hospital’s individualPRA. Based upon the provisions ofsection 1886(h)(2) of the Act, asamended by section 311 of Public Law106–113, a hospital’s PRA is revised, ifappropriate, according to the following:



• Floor—For cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 2001, to determinewhich PRAs (primary care and non-primary care separately) are below the70 percent floor, a hospital’s locality-adjusted national average PRA ismultiplied by 70 percent. This resultingnumber is then compared to thehospital’s PRA that is updated forinflation to the current cost reportingperiod. If the hospital’s PRA would beless than 70 percent of the locality-adjusted national average PRA, theindividual PRA is replaced by 70percent of the locality-adjusted nationalaverage PRA for that cost reportingperiod and would be updated forinflation in future years by the CPI–U.

We noted that there may be somehospitals with primary care and non-primary care PRAs where both PRAs arereplaced by 70 percent of the locality-adjusted national average PRA. In thesesituations, the hospital would receiveidentical PRAs; no distinction in PRAswould be made for differences ininflation (because a hospital has bothprimary care and non-primary carePRAs, each of which is updated asdescribed in § 413.86(e)(3)(ii)) as of costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2000.

For example, if the FY 2001 locality-adjusted national average PRA for AreaX is $100,000, then 70 percent of thatamount is $70,000. If, in Area X,Hospital A has a primary care FY 2001PRA of $69,000 and a non-primary careFY 2001 PRA of $67,000, both ofHospital A’s FY 2001 PRAs are replacedby the $70,000 floor. Thus, $70,000 isthe amount that would be used todetermine Hospital A’s direct GMEpayments for both primary care andnon-primary care FTEs in its costreporting period beginning in FY 2001,and the $70,000 PRA would be updatedfor inflation by the CPI–U in subsequentyears.

• Ceiling—For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and on or before September 30, 2005(FY 2001 through FY 2005), a ceilingthat is equal to 140 percent of eachlocality-adjusted national average PRAis calculated and compared to eachindividual hospital’s PRA. If thehospital’s PRA is greater than 140percent of the locality-adjusted nationalaverage PRA, the PRA would beadjusted depending on the fiscal year asfollows:

a. FY 2001. For cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 2001, each hospital’sPRA from the preceding cost reportingperiod (that is, the PRA with which itsdirect GME payments were made in FY2000) is compared to the FY 2001locality-adjusted national average PRA.

If the individual hospital’s FY 2000 PRAexceeds 140 percent of the FY 2001locality-adjusted national average PRA,the PRA is frozen at the FY 2000 PRA,and is not updated in FY 2001 by theCPI–U factor, subject to the limitation insection IV.G.2.d. of this preamble.

For example, if the FY 2001 locality-adjusted national average PRA ‘‘ceiling’’for Area Y is $140,000 (that is, 140percent of $100,000, the hypotheticallocality-adjusted national average PRA),and if, in this area, Hospital B has a FY2000 PRA of $140,001, then for FY2001, Hospital B’s PRA is frozen at$140,001 and is not updated by the CPI–U for FY 2001.

b. FY 2002. For cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 2002, the methodologyused to calculate each hospital’sindividual PRA would be the same asdescribed in section IV.G.2.a. above forFY 2001. Each hospital’s PRA from thepreceding cost reporting period (that is,the PRA with which its direct GMEpayments were made in FY 2001) iscompared to the FY 2002 locality-adjusted national average PRA. If theindividual hospital’s FY 2001 PRAexceeds 140 percent of the FY 2002locality-adjusted national average PRA,the PRA is frozen at the FY 2001 PRA,and is not updated in FY 2002 by theCPI–U factor, subject to the limitation insection IV.G.2.d. of this preamble.

c. FY 2003, FY 2004, and FY 2005.For cost reporting periods beginning inFY 2003, FY 2004, and FY 2005, if thehospital’s PRA for the previous costreporting period is greater than 140percent of the locality-adjusted nationalaverage PRA for that same previous costreporting period (for example, for thecost reporting period beginning in FY2003, compare the hospital’s PRA fromthe FY 2002 cost reporting period to thelocality-adjusted national average PRAfrom FY 2002), then, subject to thelimitation in section IV.G.2.d. of thispreamble, the hospital’s PRA is updatedin accordance with section1886(h)(2)(D)(i) of the Act, except thatthe CPI–U applied is reduced (but notbelow zero) by 2 percentage points.

For example, for purposes of HospitalA’s FY 2003 cost report, Hospital A’sPRA for FY 2002 is compared toHospital A’s locality-adjusted nationalaverage PRA ceiling for FY 2002. If, inFY 2002, Hospital A’s PRA is $100,001and the FY 2002 locality-adjustednational average PRA ceiling is$100,000, then for FY 2003, Hospital A’sPRA is updated with the FY 2003 CPI–U minus 2 percent. If, in this scenario,the CPI–U for FY 2003 is 1.024, HospitalA would update its PRA in FY 2003 by1.004 (the CPI–U minus 2 percentagepoints). However, if the CPI–U factor for

FY 2003 is 1.01 and subtracting 2percentage points of 1.01 yields 0.99,the PRA for FY 2003 would not beupdated, and would remain $100,001.

We note that, while the language insection 1886(h)(2)(D)(iv)(I) and insection 1886(h)(2)(D)(iv)(II) of the Act(the sections that describe theadjustments to PRAs for hospitals thatexceed 140 percent of the locality-adjusted national average PRA) is verysimilar, the language does differ.Section 1886(h)(2)(D)(iv)(I) of the Actstates that for a cost reporting periodbeginning during FY 2000 or FY 2001,‘‘if the approved FTE resident amountfor a hospital for the preceding costreporting period exceeds 140 percent ofthe locality-adjusted national averageper resident amount * * * for thathospital and period * * *, theapproved FTE resident amount for theperiod involved shall be the same as theapproved FTE resident amount for suchpreceding cost reporting period.’’(Emphasis added.) Section1886(h)(2)(D)(iv)(II) of the Act states thatfor a cost reporting period beginningduring FY 2003, FY 2004, or FY 2005,‘‘if the approved FTE resident amountfor a hospital for the preceding costreporting period exceeds 140 percent ofthe locality-adjusted national averageper resident amount * * * for thathospital and preceding period, theapproved FTE resident amount for theperiod involved shall be updated* * *.’’ (Emphasis added.) Accordingly,for FYs 2001 and 2002, a hospital’s PRAfrom the previous cost reporting periodis compared to the locality-adjustednational average PRA of the current costreporting period. For FY 2003, FY 2004,or FY 2005, a hospital’s PRA from theprevious cost reporting period iscompared to the locality-adjustednational average PRA from the previouscost reporting period.

d. General rule for hospitals thatexceed the ceiling. For cost reportingperiods beginning in FY 2001 throughFY 2005, if a hospital’s PRA exceeds140 percent of the locality-adjustednational average PRA and it is adjustedunder any of the above criteria, thecurrent year PRA cannot be reducedbelow 140 percent of the locality-adjusted national average PRA.

For example, to determine the PRA ofHospital A, in FY 2003, Hospital A hada FY 2002 PRA of $100,001 and the FY2002 locality-adjusted national averagePRA ceiling is $100,000. For FY 2003,applying an update of the CPI–U factorminus 2 percentage points (for example,1.024 ¥ .02 = 1.004 would yield anupdated PRA of $100,401) while thelocality-adjusted national average PRA(before calculation of the ceiling) is



updated for FY 2003 with the full CPI–U factor (1.024) so that the ceiling of$100,000 is now increased to $102,400(that is, $100,000 x 1.024 = $102,400).Therefore, applying the adjustmentwould result in a PRA of $100,401,which is under the ceiling of $102,400for FY 2003. In this situation, forpurposes of the FY 2003 cost report,Hospital A’s PRA equals $102,400.

We note that if the hospital’s PRAdoes not exceed 140 percent of thelocality-adjusted national average PRA,the PRA is updated by the CPI–U for therespective fiscal year. If a hospital’s PRAis updated by the CPI–U because it isless than 140 percent of the locality-adjusted national average PRA for arespective fiscal year, and once updated,the PRA exceeds the 140 percent ceilingfor the respective fiscal year, theupdated PRA would still be used tocalculate the hospital’s direct GMEpayments. Whether a hospital’s PRAexceeds the ceiling is determined beforethe application of the update factors; ifa hospital’s PRA exceeds the ceilingonly because of the application of theupdate factors, the hospital’s PRAwould retain the CPI–U factors.

For example, if, in FY 2001, thelocality-adjusted national average PRAceiling for Area Y is $140,000, and if, inthis area, Hospital B has a FY 2000 PRAof $139,000, then for FY 2001, HospitalB’s PRA is updated for inflation for FY2001 because the PRA is below theceiling. However, once the updatefactors are applied, Hospital B’s PRA isnow $142,000 (that is, above the$140,000 ceiling). In this scenario,Hospital B’s inflated PRA would beused to calculate its direct GMEpayments because Hospital B has onlyexceeded the ceiling after theapplication of the inflation factors.

• PRAs greater than or equal to thefloor and less than or equal to theceiling. For cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 2001 through FY 2005,if a hospital’s PRA is greater than orequal to 70 percent and less than orequal to 140 percent of the locality-adjusted national average PRA, thehospital’s PRA is updated using theexisting methodology specified in§ 413.86(e)(3)(i).

For cost reporting periods beginningin FY 2006 and thereafter, a hospital’sPRA for its preceding cost reportingperiod would be updated using theexisting methodology specified in§ 413.86(e)(3)(i).

We proposed to redesignate theexisting § 413.86(e)(4) as § 413.86(e)(5)and add the rules implementing section1886(h)(2) of the Act, as amended bysection 311 of Public Law 106–113, inthe vacated § 413.86(e)(4). Because we

proposed to apply the methodology forupdating the PRA for inflation that isdescribed in existing § 413.86(e)(3), wealso proposed to amend § 413.86(e)(3) tomake those rules applicable to the costreporting periods (FY 2001 through FY2005) specified in the proposed§ 413.86(e)(4), and in subsequent costreporting periods.

In addition, we proposed to make aconforming change by amendingproposed redesignated § 413.86(e)(5) toaccount for situations in whichhospitals do not have a 1984 base periodand establish a PRA in a cost reportingperiod beginning on or after October 1,2000. We believe there are two factorsto consider when a new teachinghospital establishes its PRA underproposed redesignated § 413.86(e)(5).First, for example, when calculating theweighted mean value of PRAs ofhospitals located in the same geographicarea or the weighted mean of the PRAsin the hospital’s census region (asspecified in § 412.62(f)(1)(i)), thehospitals’ PRAs used to calculate theweighted mean values are subject to theprovisions of proposed § 413.86(e)(4),the national average PRA methodology.Second, the resulting PRA establishedunder proposed redesignated§ 413.86(e)(5) also would be subject tothe national average PRA methodologyspecified in proposed § 413.86(e)(4).

We also proposed to make a clarifyingamendment to the proposedredesignated § 413.86(e)(5)(i)(B) toaccount for an oversight in theregulations text when we amended ourregulations on August 29, 1997 (62 FR46004). In the preamble of the August29, 1997 final rule, in setting forth ourpolicy on the determination of perresident amounts for hospitals that didnot have residents in the 1984 GME baseperiod, we stated that we would use a‘‘weighted’’ average of the per residentamounts for hospitals located in thesame geographic area. However, weinadvertently did not include a specificreference to ‘‘weighted’’ in the languageof the regulation text. Therefore, we areproposing to specify that the ‘‘weightedmean value’’ of per resident amounts ofhospitals located in the same geographicwage area is used for determining thebase period for certain hospitals for costreporting periods beginning in the samefiscal years.

We received two public comments onthe GME provisions included in theproposed rule.

Comment: One commenter supportedthe implementation of section 311 ofPublic Law 106–113. Anothercommenter suggested that there isambiguity in our volunteer physicianpolicy regarding the rotation of

residents to nonhospital sites. Thecommenter requested that we explicitlystate that, so long as the other criteriaunder the nonhospital policy are met,hospitals may receive direct GMEpayments for residents training innonhospital sites when the hospitals donot incur supervisory costs, if thewritten agreement, which is signed byboth the hospital and nonhospital site,indicates that the supervisory physicianhas agreed to volunteer his or her timein supervising activities.

Response: We did not propose tomake any revisions to our policyregarding training residents innonhospital sites. Any changes in policyregarding an adjustment for training atnonhospital sites would need to gothrough the notice and commentprocedures. We will consider the meritsof the commenter’s recommendation fora change in policy for a future proposedrulemaking.

H. Outliers: Miscellaneous ChangeUnder the provisions of section

1886(d)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the Secretarydoes not pay for day outliers fordischarges from hospitals paid underthe prospective payment systems thatoccur after September 30, 1997. In theMay 5 proposed rule, we proposed tomake a conforming change to § 412.2(a)by deleting the reference to anadditional payment for both inpatientoperating and inpatient capital-relatedcosts for cases that have an atypicallylong length of stay. We did not receiveany comments on this proposal and areadopting the change as final.

V. The Prospective Payment System forCapital-Related Costs: The Last Year ofthe Transition Period

Since FY 2001 is the last year of the10-year transition period established tophase in the prospective paymentsystem for hospital capital-related costs,for the readers’ benefit, we are providinga summary of the statutory basis for thesystem, the development and evolutionof the system, the methodology used todetermine capital-related payments tohospitals, and the policy for providingexceptions payments during thetransition period.

Section 1886(g) of the Act requires theSecretary to pay for the capital-relatedcosts of inpatient hospital services ‘‘inaccordance with a prospective paymentsystem established by the Secretary.’’Under the statute, the Secretary hasbroad authority in establishing andimplementing the capital prospectivepayment system. We initiallyimplemented the capital prospectivepayment system in the August 30, 1991final rule (56 FR 43409), in which we



established a 10-year transition periodto change the payment methodology forMedicare inpatient capital-related costsfrom a reasonable cost-basedmethodology to a prospectivemethodology (based fully on the Federalrate).

The 10-year transition periodestablished to phase in the prospectivepayment system for capital-related costsis effective for discharges occurring onor after October 1, 1991 (FY 1992)through discharges occurring on orbefore September 30, 2001. For FY 2001,hospitals paid under the fullyprospective transition periodmethodology will be paid 100 percent ofthe Federal rate and zero percent oftheir hospital-specific rate, whilehospitals paid under the hold-harmlesstransition period methodology will bepaid 85 percent of their allowable oldcapital costs (100 percent for solecommunity hospitals) plus a paymentfor new capital costs based on theFederal rate. Fiscal year 2001 is the finalyear of the capital transition period and,therefore, the last fiscal year for whicha portion of a hold-harmless hospital’scapital costs per discharge will be paidon a cost basis (except for newhospitals). In the proposed rule, westated that since fully prospectivehospitals will be paid based on 100percent of the Federal rate and zeropercent of their hospital-specific rate,we did not determine a proposedhospital-specific rate update for FY2001 in section IV of the Addendum ofthe proposed rule. However, it has cometo our attention that an update to thehospital-specific rate is necessary onOctober 1, 2000, for hospitals with costreporting periods that do not coincidewith the Federal fiscal year. Therefore,the hospital-specific rate update for FY2001 is shown in section IV of theAddendum of this final rule. For costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2001 (FY 2002), payment forcapital-related costs will be determinedbased solely on the capital standardFederal rate. Hospitals that were definedas ‘‘new’’ for the purposes of capitalpayments during the transition period(§ 412.30(b)) will continue to be paidaccording to the applicable paymentmethodology outlined in § 412.324.

Generally, during the transitionperiod, inpatient capital-related costsare paid on a per discharge basis, andthe amount of payment depends on therelationship between the hospital-specific rate and the Federal rate duringthe hospital’s base year. A hospital witha base year hospital-specific rate lowerthan the Federal rate is paid under thefully prospective payment methodologyduring the transition period. This

method is based on a dynamic blendpercentage of the hospital’s hospital-specific rate and the applicable Federalrate for each year during the transitionperiod. A hospital with a base periodhospital-specific rate greater than theFederal rate is paid under the hold-harmless payment methodology duringthe transition period. A hospital paidunder the hold-harmless paymentmethodology receives the higher of (1)a blended payment of 85 percent ofreasonable cost for old capital plus anamount for new capital based on aportion of the Federal rate or (2) apayment based on 100 percent of theadjusted Federal rate. The amountrecognized as old capital is generallylimited to the allowable Medicarecapital-related costs that were in use forpatient care as of December 31, 1990.Under limited circumstances, capital-related costs for assets obligated as ofDecember 31, 1990, but put in use forpatient care after December 31, 1990,also may be recognized as old capital ifcertain conditions are met. These costsare known as obligated capital costs.New capital costs are generally definedas allowable Medicare capital-relatedcosts for assets put in use for patientcare after December 31, 1990. Beginningin FY 2001, at the conclusion of thetransition period for the capitalprospective payment system, capitalpayments will be based solely on theFederal rate for the vast majority ofhospitals.

During the transition period, newhospitals are exempt from theprospective payment system for capital-related costs for their first 2 years ofoperation and are paid 85 percent oftheir reasonable cost during that period.The hospital’s first 12-month costreporting period (or combination of costreporting periods covering at least 12months) beginning at least 1 year afterthe hospital accepts its first patientserves as the hospital’s base period.Those base year costs qualify as oldcapital and are used to establish itshospital-specific rate used to determineits payment methodology under thecapital prospective payment system.Effective with the third year ofoperation, the hospital is paid undereither the fully prospectivemethodology or the hold-harmlessmethodology. If the fully prospectivemethodology is applicable, the hospitalis paid using the appropriate transitionblend of its hospital-specific rate andthe Federal rate for that fiscal year untilthe conclusion of the transition period,at which time the hospital will be paidbased on 100 percent of the Federal rate.If the hold-harmless methodology is

applicable, the hospital will receivehold-harmless payment for assets in useduring the base period for 8 years,which may extend beyond the transitionperiod.

The basic methodology fordetermining capital prospectivepayments based on the Federal rate isset forth in § 412.312. For the purposeof calculating payments for eachdischarge, the standard Federal rate isadjusted as follows:(Standard Federal Rate) × (DRG Weight)

× (GAF) × (Large Urban Add-on, ifapplicable) ×

(COLA Adjustment for HospitalsLocated in Alaska and Hawaii) × (1+ DSH Adjustment Factor + IMEAdjustment Factor).

Hospitals may also receive outlierpayments for those cases that qualifyunder the thresholds established foreach fiscal year. Section 412.312(c)provides for a single set of thresholds toidentify outlier cases for both inpatientoperating and inpatient capital-relatedpayments.

During the capital prospectivepayment system transition period, ahospital may also receive an additionalpayment under an exceptions process ifits total inpatient capital-relatedpayments are less than a minimumpercentage of its allowable Medicareinpatient capital-related costs forqualifying classes of hospitals. For up to10 years after the conclusion of thetransition period, a hospital may alsoreceive an additional payment under aspecial exceptions process if certainqualifying criteria are met and its totalinpatient capital-related payments areless than the 70 percent minimumpercentage of its allowable Medicareinpatient capital-related costs.

In accordance with section1886(d)(9)(A) of the Act, under theprospective payment system forinpatient operating costs, hospitalslocated in Puerto Rico are paid foroperating costs under a special paymentformula. Prior to FY 1998, hospitals inPuerto Rico were paid a blended ratethat consisted of 75 percent of theapplicable standardized amount specificto Puerto Rico hospitals and 25 percentof the applicable national averagestandardized amount. However,effective October 1, 1997, underamendments to the Act enacted bysection 4406 of Public Law 105–33,operating payments to hospitals inPuerto Rico are based on a blend of 50percent of the applicable standardizedamount specific to Puerto Rico hospitalsand 50 percent of the applicablenational average standardized amount.In conjunction with this change to the



operating blend percentage, effectivewith discharges on or after October 1,1997, we compute capital payments tohospitals in Puerto Rico based on ablend of 50 percent of the Puerto Ricorate and 50 percent of the Federal rate.

Section 412.374 provides for the useof this blended payment system forpayments to Puerto Rico hospitals underthe prospective payment system forinpatient capital-related costs.Accordingly, for capital-related costs,we compute a separate payment ratespecific to Puerto Rico hospitals usingthe same methodology used to computethe national Federal rate for capital-related costs.

In the August 30, 1991 final rule, weestablished a capital exceptions policy,which provides for exceptions paymentsduring the transition period (§ 412.348).Section 412.348 provides that, duringthe transition period, a hospital mayreceive additional payment under anexceptions process when its regularpayments are less than a minimumpercentage, established by class ofhospital, of the hospital’s reasonablecapital-related costs. The amount of theexceptions payment is the differencebetween the hospital’s minimumpayment level and the payments thehospital would receive under the capitalprospective payment system in theabsence of an exceptions payment. Thecomparison is made on a cumulativebasis for all cost reporting periodsduring which the hospital is subject tothe capital prospective paymenttransition rules. The minimum paymentpercentages for regular capitalexceptions payments by class ofhospitals for FY 2001 are:

• For sole community hospitals, 90percent;

• For urban hospitals with at least100 beds that have a disproportionateshare patient percentage of at least 20.2percent or that received more than 30percent of their net inpatient carerevenues from State or localgovernments for indigent care, 80percent;

• For all other hospitals, 70 percent ofthe hospital’s reasonable inpatientcapital-related costs.

The provision for regular exceptionspayments will expire at the end of thetransition period. Payments will nolonger be adjusted to reflect regularexceptions payments at § 412.348.Accordingly, for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2001,hospitals will receive only the perdischarge payment based on the Federalrate for capital costs (plus anyapplicable DSH or IME and outlieradjustments) unless a hospital qualifies

for a special exceptions payment under§ 412.348(g).

Under the special exceptionsprovision at § 412.348(g), an additionalpayment may be made for up to 10 yearsbeyond the end of the capitalprospective payment system transitionperiod for eligible hospitals. The capitalspecial exceptions process is budgetneutral; that is, even after the end of thecapital prospective payment systemtransition, we will continue to make anadjustment to the capital Federal rate ina budget neutral manner to pay forexceptions, as long as an exceptionspolicy is in force. Currently, the limitedspecial exceptions policy will allow forexceptions payments for 10 yearsbeyond the conclusion of the 10-yearcapital transition period or throughSeptember 30, 2011.

VI. Changes for Hospitals and HospitalUnits Excluded From the ProspectivePayment System

A. Limits on and Adjustments to theTarget Amounts for Excluded Hospitalsand Units (§§ 413.40(b)(4) and (g))

1. Updated CapsSection 1886(b)(3) of the Act (as

amended by section 4414 of Public Law105–33) establishes caps on the targetamounts for certain existing excludedhospitals and units for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,1997 through September 30, 2002. Thecaps on the target amounts apply to thefollowing three classes of excludedhospitals: Psychiatric hospitals andunits, rehabilitation hospitals and units,and long-term care hospitals.

A discussion of how the caps on thetarget amounts were calculated can befound in the August 29, 1997 final rulewith comment period (62 FR 46018); theMay 12, 1998 final rule (63 FR 26344);the July 31, 1998 final rule (63 FR41000), and the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41529). For purposes ofcalculating the caps on existingfacilities, the statute required us tocalculate the national 75th percentile ofthe target amounts for each class ofhospital (psychiatric, rehabilitation, orlong-term care) for cost reportingperiods ending during FY 1996. Undersection 1886(b)(3)(H)(iii) of the Act, theresulting amounts are updated by themarket basket percentage to theapplicable fiscal year. In establishingthe caps on the target amounts withineach class of hospital for new hospitals,section 1886(b)(7)(C) of the Act, asamended by section 4416 of Public Law105–33, explicitly instructed theSecretary to provide an appropriateadjustment to take into account areadifferences in wage-related costs.

However, since the statutory languageunder section 4414 of Public Law 105–33 did not provide for the Secretary toaccount for area differences in wage-related costs in establishing the caps onthe target amounts for existing hospitals,HCFA did not account for wage-relateddifferences in establishing the caps onthe target amounts for existing facilitiesin FY 1998.

Section 121 of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(b)(3)(H) of theAct to direct the Secretary to provide foran appropriate wage adjustment to thecaps on the target amounts forpsychiatric hospitals and units,rehabilitation hospitals and units, andlong-term care hospitals, effective forcost reporting periods beginning on orafter October 1, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 2002. Elsewhere in thisissue of the Federal Register we arepublishing an interim final rule withcomment period implementing thisprovision for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 1999and before October 1, 2000. This finalrule addresses the wage adjusted capson the target amounts for excludedhospitals and units for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2000.

For purposes of calculating the capson the target amounts, section1886(b)(3)(H)(ii) of the Act requires theSecretary to first ‘‘estimate the 75thpercentile of the target amounts for suchhospitals within such class for costreporting periods ending during fiscalyear 1996.’’ Furthermore, section1886(b)(3)(H)(iii), as added by PublicLaw 106–113, requires the Secretary toprovide for ‘‘an appropriate adjustmentto the labor-related portion of theamount determined under suchsubparagraph to take into account thedifferences between average wage-related costs in the area of the hospitaland the national average of such costswithin the same class of hospital.’’

For cost reporting periods beginningin FY 2000, we update the FY 1996wage-neutralized national 75thpercentile target amount for each classof hospital by the market basket increasethrough FY 2000. For cost reportingperiods beginning during FY 2001 andFY 2002, we update the previous year’swage-neutralized national 75thpercentile target amount for each classof hospital by the applicable marketbasket percentage increase. Indetermining the wage-neutralized 75thpercentile target amount for each classof hospital and consistent with thebroad authority conferred on theSecretary by section 1886(b)(3)(H)(iii) ofthe Act (as added by Pub. L. 106–113)to determine the appropriate wage



adjustment, we accounted fordifferences in wage-related costs byadjusting the caps on the target amountsfor each class of hospital (psychiatric,rehabilitation, and long-term care) usingthe methodology, which is described indetail in the interim final rule withcomment period that implements theprovisions of section 121 Public Law106–113 that is published elsewhere inthis issue of the Federal Register.

As stated in the May 5, 2000 proposedrule, we wage neutralized eachhospital’s FY 1996 target amount toaccount for area differences in wage-related costs. For each class of hospitals,we determined the labor-related portionof each hospital’s FY 1996 targetamount by multiplying its target amountby the most recent actuarial estimate ofthe labor-related portion of excludedhospital costs (or 0.71553). Thisactuarial estimate of the labor-relatedshare of PPS-excluded hospital costswas revised in connection with otherrevisions to the PPS-excluded hospitalmarket basket published in the August29, 1997 final rule (62 FR 45996). Basedon the relative weights of the labor costcategories (wages and salaries, employeebenefits, professional fees, postalservices, and all other labor intensiveservices), the labor-related portion is71.553 percent. The remaining 28.447percent is the nonlabor-related portion.Similarly, we determined the nonlabor-related portion of each hospital’s FY1996 target amount by multiplying itstarget amount by the actuarial estimateof the nonlabor-related portion of costs(or 0.28447).

Next, as we stated in the May 5proposed rule, we wage neutralize eachhospital’s FY 1996 target amount bydividing the labor-related portion ofeach hospital’s FY 1996 target amountby the hospital’s FY 1998 hospital wageindex under the hospital inpatientprospective payment system (see§ 412.63), as shown in Tables 4A and 4Bof the August 29, 1997 final rule (62 FR46070). Each hospital’s wage-neutralized FY 1996 target amount wascalculated by adding the nonlabor-related portion of its target amount andthe wage-neutralized labor-relatedportion of its target amount. Then, thewage-neutralized target amounts forhospitals within each class were arrayedin order to determine the national wage-neutralized 75th percentile caps on thetarget amounts for each class of hospital.

As stated in the May 5 proposed rule,this methodology for wage-neutralizingthe national 75th percentile of the targetamounts is identical to the methodologywe utilized for the wage indexadjustment described in the August 29,1997 final rule (62 FR 46020) to

calculate the wage-adjusted 110 percentof the national median target amountsfor new excluded hospitals and units.Again, we recognize that wages maydiffer for prospective payment hospitalsand excluded hospitals, but we believethat the acute care hospital wage datautilized reflect area differences in wage-related costs. Moreover, in light of theshort timeframe for implementing thisprovision, we used the wage data foracute hospitals since they are the mostfeasible data source. Reliable wage datafor excluded hospitals and units are notavailable.

Comment: One commenter objected toour use of the FY 1998 hospital wageindex, which is based on FY 1994 wagedata from Medicare cost reports, to wageneutralize the labor-related portion ofeach hospital’s FY 1996 target amountin establishing area wage adjustments tothe caps on the target amounts for long-term care hospitals. The commenterfavored using the most current wagedata (the FY 2001 wage index, based onFY 1997 Medicare cost report data) toestimate wage adjustments to the capson the target amounts for excludedhospitals and units.

Response: We reconsidered ourmethodology for wage-neutralizing eachhospital’s FY 1996 target amount usedin determining the wage-neutralizednational 75th percentile target amountfor each class of hospital. In the May 5,2000 proposed rule, the labor-relatedportion of each hospital’s FY 1996 targetamount was wage neutralized bydividing it by the FY 1998 hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemwage index. The FY 1998 hospitalinpatient prospective payment systemwage index was calculated using FY1994 wage data due to the 4-year lagtime in receiving the data used in theannual calculation of the wage index.We have reconsidered this methodologyand believe it is appropriate to wageneutralize the labor-related portion ofeach hospital’s FY 1996 target amountby the FY 2000 hospital inpatientprospective payment system wageindex. The FY 2000 wage index is themost current wage data available towage neutralize each hospital’s FY 1996target amount, and the FY 2000 wageindex was calculated based on FY 1996wage data and therefore reflects areadifferences in wage-related FY 1996costs. The FY 2001 wage index will beapplied to the wage-related portion ofthe cap to determine each hospital’s FY2001 wage-adjusted cap on its targetamount.

In the May 5, 2000 proposed rule (65FR 26314), we proposed the labor-related and nonlabor-related shares ofthe wage-neutralized national 75th

percentile caps on the target amountsfor FY 2001 as follows:

Class of ex-cluded hospital

or unit

FY 2001proposed

labor-relatedshare

FY 2001proposed

nonlabor-re-lated share

Psychiatric ........ $8,106 $3,223Rehabilitation .... 15,108 6,007Long-Term Care 29,312 11,654

Taking into account the national 75thpercentile of the target amounts for costreporting periods ending during FY1996 (wage-neutralized using the FY2000 acute care wage index), the wageadjustment provided for under PublicLaw 106–113, and the applicable updatefactor based on the market basketpercentage increase to FY 2001, we areestablishing the labor-related andnonlabor-related portions of the caps onthe target amounts for FY 2001 using themethodology outlined above as follows:.


or unit

FY 2001labor-related

share

FY 2001nonlabor-re-lated share


These caps on the target amounts forFY 2001 reflect the use of the FY 2000wage index in determining the FY 1996national wage-neutralized 75thpercentile target amounts, updated toFY 2001 by the applicable market basketpercentage increase. The market basketpercentage increase for excludedhospitals and units for FY 2001 iscurrently forecast at 3.4 percent. At thetime the proposed rule was issued, themarket basket increase was forecast at3.1 percent.

Finally, the cap on a hospital’s FY2001 target amount per discharge isdetermined by adding the hospital’snonlabor-related portion of the national75th percentile target amount to itswage-adjusted labor-related portion ofthe national 75th percentile targetamount. A hospital’s wage-adjustedlabor-related portion of the targetamount is calculated by multiplying thelabor-related portion of the wage-neutralized national 75th percentiletarget amount for the hospital’s class bythe hospital’s applicable wage index.For FY 2001, a hospital’s applicablewage index is the wage index under thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem (see § 412.63). For cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2000 and ending on or before September30, 2001 as shown in Tables 4A and 4Bof this final rule, a hospital’s applicablewage index corresponds to the area inwhich the hospital or unit is physically



located (MSA or rural area) and is notsubject to prospective payment systemhospital reclassification under section1886(d)(10) of the Act.

Comment: One commenter requestedthat HCFA provide long-term carehospitals the opportunity to redesignateto another rural or urban area under thestandards outlined in § 412.230 forprospective payment system hospitals.The commenter believed that section121 of Public Law 106–113 directsHCFA to make accurate area wageadjustments for excluded hospitals andthat, in the interest of equity, HCFAshould afford long-term care hospitals aprocess analogous to the MGCRB so thatthese providers would be able toredesignate their wage area to a rural orurban area. Additionally, thecommenter recommended that long-term care hospitals located in ‘‘closeproximity’’ (as defined in § 412.230(b))to a prospective payment systemhospital that has been allowed toreclassify its area wage index, shouldalso be allowed to reclassify to thatwage area.

Response: Section 121 of Public Law106–113 directs the Secretary to make‘‘an appropriate adjustment’’ to accountfor area wage-related differences. As westated in the May 5 proposed rule, long-term care hospitals and psychiatric andrehabilitation hospitals and units whichare exempt from the prospectivepayment system are not subject toprospective payment system hospitalreclassification under section1886(d)(10)(A) of the Act. This sectionestablishes the MGCRB for the purposeof evaluating applications from short-term acute care providers. There is noequivalent statutory provision for HCFAto develop an alternative board for long-term care hospitals or for psychiatricand rehabilitation hospitals and units,or both.

While it would be feasible to allowunits physically located in PPShospitals that have been reclassified bythe MGCRB to use the wage-index forthe area to which that hospital has beenreclassified, at the present time there isno process in place to makereclassification determinations forexcluded free-standing providers. Thewage-adjustment to the cap on the targetamounts for existing excluded providersis only effective through FY 2002 andthere is not enough time to develop andimplement a process to determinereclassification for free-standingexcluded providers. There areapproximately 1000 free-standingexcluded facilities (529 psychiatric, 196rehabilitation and 242 long-term care).Therefore, in the interest of equity, webelieve that in determining a hospital’s

wage-adjusted cap on its target amount,it is appropriate for excluded hospitalsand units to use the wage indexassociated with the area in which it isphysically located (MSA or rural area)and prospective payment systemreclassification under section1886(d)(10) of the Act is not applicable.This policy is consistent with thedetermination of the wage-adjusted capson the target amounts for new excludedhospitals and units, which are notsubject to reclassification whenapplying the wage index in thecalculation of the cap. Additionally,skilled-nursing facility and ambulatorysurgical center payment systems bothuse the acute-care inpatient hospitalPPS wage index and do not allow forreclassifications since there is noanalogous determination process to theMGCRB, which only has authority overPPS hospitals under section1886(d)(10)(a) of the Act. Therefore,consistent with these policies regardingthe application of the acute care wageindex to other types of facilities, we arenot implementing the commenter’srecommendation to permitreclassification of an excludedhospital’s or unit’s wage index indetermining the wage-adjusted cap ontheir target amount under§ 41340(c)(4)(iii).

Comment: One commenter assertedthat this is the first time HCFA hasapplied area wage adjustments toexcluded hospitals and units. Thecommenter suggested that HCFA assesswhether long-term care hospitals have adifferent mix of occupations comparedto short-term acute care facilities andrecommended that HCFA propose anappropriate adjustment to the acute carewage index to account for the relativewage-related costs for the occupationalcategories of long-term care hospitals orestablish a long-term care hospitalspecific area wage index. Thecommenter noted that the acute carewage index includes some wage dataderived from hospital-based psychiatricand rehabilitation units, but contains nodata from long-term care hospitals. Also,the commenter argued that HCFA didnot meet the statutory requirements ofsection 1886(b)(3)(H) of the Act asamended by section 121 of Public Law106–113, which states that the Secretaryshall provide for an appropriateadjustment ‘‘to take into accountdifferences between average wage-related costs in the area of the hospitaland the national average of such costswithin the same class of hospital’’(emphasis added), since the acute carewage index data are based on data

exclusively from short-term acute carehospitals.

Response: As stated in the May 5,2000 proposed rule (65 FR 26314), werecognize that wages may differ forprospective payment system acute carehospitals and excluded hospitals, butwe believe the acute care wage indexdata accurately reflects area differencesin wage-related costs and they are themost feasible data source. For thisreason the acute care hospital wageindex is used for the Medicareprospective payment systems foroutpatient facilities, skilled nursingfacilities, and home health facilities.

Currently, there is hospital specificwage data available to develop a wageindex based on data from excludedhospitals (or, as the commenterspecifically requested, a long-term carehospital exclusive wage index). We mayconsider exploring the feasibility ofdeveloping a wage index for excludedhospitals and units in the future.However, the commenter has notpresented any evidence that the acutecare wage index inappropriately reflectsthe differences in wage-related costs forexcluded hospital and units. We believethat the acute care wage index providesfor an appropriate adjustment toaccount for wage-related costs indetermining a hospital’s wage-adjustedcap on its target amount.

In the interim final rule withcomment period implementing certainprovisions of Public Law 106–113 thatwe are publishing elsewhere in thisissue of the Federal Register we revised§§ 413.40(c)(4)(i) and (c)(4)(ii) toincorporate the changes in the formulaused to determine the limitation on thetarget amounts for excluded hospitalsand units, as provided for by section121 of Public Law 106–113.

In response to the May 5, 2000proposed rule, we received two publiccomments relating to establishment ofthe wage-adjusted caps on the targetamounts for excluded hospitals andunits.

Comment: One commenter believedthat the provision for a wage-adjustmentto the national 75th percentile targetamount cap placed on hospitalsexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem provided HCFA with the broadauthority to transition to a wage-adjusted cap over more than one period.The commenter suggested that the wage-adjusted caps on target amounts bephased-in over a period of time in amanner similar to the removal ofteaching physician costs from the wageindex calculation.

Response: Public Law 106–113, whichwas enacted November 29, 1999,directed us to retroactively provide for



a wage adjustment for the national 75thpercentile target amounts for psychiatricand rehabilitation hospitals and unitsand for long-term care hospitals as ofOctober 1, 1999. The purpose of thewage-adjustment to the 75th percentilecap on target amounts for excludedproviders is to account for areadifferences in wage-related costs. Webelieve that the intent of this provisionis to account for these wage differencesbeginning with cost reporting periodsstarting during FY 2000. Phasing-in thewage-adjustment to the caps on thetarget amounts would mitigate thepurpose of the wage-adjustment becausehospitals located in areas with wageindex values greater than one would notreceive the full intended benefit of theprovision. Additionally, as we stated inthe interim final rule with comment thatwe are publishing elsewhere in thisissue of the Federal Register weestimate that most providers (93.3percent of psychiatric hospitals andunits, 97.5 percent of rehabilitationhospitals and units, and 93.5 percent oflong-term care hospitals) are either noteffected or are positively effected by thewage adjustment to the caps on thetarget amounts. Therefore, we believe itis inappropriate to phase in the wage-adjustment to the caps on the targetamounts as the commenterrecommended.

Additionally, the removal of theteaching physician costs on the wageindex is set for a 5-year phase-out, whilethe wage-adjusted caps on nationaltarget amounts are only legislated toremain in effect from FY 2000 to FY2002. As such, the remaining period oftime for which these caps are in effectis too brief to warrant the administrativeresources that would be involved insuch a transition. The 5-year phase-outof the removal of teaching costs from thewage index was implemented based onthe recommendation of an industrygroup made up of representatives fromnational and state hospital associations.While one commenter advocated thephase-in of the wage-adjustment to thecaps on the target amounts, anothercommenter supported the completeimplementation of the wage-adjustmentto the caps on the target amountseffective FY 2000, since this adjustmentreflects the higher cost incurred byproviders located in areas with higherthan the national average of laborexpenditures.

Comment: One commentercommended the wage-adjustment to thecaps on the target amounts forpsychiatric and rehabilitation hospitaland units and long-term care hospitalsmandated by section 121 of Public Law106–113. The commenter supported the

application of the acute care wage indexto the caps on the national targetamounts since the wage adjustment aidsproviders who incur costs higher thanthe national average simply becausethey are located in marketplaces withhigher labor prices. The commenter alsonoted that the target amounts forexisting hospitals are now in line withthe target amounts for new hospitals,which have been wage adjusted sincetheir implementation in FY 1998 byPublic Law 105–33. The commenterfurther suggested that, if the threeclasses of hospitals have not beentransitioned to prospective paymentsystems by FY 2002, the wageadjustment to the national targetamounts for both new and existingproviders should remain in place.

Response: We agree with thecomment and we believe that ourimplementation of the wage adjustmentis consistent with the statutoryprovision in Public Law 106–113.However, regardless of whether theprospective payment systems for theseclasses of providers have beenimplemented, we will only be in aposition to continue the use of the wage-adjusted caps on the target amountsbeyond FY 2002 if Congress directs usto do so through additional legislation.

2. Updated Caps for New ExcludedHospitals and Units (§ 413.40(f))

Section 1886(b)(7) of the Actestablishes a payment methodology fornew psychiatric hospitals and units,rehabilitation hospitals and units, andlong-term care hospitals. Under thestatutory methodology, for a hospitalthat is within a class of hospitalsspecified in the statute and that firstreceives payment as a hospital or unitexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem on or after October 1, 1997, theamount of payment will be determinedas follows:

For the first two 12-month costreporting periods, the amount ofpayment is the lesser of (1) the operatingcosts per case; or (2) 110 percent of thenational median of target amounts forthe same class of hospitals for costreporting periods ending during FY1996, updated to the first cost reportingperiod in which the hospital receivespayments and adjusted for differencesin area wage levels. The amountsincluded in the following table reflectthe updated 110 percent of the wageneutral national median target amountsfor each class of excluded hospitals andunits for cost reporting periodsbeginning during FY 2001. These figuresare updated to reflect the market basketincrease of 3.4 percent. For a newprovider, the labor-related share of the

target amount is multiplied by theappropriate geographic area wage indexand added to the nonlabor-related sharein order to determine the per case limiton payment under the statutorypayment methodology for newproviders.


or unit

Labor-re-lated share

Nonlabor-re-lated share


3. Development of Prospective PaymentSystem for Inpatient RehabilitationHospitals and Units

Section 4421 of Public Law 105–33added section 1886(j) to the Act. Section1886(j) of the Act mandates the phase-in of a case-mix adjusted prospectivepayment system for inpatientrehabilitation services (freestandinghospitals and units) for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2000 and before October 1, 2002. Theprospective payment system will befully implemented for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2002. Section 1886(j) was amended bysection 125 of Public Law 106–113 torequire the Secretary to use thedischarge as the payment unit under theprospective payment system forinpatient rehabilitation services and toestablish classes of patient discharges byfunctional-related groups.

We will issue a separate notice ofproposed rulemaking in the FederalRegister on the prospective paymentsystem for inpatient rehabilitationfacilities. That document will discussthe requirements in section1886(j)(1)(A)(i) of the Act for a transitionphase covering the first two costreporting periods under the prospectivepayment system. During this transitionphase, inpatient rehabilitation facilitieswill receive a payment rate comprisedof a blend of the facility specific rate(the TEFRA percentage) based on theamount that would have been paidunder Part A with respect to these costsif the prospective payment systemwould not be implemented and theinpatient rehabilitation facilityprospective payment rate (prospectivepayment percentage). As set forth insections 1886(j)(1)(C)(i) and (ii) of theAct, the TEFRA percentage for a costreporting period beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2000, and before October 1,2001, is 662⁄3 percent; the prospectivepayment percentage is 331⁄3 percent. Forcost reporting periods beginning on orafter October 1, 2001 and before October1, 2002, the TEFRA percentage is 331⁄3



percent and the prospective paymentpercentage is 662⁄3 percent.

As provided in section 1886(j)(3)(A)of the Act, the prospective paymentrates will be based on the averageinpatient operating and capital costs ofrehabilitation facilities and units.Payments will be adjusted for case-mixusing patient classification groups, areawages, inflation, outlier status and anyother factors the Secretary determinesnecessary. We will propose to set theprospective payment amounts in effectduring FY 2001 so that total paymentsunder the system are projected to equal98 percent of the amount of paymentsthat would have been made under thecurrent payment system. Outlierpayments in a fiscal year may not beprojected or estimated to exceed 5percent of the total payments based onthe rates for that fiscal year.

4. Continuous Improvement BonusPayment

Under § 413.40(d)(4), for costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 1997, an ‘‘eligible’’ hospitalmay receive continuous improvementbonus payments in addition to itspayment for inpatient operating costsplus a percentage of the hospital’s rate-of-increase ceiling (as specified in§ 413.40(d)(2)). An eligible hospital is ahospital that has been a providerexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem for at least three full costreporting periods prior to the applicableperiod and the hospital’s operating costsper discharge for the applicable periodare below the lowest of its targetamount, trended costs, or expected costsfor the applicable period. Prior toenactment of Public Law 106–113, theamount of the continuous improvementbonus payment was equal to the lesserof—

(a) 50 percent of the amount by whichoperating costs were less than theexpected costs for the period; or

(b) 1 percent of the ceiling.Section 122 of Public Law 106–113

amended section 1886(b)(2) of the Act toprovide, for cost reporting periods

beginning on or after October 1, 2000,and before September 30, 2001, for anincrease in the continuous improvementbonus payment for long-term care andpsychiatric hospitals and units. Undersection 1886(b)(2) of the Act, asamended, a hospital that is within oneof these two classes of hospitals(psychiatric hospitals or units and long-term-care hospitals) will receive thelesser of 50 percent of the amount bywhich the operating costs are less thanthe expected costs for the period, or theincreased percentages mandated bystatute as follows:

(a) For a cost reporting periodbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and before September 30, 2001, 1.5percent of the ceiling; and

(b) For a cost reporting periodbeginning on or after

October 1, 2001, and beforeSeptember 30, 2002, 2 percent of theceiling.

We did not receive any publiccomments on our proposed revision of§ 413.40(d)(4) to incorporate thisprovision of the statute and, therefore,are adopting it as final.

5. Changes in the Types of PatientsServed or Inpatient Care Services ThatDistort the Comparability of a CostReporting Period to the Base Year AreGrounds for Requesting an AdjustmentPayment in Accordance With Section1886(b)(4) of the Act

Section 4419(b) of Public Law 104–33requires the Secretary to publishannually in the Federal Register areport describing the total amount ofadjustment (exception) payments madeto excluded hospitals and units, byreason of section 1886(b)(4) of the Act,during the previous fiscal year.However, the data on adjustmentpayments made during the previousfiscal year are not available in time topublish a report describing the totalamount of adjustment payments madeto all excluded hospitals and units inthe subsequent year’s final rulepublished in the Federal Register.

The process of requesting,adjudicating, and awarding anadjustment payment for a given costreporting period occurs over a 2-yearperiod or longer. An excluded hospitalor unit must first file its cost report forthe previous fiscal year with itsintermediary within 5 months after theclose of the previous fiscal year. Thefiscal intermediary then reviews the costreport and issues a Notice of ProgramReimbursement (NPR) in approximately2 months. If the hospital’s operatingcosts are in excess of the ceiling, thehospital may file a request for anadjustment payment within 6 monthsfrom the date of the NPR. Theintermediary, or HCFA, depending onthe type of adjustment requested, thenreviews the request and determines if anadjustment payment is warranted. Thisdetermination is often not made untilmore than 6 months after the date therequest is filed. Therefore, it is notpossible to provide data in a final ruleon adjustments granted for cost reportsending in the previous Federal fiscalyear, since those adjustments have noteven been requested by that time.However, in an attempt to provideinterested parties at least some relevantdata on adjustments, we are publishingdata on requests for adjustments thatwere processed by the fiscalintermediaries or HCFA during theprevious Federal fiscal year.

The table below includes the mostrecent data available from the fiscalintermediaries and HCFA on adjustmentpayments that were adjudicated duringFY 1999. By definition these were forcost reporting periods ending in yearsprior to FY 1998. The total adjustmentpayments awarded to excludedhospitals and units during FY 1999 are$73,532,146. The table depicts for eachclass of hospital, in aggregate, thenumber of adjustment requestsadjudicated, the excess operating costover the ceiling, and the amount of theadjustment payment.

Class of hospital Number Excess cost overceiling

Adjustmentpayment

Psychiatric ............................................................................................................................ 198 $100,861,663 $49,986,012Rehabilitation ....................................................................................................................... 53 32,690,736 16,798,634Long-term care .................................................................................................................... 4 3,239,164 2,577,455Children’s ............................................................................................................................. 7 3,311,758 1,470,670Cancer ................................................................................................................................. 2 4,849,093 2,699,375



B. Responsibility for Care of Patients inHospitals-Within-Hospitals(§ 413.40(a)(3))

Effective October 1, 1999, forhospitals-within-hospitals, weimplemented a policy that allows for a5-percent threshold for cases in whicha patient discharged from an excludedhospital-within-a-hospital and admittedto the host hospital was subsequentlyreadmitted to the excluded hospital-within-a-hospital. With respect to thesecases, if the excluded hospital exceedsthe 5-percent threshold, we do notinclude any previous discharges to theprospective payment hospital incalculating the excluded hospital’s costper discharge. That is, the entire stay isconsidered one Medicare ‘‘discharge’’for purposes of payments to theexcluded hospital. The effect of thisrule, as explained more fully in the May7, 1999 proposed rule (64 FR 24716) andin the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41490), is to prevent inappropriateMedicare payment to hospitals having alarge number of such stays.

In the existing regulations at§ 413.40(a)(3), we state that the 5-percent threshold is determined basedon the total number of discharges fromthe hospital-within-a-hospital. We havereceived questions as to whether, indetermining whether the threshold ismet, we consider Medicare patients onlyor all patients (Medicare and non-Medicare). To avoid any furthermisunderstanding, in the May 5, 2000proposed rule, we indicated our intentto clarify the definition of ‘‘ceiling’’ in§ 413.40(a)(3) by specifying that the 5-percent threshold is based on theMedicare inpatients discharged from thehospital-within-a-hospital in aparticular cost reporting period, not ontotal Medicare and non-Medicareinpatient discharges.

We did not receive any publiccomments on our proposed clarificationof the definition of ‘‘ceiling’’ in§ 413.40(a)(3) and, therefore, areadopting the revision as final.

C. Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs)

1. Election of Payment Method(§ 413.70)

Section 1834(g) of the Act, as in effectbefore enactment of Public Law 106–113, provided that the amount ofpayment for outpatient CAH services isthe reasonable costs of the CAH inproviding such services. However, thereasonable costs of the CAH’s services tooutpatients included only the CAH’scosts of providing facility services, anddid not include any payment forprofessional services. Physicians andother practitioners who furnished

professional services to CAH outpatientsbilled the Part B carrier for theseservices and were paid under thephysician fee schedule in accordancewith the provisions of section 1848 ofthe Act.

Section 403(d) of Public Law 106–113amended section 1834(g) of the Act topermit the CAH to elect to be paid forits outpatient services under anotheroption. CAHs making this electionwould be paid amounts equal to thesum of the following, less the amountthat the hospital may charge asdescribed in section 1866(a)(2)(A) of theAct (that is, Part A and Part Bdeductibles and coinsurance):

(1) For facility services, not includingany services for which payment may bemade as outpatient professionalservices, the reasonable costs of theCAH in providing the services; and

(2) For professional services otherwiseincluded within outpatient CAHservices, the amounts that wouldotherwise be paid under Medicare if theservices were not included in outpatientCAH services.

Section 403(d) of Public Law 106–113added section 1834(g)(3) to the Act tofurther specify that payment amountsunder this election are be determinedwithout regard to the amount of thecustomary or other charge.

The amendment made by section403(d) is effective for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2000.

In the May 5, 2000 proposed rule, weproposed to revise § 413.70 toincorporate the provisions of section403(d) of Public Law 106–113. Theexisting § 413.70 specifies a single set ofreasonable cost basis payment rulesapplicable to both inpatient andoutpatient services furnished by CAHs.As section 403(d) of Public Law 106–113 provides that, for outpatient CAHservices, CAHs may elect to be paid ona reasonable cost basis for facilityservices and on a fee schedule basis forprofessional services, we proposed torevise the section to allow for separatepayment rules for CAH inpatient andoutpatient services.

We proposed to place the provisionsof existing § 413.70(a) and (b) that relateto payment on a reasonable cost basisfor inpatient services furnished by aCAH under proposed § 413.70(a).Proposed § 413.70(a)(2) also stated thatpayment to a CAH for inpatient servicesdoes not include professional services toCAH inpatients and is subject to the PartA hospital deductible and coinsurancedetermined under 42 CFR Part 409,Subpart G.

We proposed to include under§ 413.70(b) the payment rules for

outpatient services furnished by CAHs,including the option for CAHs to electto be paid on the basis of reasonablecosts for facility services and on thebasis of the physician fee schedule forprofessional services. Under proposed§ 413.70(b)(2), we would retain theexisting provision that unless the CAHelects the option provided for undersection 403 of Public Law 106–113,payment for outpatient CAH services ison a reasonable cost basis, asdetermined in accordance with section1861(v)(1)(A) of the Act and theapplicable principles of costreimbursement in Parts 413 and 415(except for certain payment principlesthat do not apply; that is, the lesser ofcosts or charges, RCE limits, any type ofreduction to operating or capital costsunder § 413.124 or § 413.130(j)(7), andblended payment amounts forambulatory surgical center services,radiology services, and other diagnosticservices).

Under proposed § 413.70(b)(3), wespecified that any CAH that elects to bepaid under the optional method mustmake an annual request in writing, anddeliver the request for the election to thefiscal intermediary at least 60 daysbefore the start of the affected costreporting period. In addition, proposed§ 413.70(b)(3)(ii) stated that if a CAHelects payment under this method,payment to the CAH for each outpatientvisit will be the sum of the followingtwo amounts:

• For facility services, not includingany outpatient professional services forwhich payment may be made on a feeschedule basis, the amount would bethe reasonable costs of the services asdetermined in accordance withapplicable principles of costreimbursement in 42 CFR Parts 413 and415, except for certain paymentprinciples that would not apply asspecified above; and

• For professional services, otherwisepayable to the physician or otherpractitioner on a fee schedule basis, theamounts would be those amounts thatwould otherwise be paid for the servicesif the CAH had not elected paymentunder this method.

We also proposed in § 413.70(b)(3)(iii)that payment to a CAH for outpatientservices would be subject to the Part Bdeductible and coinsurance amounts, asdetermined under §§ 410.152, 410.160,and 410.161. In proposed § 413.70(c),we stated that final payment to the CAHfor its facility services to inpatients andoutpatients furnished during a costreporting would be based on a costreport for that period, as required under§ 413.20(b).



Comment: One commenter expressedconcern about several CAH paymentissues on which we did not propose tochange existing policy. These commentsrelated to payment for costs attributableto Medicare bed debts, counting of bedstoward the 15- and 25-bed maximums,and payment for swing-bed services inCAHs.

Response: Because these commentsdealt with matters beyond the scope ofthe proposed rule, we have receivedthem with interest and will considerwhether any changes in policy areneeded at a later date.

We are adopting the proposedrevisions to § 413.70 as final. Therevised § 413.70 includes at paragraph(b)(2)(iii) the text of a paragraph (c) thatwas added in the interim final rule withcomment period that implementedcertain provisions of Public Law 106–33published elsewhere in this issue of theFederal Register. We did not revise thetext of this paragraph (c); we merelychanged the paragraph coding to fit itinto the scheme of coding of the revised§ 413.70.

2. Condition of Participation: Organ,Tissue, and Eye Procurement (§ 485.643)

Sections 1820(c)(2)(B) and 1861(mm)of the Act set forth the criteria fordesignating a CAH. Under thisauthority, the Secretary has establishedin regulations the minimumrequirements a CAH must meet toparticipate in Medicare (42 CFR Part485, Subpart F).

Section 1905(a) of the Act providesthat Medicaid payments may be madefor any other medical care, and anyother type of remedial care recognizedunder State law, specified by theSecretary. The Secretary has specifiedCAH services as Medicaid services inregulations. Specifically, the regulationsat 42 CFR 440.170(g)(1)(i), define CAHservices under Medicaid as thoseservices furnished by a providermeeting the Medicare conditions ofparticipation (CoP).

Section 1138 of the Act provides thata CAH participating in Medicare mustestablish written protocols to identifypotential organ donors that: (1) Assurethat potential donors and their familiesare made aware of the full range ofoptions for organ or tissue donation aswell as their rights to decline donation;(2) encourage discretion and sensitivitywith respect to the circumstances,views, and beliefs of those families; and(3) require that an organ procurementagency designated by the Secretary benotified of potential organ donors.

On June 22, 1998, as part of theMedicare hospital conditions ofparticipation under Part 482, subpart C,

we added to the regulations at § 482.45,a condition that specifically addressedorgan, tissue, and eye procurement.However, Part 482 does not apply toCAHs, as CAHs are a distinct type ofprovider with separate CoP under Part485. Therefore, in the proposed rule, weproposed to add a CoP for organ, tissue,and eye procurement for CAHs at a new§ 485.643 that generally parallels theCoP at § 482.45 for all Medicarehospitals with respect to the statutoryrequirement in section 1138 of the Actconcerning organ donation. CAHs arenot full service hospitals and thereforeare not equipped to perform organtransplantations. Therefore, we did notpropose to include the standardapplicable to Medicare hospitals thatCAHs must be a member of the OrganProcurement and TransplantationNetwork (OPTN), abide by its rules andprovide organ transplant-related data tothe OPTN, the Scientific Registry, organprocurement agencies, or directly to theDepartment on request of the Secretary.

The proposed CoP for CAHs includedseveral requirements designed toincrease organ donation. One of theserequirements is that a CAH must havean agreement with the OrganProcurement Organization (OPO)designated by the Secretary, underwhich the CAH will contact the OPO ina timely manner about individuals whodie or whose death is imminent. TheOPO will then determine theindividual’s medical suitability fordonation. In addition, the CAH musthave an agreement with at least onetissue bank and at least one eye bank tocooperate in the retrieval, processing,preservation, storage, and distribution oftissues and eyes, as long as theagreement does not interfere with organdonation. The proposed CoP wouldrequire a CAH to ensure, incollaboration with the OPO with whichit has an agreement, that the family ofevery potential donor is informed of itsoption to either donate or not donateorgans, tissues, or eyes. The CAH maychoose to have OPO staff perform thisfunction, have CAH and OPO staffjointly perform this function, or relyexclusively on CAH staff. Researchindicates that consent to organ donationis highest when the formal request ismade by OPO staff or by OPO staff andhospital staff together. While we requirecollaboration, we also recognize thatCAH staff may wish to perform thisfunction and may do so when properlytrained. Moreover, the CoP wouldrequire the CAH to ensure that CAHemployees who initiate a request fordonation to the family of a potential

donor have been trained as designatedrequestors.

Finally, we proposed that the CoPwould require the CAH to work with theOPO and at least one tissue bank andone eye bank in educating staff ondonation issues, reviewing deathrecords to improve identification ofpotential donors, and maintainingpotential donors while necessary testingand placement of organs and tissues isunderway.

Because we were sensitive to thepossible burden the proposed CoP couldplace on CAHs, we invited publiccomments and information concerningthe following requirements: (1)Developing written protocols fordonations; (2) developing agreementswith OPOs, tissue banks, and eye banks;(3) referring all deaths to the OPO; (4)working cooperatively with thedesignated OPO, tissue bank, and eyebank in educating staff on donationissues, reviewing death records, andmaintaining potential donors. We notethat the proposed requirement allowedsome degree of flexibiilty for the CAH.For example, the CAH would have theoption of using an OPO-approvededucation program to train its ownemployees as routine requestors ordeferring requesting services to theOPO, the tissue bank, or the eye bankto provide requestors.

We did not receive any publiccomments on the proposed CAH CoP onorgan, tissue, and eye procurement. Weare adopting § 485.643 as final.

VII. MedPAC RecommendationsOn March 1, 2000 the Medicare

Payment Advisory Commission(MedPAC) issued its annual report toCongress, including severalrecommendations related to theinpatient operating payment system.Those related to the inpatientprospective payment systems were:Congress should establish a single set ofpayment adjustors for both the operatingand capital systems; HCFA shouldexpand the definition of transfers whichapplies a transfer policy to patientstransferred to postacute settings; and,Congress should reformulate theMedicare DSH adjustment. In theproposed rule, we responded to theserecommendations.

In addition, this year MedPACpublished another report in June withadditional recommendations. Amongthe recommendations were: FY 2001updates to the operating and capitalpayment rates; moving to refined DRGsto better capture variations in patientseverity; adopting DRG-specific outlieroffsets; Congress should provide theSecretary the authority to adjust the



base payment amounts for anticipatedcoding changes; and, Congress shouldfold inpatient direct GME into theprospective payment system through arevised teaching hospital adjustment. Adiscussion of MedPAC’s updaterecommendation can be found inAppendix D of this final rule.

A. Combined Operating and CapitalProspective Payment Systems(Recommendation 3J: March Report)

Recommendation: The Congressshould combine prospective paymentsystem operating and capital paymentrates to create a single prospective ratefor hospital inpatient care. This changewould require a single set of paymentadjustments—in particular, for indirectmedical education and disproportionateshare hospital payments—and a singlepayment update.

Response: We responded to a similarcomment in the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41552), the July 31, 1998 finalrule (63 FR 41013), and the September1, 1995 final rule (60 FR 45816). Inthose rules, we stated that our long-termgoal was to develop a single updateframework for operating and capitalprospective payments and that wewould begin development of a unifiedframework. However, we have not yetdeveloped such a single framework asthe actual operating system update hasbeen determined by Congress throughFY 2002. In the meantime, we intend tomaintain as much consistency aspossible with the current operatingframework in order to facilitate theeventual development of a unifiedframework. We maintain our goal ofcombining the update frameworks at theend of the 10-year capital transitionperiod (the end of FY 2001) and mayexamine combining the paymentsystems post-transition. Because of thesimilarity of the update frameworks, webelieve that they could be combinedwith little difficulty.

In the discussion of itsrecommendation, MedPAC notes that it‘‘is examining broad reforms to theprospective payment system, includingDRG refinement and modifications ofthe graduate medical educationpayment and the IME and DSHadjustments. The Commission believesthat a combined hospital prospectivepayment rate should be establishedwhether or not broader reforms areundertaken. However, if the Congressacts on any or all of the Commission’srecommendations, it should considercombining operating and capitalpayments as part of a larger package.’’

We agree that ultimately the operatingand capital prospective paymentsystems should be combined into a

single system. However, we believe that,because of MedPAC’s ongoing analysisand the Administration’s pending DSHreport to Congress, any such unificationshould occur within the context of othersystem refinements.

B. Continuing Postacute TransferPayment Policy (Recommendation 3K:March Report)

Recommendation: The Commissionrecommends continuing the existingpolicy of adjusting per case paymentsthrough an expanded transfer policywhen a short length of stay results froma portion of the patient’s care beingprovided in another setting.

Response: As noted in section IV.A. ofthis preamble, we have undertaken(through a contract with HER) ananalysis of the impact on hospitals andhospital payments of the postacutetransfer provision. That analysis (basedon preliminary data covering onlyapproximately 6 months of dischargedata) showed a minimal impact on therate of short-stay postacute transfersafter implementation of the policy.However, average profit margins asmeasured by HER declined from $3,496prior to implementation of the policy to$2,255 after implementation. We believethese preliminary findings demonstratethat the postacute transfer provision hashad only marginal impact on existingpractice patterns while more closelyaligning the payments to hospitals forthese cases with the costs incurred.Therefore, we agree with MedPAC’srecommendation that the policy shouldbe continued.

C. Disproportionate Share Hospitals(DSH) (Recommendations 3L and 3M:March Report)

Recommendation: To addresslongstanding problems and current legaland regulatory developments, Congressshould reform the disproportionateshare adjustment to: Include the costs ofall poor patients in calculating low-income shares used to distributedisproportionate share payments, anduse the same formula to distributepayments to all hospitals covered byprospective payment.

Response: As we noted in sectionIV.E. of this preamble, Public Law 106–113 directed the Secretary to requiresubsection (d) hospitals (as defined insection 1886(d)(1)(B) of the Act) tosubmit data on costs incurred forproviding inpatient and outpatienthospital services for which the hospitalis not compensated, including non-Medicare bad debt, charity care, andcharges for Medicaid and indigent care.These data must be reported on thehospital’s cost reports for cost reporting

periods beginning on or after October 1,2001, and will provide information thatwill enable MedPAC and us to evaluatepotential refinements to the DSHformula to address the issues referred toby MedPAC.

Medicare fiscal intermediaries willaudit these data to ensure their accuracyand consistency. Our experience withadministering the current DSH formulaleads us to believe that this auditingfunction would necessarily beextensive, because the non-Medicaredata that would be collected have neverbefore been collected and reviewed byMedicare’s fiscal intermediaries. Thedata would have to be determined to beaccurate and usable, and corrected ifnecessary.

We agree that the current statutorypayment formula could be improved,largely because of different thresholdlevels and different formula parametersapplicable to different groups ofhospitals. We are in the process ofpreparing a report to Congress on theMedicare DSH adjustment that includesoptions for amending the statutoryformula.

Comment: We received one commentregarding MedPAC’s recommendation.The commenter expressed the concernthat any unrecoverable costs fromcertified registered nurse anesthetistservices in providing anesthesia andrelated care to indigent patients may notbe included in the bad debt costs ofhospitals.

Response: One of the difficulties incollecting uncompensated care and non-Medicare bad debt data is definingexactly the types of data being sought,particularly when there are no existingcost reporting guidelines to follow. Wewill be working closely with thehospital industry to identify and collectthese data.

Recommendation: To provide furtherprotection for the primarily voluntaryhospitals with mid-level low-incomeshares, the minimum value, orthreshold, for the low-income share thata hospital must have before payment ismade should be set to make 60 percentof hospitals eligible to receivedisproportionate share payments.

Response: Currently, fewer than 40percent of all prospective paymentsystem hospitals receive DSH payments.Therefore, this recommendation wouldentail significant redistributions ofexisting DSH payments if implementedin a budget neutral manner. We areparticularly concerned about the effectof this recommendation on hospitalsreceiving substantial DSH paymentscurrently, including major teachinghospitals and public hospitals. Theanalysis by MedPAC demonstrates that



these hospitals would be negativelyimpacted, if more hospitals were madeeligible for DSH payments.

D. Severity-Adjusted DRGs(Recommendation 3A: June Report)

Recommendation: The Secretaryshould improve the hospital inpatientprospective payment system byadopting, as soon as practicable, DRGrefinements that more fully capturedifferences in severity of illness amongpatients. At the same time, she shouldmake the DRG payment rates moreaccurate by basing the DRG relativeweights on the national average ofhospitals’ relative values in each DRG.

Response: For its analysis, MedPACused the severity classifications fromthe all patient refined diagnosis relatedgroups (APR–DRG) system. Accordingto MedPAC, under this system eachpatient is initially assigned to 1 of 355APR–DRGs. Each APR–DRG is brokeninto four severity classes: minor,moderate, major or extreme. Assignmentto these classes within the APR–DRG isbased on specific combinations ofsecondary diagnoses, age, procedures,and other factors. This process yields1,420 distinct groups, compared withfewer than 500 DRGs. The MedPACpoints out that ‘‘to avoid creatingrefined DRGs that might have unstablerelative weights, the Secretary should beselective in adopting clinicaldistinctions similar to those reflected inthe APR–DRGs. This will requirecarefully weighing the benefits of moreaccurate clinical and economicdistinctions against the potential forinstability in relative weights based onsmall numbers of cases (p. 64).’’

The MedPAC’s predecessor, theProspective Payment AssessmentCommission, made a similarrecommendation in 1995. In the June 2,1995 proposed rule (60 FR 29246), weagreed with the Commission’s judgmentthat adopting the severity DRGs wouldtend to reduce discrepancies betweenpayments and costs for individual casesand thereby improve payment equityamong hospitals. In the same rule, wealso agreed with the Commission thatbasing DRG weights on standardizedcharges results in weights that aresomewhat distorted as measures of therelative costliness of treating a typicalcase in each DRG, and that the hospital-specific relative value method of settingweights may reduce or eliminatedistortions present in the currentsystem.

However, in our discussion on DRGrefinements in the same rule (60 FR29209) we reiterated our positionpublished in the final rule on September1, 1992 (57 FR 39761) that we would not

propose to make significant changes tothe DRG classification system, unlesswe are able either to improve our abilityto predict coding changes by validatingin advance the impact that potentialDRG changes may have on codingbehavior, or to make methodologicalchanges to prevent building theinflationary effects of the codingchanges into future program payments.In addition, we would need specificlegislative authority to offset, throughadjustments to the standardizedamounts, any significant anticipatedincrease in payments attributable tochanges in coding practices caused bysignificant changes to the DRGclassification system. Because we havenot been granted this authority, we donot believe it would be appropriate toadopt revised severity-adjusted DRGs atthis time.

E. DRG-Specific Outlier Offsets(Recommendation 3B: June Report)

Recommendation: Congress shouldamend the law to change the methodnow used to finance outlier paymentsunder the hospital inpatient prospectivepayment system. Projected outlierpayments in each DRG should befinanced through an offsettingadjustment to the relative weight for thecategory, rather than the current flatadjustment to the national average basepayment amounts.

Response: Under thisrecommendation, outlier paymentswould be financed through an offset tothe relative weight of each DRG basedon the proportion of outlier cases in thatDRG, rather than an overall offset to thestandardized amounts as is donecurrently. This would more directlyrelate payments under each DRG to theproportion of outlier cases occurringwithin that DRG.

Because the effects on DRG weights ofimplementing severity refinements,changing the method used to calculateDRG relative weights, and adoptingDRG-specific outlier financing areinteractive, we believe that we shouldmake appropriate changes concurrently.Therefore, as stated in our response torecommendation 3A, we would notrecommend that Congress implementthis recommendation until we are ableto offset, through adjustments to thestandardized amounts, any significantanticipated increase in paymentsattributable to changes in codingpractices caused by significant changesto the DRG classification system.

In addition, we are concerned thatany benefits of adopting theCommission’s recommendation wouldnot outweigh the additional complexityand variation it would add to the

already complex process of calculatingoutlier thresholds so that outlierpayments are projected to equal acertain percentage between 5 and 6 ofDRG payments.

F. Gradual Implementation of DRGRefinement and DRG-Specific OutlierOffsets (Recommendation 3C: JuneReport)

Recommendation: To avoid imposingextraordinary financial burdens onindividual providers, the Congressshould ensure that the case-mixmeasurement and outlier financingpolicies recommended earlier areimplemented gradually over a period ofseveral years. Further, the Congressshould consider including protectivepolicies, such as exemptions or hold-harmless provisions, for providers incircumstances in which vulnerablepopulations’ access to care might bedisrupted.

Response: The Commission’s analysesshow that implementing its case-mixmeasurement and outlier financingrecommendations would substantiallychange PPS payments for manyhospitals and may impose heavyburdens on individual hospitals. TheCommission believes that many of thesehospitals could accommodate thechanges in an orderly way undertraditional phase-in mechanisms. TheCommission also states that somehospitals, including some groups ofrural hospitals, may need longer termrelief from the financial impact of thesechanges. The Commission suggests thatthis relief might include suchapproaches as targeted additionalpayments, hold-harmless provisions,and temporary or permanentexemptions.

We are concerned that implementingthe Commission’s recommendationsmay increase the need for specialpayment exceptions for variouscategories of hospitals to ensurecontinued access to care for manyMedicare beneficiaries. Beforerecommending implementation of theserefinements to the payment system, theymust be examined to determine how thechanges would impact hospitalsfinancially and strategies would need tobe developed for countering effects thatcould endanger beneficiaries’ access toquality health care.

G. Congress Should Grant the Secretarythe Authority to Offset Payments forAnticipated Coding Changes(Recommendation 3D: June Report)

Recommendation: The Congressshould give the Secretary explicitauthority to adjust the hospital inpatientbase payment amounts if anticipated



coding improvements in response torefinements in case-mix measurementare expected to increase aggregatepayments by a substantial amountduring the forthcoming year. Thisadjustment should be separate from theannual update. Further, the Congressshould require the Secretary to measurethe extent of actual codingimprovements based on the billsproviders submit for payment and makea timely adjustment to correct anysubstantial forecast error.

Response: In the past, wheneversignificant refinements to the DRGshave been implemented, there havebeen unanticipated payment increasesas hospitals have responded withchanges to their coding practices,resulting in more cases being assignedto higher-weighted DRGs than estimatedwhen the DRG relative weights werecalculated. We anticipate that a similareffect would occur followingimplementation of refined DRGs.

Therefore, we agree with MedPAC’srecommendation that Congress give theSecretary explicit authority to adjust thehospital inpatient base paymentamounts if anticipated codingimprovements in response torefinements in case-mix measurementare expected to increase aggregatepayments by a substantial amountduring the forthcoming year. We alsoagree that adjustments to correctsubstantial forecast errors would beappropriate.

H. Fold Inpatient Direct GME Costs Intothe Prospective Payment System(Recommendation 3E: June Report)

Recommendation: Congress shouldfold inpatient direct graduate medicaleducation costs into prospectivepayment system payment rates througha revised teaching hospital adjustment.The new adjustment should be set suchthat the subsidy provided to teachinghospitals would be added to the IMEadjustment. This recommendationshould be implemented with areasonable transition to limit the impacton hospitals of substantial changes inMedicare payments and to ensure thatbeneficiaries have continued access tothe services that teaching hospitalsprovide.

Response: MedPAC cites two primaryreasons for its recommendation: toimprove payment equity amongteaching hospitals by eliminating thewide variation in current hospital-specific GME payment amounts, and toestablish that GME payments are a partof patient care costs. MedPAC proposesthree options for folding direct GMEcosts into PPS in terms of its impact ontotal payments: fold inpatient direct

GME costs into the prospective paymentrates, holding aggregate payments andspecial payments to teaching hospitalsconstant; fold inpatient direct GMEcosts into the prospective paymentrates, holding aggregate paymentsconstant, and redistributing teachinghospital subsidies across all hospitals;and fold inpatient direct GME costs intoprospective payment rates with noconstraint on aggregate payments andno teaching hospital subsidy. Thecommission recommends the firstoption. While we do not disagree withMedPAC’s objectives, we believe thatthere are still some significant issuesrelated to these recommendations.

First, Congress has already taken stepstowards addressing the direct GMEpayment variation. Section 311 of theBBRA of 1999 established a 70 percentfloor and a 140 percent ceiling based ona national average per resident amountfor direct GME payment purposes forFYs 2001 through 2005. While we agreewith the objective of decreasing thevariation in the current per residentamounts, the same objective can beachieved by moving to a national, ratherthan hospital-specific, per residentamount.

Second, MedPAC asserts that foldingthe direct GME payments into theprospective payment system willestablish that GME payments arepayments to account for the increasedcosts of inpatient care due to residencytraining. However, we would note thecurrent direct GME payments aredistributed on the basis of Medicare’spatient share, based on the percentage oftotal Medicare inpatient days to totalhospital inpatient days. It is unclearexactly how MedPAC’srecommendation would better associateGME payments with the increased costsof patient care without rebasing thecurrent IME adjustment to moreappropriately reflect the empiricalestimate of those increased costs, bothdirect and indirect. Furthermore, thecurrent distribution of IME payments isnot directly linked to the involvement ofresidents providing patient care, butinstead is based on each Medicaredischarge, adjusted for the otherpayment factors. In addition, if therecommended teaching adjustment is amechanism for accounting for the extracosts of inpatient training, it seemsinappropriate to include residents nottraining in inpatient settings in apayment for inpatient care costs.

Third, MedPAC estimates show thatthe IME adjustment for operatingpayments would be only 3.2 percent, ifit were based on the empiricalrelationship between costs and the ratioof residents to hospital beds. This is

significantly less than the adjustment of5.5 percent, which is the adjustment setfor the end of the phase-in undercurrent law. MedPAC asserts thatapproximately $1.5 billion of the IMEpayments to teaching hospitals resultfrom paying more than the empiricalestimate suggests. Under MedPAC’srecommendation, the direct GMEpayments would essentially be added tocurrent IME payments. However, wefeel that it is inappropriate to revise theteaching adjustment in such a way thatwould constitute a further add-on to thecurrent IME payments which MedPACbelieves are excessive. Before such achange is adopted, Congress shoulddetermine a more accurate level atwhich to set the IME adjustment.

In addition, we note that MedPACrecommends folding the direct GMEcosts into the prospective paymentsystem based on the most recent costreports. The costs associated with GME,however, are no longer routinelyaudited by the fiscal intermediaries.Any reconstitution of the direct GMEpayment methodology based on recentcost reports would require furtherextensive audit work by the fiscalintermediaries.

VIII. Other Required Information

A. Requests for Data From the Public

In order to respond promptly topublic requests for data related to theprospective payment system, we haveset up a process under whichcommenters can gain access to the rawdata on an expedited basis. Generally,the data are available in computer tapeor cartridge format; however, some filesare available on diskette as well as onthe Internet at http://www.hcfa.gov/stats/pubfiles.html. In our May 5, 2000proposed rule, we published a list ofdata files that are available for purchase(65 FR 26318 through 26320).

B. Information Collection Requirements

Under the Paperwork Reduction Actof 1995, we are required to provide 60-day notice in the Federal Register andsolicit public comment before acollection of information requirement issubmitted to the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) for review andapproval. In order to fairly evaluatewhether an information collectionshould be approved by OMB, section3506(c)(2)(A) of the PaperworkReduction Act of 1995 requires that wesolicit comment on the following issues:

• The need for the informationcollection and its usefulness in carryingout the proper functions of our agency.

• The accuracy of our estimate of theinformation collection burden.



• The quality, utility, and clarity ofthe information to be collected.

• Recommendations to minimize theinformation collection burden on theaffected public, including automatedcollection techniques.

In the May 5, 2000 proposed rule, wesolicited public comment on each of theinformation collection requirements in§§ 412.77, 412.92, and 485.643described below.

Section 412.77, Determination of thehospital-specific rate for inpatientoperating costs for certain solecommunity hospitals based on a Federalfiscal year 1996 base period, and§ 412.92, Special treatment: solecommunity hospitals.

Sections 412.77(a)(2) and412.92(d)(1)(ii) state that an otherwiseeligible hospital that elects not toreceive payment based on its hospital-specific rate as determined under§ 412.77 must notify its fiscalintermediary of its decision prior to thebeginning of its cost reporting periodbeginning on or after October 1, 2000.

We estimate that it will take eachhospital that notifies its intermediary ofits election not to receive paymentsbased on its hospital-specific rate asdetermined under § 412.77 an hour todraft and send its notice. However, weare unable at this time to determine howmany hospitals will make this electionand, therefore, will need to notify theirintermediaries of their decision.

Section 485.643, Condition ofparticipation: Organ, tissue, and eyeprocurement.

It is important to note that because ofthe inherent flexibility of this finalregulation, the extent of the informationcollection requirements is dependentupon decisions that will be made eitherby the CAH or by the CAH inconjunction with the OPO or the tissueand eye banks, or both. Thus, thepaperwork burden on individual CAHswill vary and is subject, in large part, totheir decisionmaking.

The burden associated with therequirements of this section include: (1)The requirement to maintain protocoldocumentation demonstrating that thefive requirements of this section havebeen met; (2) the requirement for a CAHto notify an OPO, a tissue bank, or aneye bank of any imminent or actualdeath; and (3) the time required for ahospital to document and maintain OPOreferral information.

We estimate that, on average, therequirement to maintain protocoldocumentation demonstrating that therequirements of this section have beenmet will impose one hour of burden on

each CAH (on 161 CAHs) on an annualbasis, resulting in a total of 161 annualburden hours.

The CoP in this section will requireCAHs to notify the OPO about everydeath that occurs in the CAH. Theaverage Medicare hospital hasapproximately 165 beds and 200 deathsper year. However, by statute andregulation, CAHs may use no more than15 beds for acute care services.Assuming that the number of deaths ina hospital is related to the number ofacute care beds, there should beapproximately 18 deaths per year in theaverage CAH. We estimate that theaverage notification telephone call tothe OPO takes 5 minutes. Based on thisestimate, a CAH would needapproximately 90 minutes per year tonotify the OPO about all deaths andimminent deaths.

Under the CoP, a CAH may agree tohave the OPO determine medicalsuitability for tissue and eye donation ormay have alternative arrangements witha tissue bank and an eye bank. Thesealternative arrangements could includethe CAH’s direct notification of thetissue and eye bank of potential tissueand eye donors or direct notification ofall deaths. If a CAH chose to contactboth a tissue bank and an eye bankdirectly on all deaths, it could need anadditional 180 minutes per year (that is,5 minutes per call) in order to call boththe tissue and eye bank directly. Again,the impact is small, and this regulationpermits the CAH to decide how thisprocess will take place. We note thatmany communities already have a one-phone call system in place. In addition,some OPOs are also tissue banks or eyebanks, or both. A CAH that chooses touse the OPO’s tissue and eye bankservices in these localities would needto make only one telephone call onevery death.

We estimate that additional timewould be needed by the CAH toannotate the patient record or fill out aform regarding the disposition of a callto the OPO, the tissue bank, or the eyebank, or all three. This recordkeepingshould take no more than 5 minutes torecord each disposition or call.Therefore, all of the paperwork burdenassociated with the call(s) could add upto an additional 270 minutes per yearper CAH.

In summary, the informationcollection requirements of this sectionwould be a range of 3 to 6 hours perCAH annually.

We did not receive any comments onthe proposed information collection andrecordkeeping requirements.

These new information collection andrecordkeeping requirements have been

submitted to the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB) for review under theauthority of PRA. These requirementswill not be effective until they havebeen approved by OMB.

The requirements associated with ahospital’s application for a geographicredesignation, codified in Part 412, arecurrently approved by OMB under OMBapproval number 0938–0573, with anexpiration date of September 30, 2002.

List of Subjects

42 CFR Part 410

Health facilities, Health professions,Kidney diseases, Laboratories,Medicare, Rural areas, X-rays.

42 CFR Part 412

Administrative practice andprocedure, Health facilities, Medicare,Puerto Rico, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

42 CFR Part 413

Health facilities, Kidney diseases,Medicare, Puerto Rico, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements.

42 CFR Part 485

Grant programs-health, Healthfacilities, Medicaid, Medicare,Reporting and recordkeepingrequirements.

42 CFR Chapter IV is amended as setforth below:

PART 410—SUPPLEMENTARYMEDICAL INSURANCE (SMI)BENEFITS

A. Part 410 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for Part 410



§ 410.152 [Amended]

2. In § 410.152, paragraph (k)(2), thecross-reference ‘‘§ 413.70(c)’’ is removedand ‘‘§ 413.70(b)(2)(iii)(B)’’ is added inits place.

PART 412—PROSPECTIVE PAYMENTSYSTEMS FOR INPATIENT HOSPITALSERVICES

B. Part 412 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for Part 412



2. Section 412.2 is amended byrevising the last sentence of paragraph(a) to read as follows:



§ 412.2 Basis of payment.(a) Payment on a per discharge basis.

* * * An additional payment is madefor both inpatient operating andinpatient capital-related costs, inaccordance with subpart F of this part,for cases that are extraordinarily costlyto treat.* * * * *

§ 412.4 [Amended]

3. In § 412.4(f)(3), the reference to‘‘§ 412.2(e)’’ is removed and ‘‘§ 412.2(b)’’is added in its place.

4. Section 412.63 is amended by:A. Revising paragraph (s).B. Redesignating paragraphs (t), (u),

(v), and (w) as paragraphs (u), (v), (w),and (x) respectively.

C. Adding a new paragraph (t).

§ 412.63 Federal rates for inpatientoperating costs for fiscal years afterFederal fiscal year 1984.

* * * * *(s) Applicable percentage change for

fiscal year 2001. The applicablepercentage change for fiscal year 2001 isthe percentage increase in the marketbasket index for prospective paymenthospitals (as defined in § 413.40(a) ofthis subchapter) for sole communityhospitals and the increase in the marketbasket index minus 1.1 percentagepoints for other hospitals in all areas.

(t) Applicable percentage change forfiscal year 2002. The applicablepercentage change for fiscal year 2002 isthe percentage increase in the marketbasket index for prospective paymenthospitals (as defined in § 413.40(a) ofthis subchapter) minus 1.1 percentagepoints for hospitals in all areas.* * * * *

5. Section 412.73 is amended by:A. Revising paragraph (c)(12).B. Adding paragraphs (c)(13), (c)(14),

and (c)(15).

§ 412.73 Determination of the hospital-specific rate based on a Federal fiscal year1982 base period.

* * * * *(c) Updating base-year costs—* * *(12) For Federal fiscal years 1996

through 2000. For Federal fiscal years1996 through 2000, the update factor isthe applicable percentage change forother prospective payment hospitals ineach respective year as set forth in§§ 412.63(n) through (r).

(13) For Federal fiscal year 2001. ForFederal fiscal year 2001, the updatefactor is the percentage increase in themarket basket index for prospectivepayment hospitals (as defined in§ 413.40(a) of this chapter).

(14) For Federal fiscal year 2002. ForFederal fiscal year 2002, the update

factor is the percentage increase in themarket basket index for prospectivepayment hospitals (as defined in§ 413.40(a) of this chapter) minus 1.1percentage points.

(15) For Federal fiscal year 2003 andfor subsequent years. For Federal fiscalyear 2003 and subsequent years, theupdate factor is the percentage increasein the market basket index forprospective payment hospitals (asdefined in § 413.40(a) of this chapter).* * * * *

§ 412.75 [Amended]

6. In § 412.75(d), the cross reference‘‘§ 412.73 (c)(5) through (c)(12)’’ isremoved and ‘‘§ 412.75(c)(15)’’ is addedin its place.

§ 412.76 [Redesignated]

7. Section 412.76 is redesignated as anew § 412.78.

8. A new § 412.77 is added to read asfollows:

§ 412.77 Determination of the hospital-specific rate for inpatient operating costsfor certain sole community hospitals basedon a Federal fiscal year 1996 base period.

(a) Applicability. (1) This sectionapplies to a hospital that has beendesignated as a sole communityhospital, as described in § 412.92, thatreceived payment for its cost reportingperiod beginning during 1999 based onits hospital-specific rate for either fiscalyear 1982 under § 412.73 or fiscal year1987 under § 412.75, and that electsunder paragraph (a)(2) of this section tobe paid based on a fiscal year 1996 baseperiod. If the 1996 hospital-specific rateexceeds the hospital-specific rates foreither fiscal year 1982 or 1987, unlessthe hospital elects to the contrary, thisrate will be used in the paymentformula set forth under § 412.92(d)(1).

(2) Hospitals that are otherwiseeligible for but elect not to receivepayment on the basis of their Federalfiscal year 1996 updated costs per casemust notify their fiscal intermediary ofthis decision prior to the end of theircost reporting period beginning on orafter October 1, 2000, for which suchpayments would otherwise be made. Ifa hospital does not make thenotification to its fiscal intermediarybefore the end of the cost reportingperiod, the hospital is deemed to haveelected to have section 1886(b)(3)(I) ofthe Act apply to the hospital.

(3) This section applies only to costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2000.

(4) The formula for determining thehospital-specific costs for hospitalsdescribed under paragraph (a)(1) of this

section is set forth in paragraph (f) ofthis section.

(b) Based costs for hospitals subject tofiscal year 1996 rebasing. (1) Generalrule. Except as provided in paragraph(b)(2) of this section, for each hospitaleligible under paragraph (a) of thissection, the intermediary determines thehospital’s Medicare Part A allowableinpatient operating costs, as describedin § 412.2(c), for the 12-month or longercost reporting period ending on or afterSeptember 30, 1996 and beforeSeptember 30, 1997, and computes thehospital-specific rate for purposes ofdetermining prospective payment ratesfor inpatient operating costs asdetermined under § 412.92(d).

(2) Exceptions. (i) If the hospital’s lastcost reporting period ending beforeSeptember 30, 1997 is for less than 12months, the base period is the hospital’smost recent 12-month or longer costreporting period ending before the shortperiod report.

(ii) If the hospital does not have a costreporting period ending on or afterSeptember 30, 1996 and beforeSeptember 30, 1997, and does have acost reporting period beginning on orafter October 1, 1995 and before October1, 1996, that cost reporting period is thebase period unless the cost reportingperiod is for less than 12 months. If thatcost reporting period is for less than 12months, the base period is the hospital’smost recent 12-month or longer costreporting period ending before the shortcost reporting period. If a hospital hasno cost reporting period beginning infiscal year 1996, the hospital will nothave a hospital-specific rate based onfiscal year 1996.

(c) Costs on a per discharge basis. Theintermediary determines the hospital’saverage base-period operating cost perdischarge by dividing the total operatingcosts by the number of discharges in thebase period. For purposes of thissection, a transfer as defined in§ 412.4(b) is considered to be adischarge.

(d) Case-mix adjustment. Theintermediary divides the average base-period cost per discharge by thehospital’s case-mix index for the baseperiod.

(e) Updating base-period costs. Forpurposes of determining the updatedbase-period costs for cost reportingperiods beginning in Federal fiscal year1996, the update factor is determinedusing the methodology set forth in§ 412.73(c)(12) through (c)(15).

(f) DRG adjustment. The applicablehospital-specific cost per discharge ismultiplied by the appropriate DRGweighting factor to determine thehospital-specific base payment amount



(target amount) for a particular covereddischarge.

(g) Notice of hospital-specific rates.The intermediary furnishes a hospitaleligible for rebasing a notice of thehospital-specific rate as computed inaccordance with this section. The noticewill contain a statement of the hospital’sMedicare Part A allowable inpatientoperating costs, the number of Medicaredischarges, and the case-mix indexadjustment factor used to determine thehospital’s cost per discharge for theFederal fiscal year 1996 base period.

(h) Right to administrative andjudicial review. An intermediary’sdetermination of the hospital-specificrate for a hospital is subject toadministrative and judicial review.Review is available to a hospital uponreceipt of the notice of the hospital-specific rate. This notice is treated as afinal intermediary determination of theamount of program reimbursement forpurposes of subpart R of part 405 of thischapter.

(i) Modification of hospital-specificrate. (1) The intermediary recalculatesthe hospital-specific rate to reflect thefollowing:

(i) Any modifications that aredetermined as a result of administrativeor judicial review of the hospital-specific rate determinations; or

(ii) Any additional costs that arerecognized as allowable costs for thehospital’s base period as a result ofadministrative or judicial review of thebase-period notice of amount of programreimbursement.

(2) With respect to either the hospital-specific rate determination or theamount of program reimbursementdetermination, the actions taken onadministrative or judicial review thatprovide a basis for the recalculations ofthe hospital-specific rate include thefollowing:

(i) A reopening and revision of thehospital’s base-period notice of amountof program reimbursement under§§ 405.1885 through 405.1889 of thischapter.

(ii) A prehearing order or findingissued during the provider paymentappeals process by the appropriatereviewing authority under § 405.1821 or§ 405.1853 of this chapter that resolveda matter at issue in the hospital’s base-period notice of amount of programreimbursement.

(iii) An affirmation, modification, orreversal of a Provider ReimbursementReview Board decision by theAdministrator of HCFA under§ 405.1875 of this chapter that resolveda matter at issue in the hospital’s base-period notice of amount of programreimbursement.

(iv) An administrative or judicialreview decision under § 405.1831,§ 405.1871, or § 405.1877 of this chapterthat is final and no longer subject toreview under applicable law orregulations by a higher reviewingauthority, and that resolved a matter atissue in the hospital’s base-periodnotice of amount of programreimbursement.

(v) A final, nonappealable courtjudgment relating to the base-periodcosts.

(3) The adjustments to the hospital-specific rate made under paragraphs(i)(1) and (i)(2) of this section areeffective retroactively to the time of theintermediary’s initial determination ofthe rate.

9. Section 412.92 is amended by:A. Revising paragraph (d)(1).B. Redesignating paragraph (d)(2) as

paragraph (d)(3).C. Adding a new paragraph (d)(2).

§ 412.92 Special treatment: solecommunity hospitals.

* * * * *(d) Determining prospective payment

rates for inpatient operating costs forsole community hospitals—(1) Generalrule. For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after April 1, 1990, asole community hospital is paid basedon whichever of the following amountsyields the greatest aggregate payment forthe cost reporting period:

(i) The Federal payment rateapplicable to the hospitals asdetermined under § 412.63.

(ii) The hospital-specific rate asdetermined under § 412.73.

(iii) The hospital-specific rate asdetermined under § 412.75.

(iv) For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000,the hospital-specific rate as determinedunder § 412.77 (calculated under thetransition schedule set forth inparagraph (d)(2) of this section), if thesole community hospital was paid forits cost reporting period beginningduring 1999 on the basis of the hospital-specific rate specified in paragraph(d)(1)(ii) or (d)(1)(iii) of this section,unless the hospital elects otherwiseunder § 412.77(a)(1).

(2) Transition of FY 1996 hospital-specific rate. The intermediarycalculates the hospital-specific ratedetermined on the basis of the fiscalyear 1996 base period rate as follows:

(i) For Federal fiscal year 2001, thehospital-specific rate is the sum of 75percent of the greater of the hospital-specific rates specified in paragraph(d)(1)(ii) or (d)(1)(iii) of this section,plus 25 percent of the hospital-specific

rate specified in paragraph (d)(1)(iv) ofthis section.

(ii) For Federal fiscal year 2002, thehospital-specific rate is the sum of 50percent of the greater of the hospital-specific rates specified in paragraph(d)(1)(ii) or (d)(1)(iii) of this section plus50 percent of the hospital-specific ratespecified in paragraph (d)(1)(iv) of thissection.

(iii) For Federal fiscal year 2003, thehospital-specific rate is the sum of 25percent of the greater of the hospital-specific rates specified in paragraph(d)(1)(ii) or (d)(1)(iii) of this section,plus 75 percent of the hospital-specificrate specified in paragraph (d)(1)(iv) ofthis section.

(iv) For Federal fiscal year 2004 andany subsequent fiscal years, thehospital-specific rate is 100 percent ofthe hospital-specific rate specified inparagraph (d)(1)(iv) of this section.* * * * *

10. Section 412.105 is amended by:A. Revising paragraph (d)(3)(v).B. Adding a new paragraph (d)(3)(vi).C. Republishing paragraph (f)(1)

introductory text and revising paragraph(f)(1)(vii).

D. Adding new paragraphs (f)(1)(viii)and (f)(1)(ix).

E. Revising paragraph (g).

§ 412.105 Special treatment: Hospitals thatincur indirect costs for graduate medicaleducation programs.

* * * * *(d) Determination of education

adjustment factor. * * *(3) * * *(v) For discharges occurring during

fiscal year 2001, 1.54.(vi) For discharges occurring on or

after October 1, 2001, 1.35.* * * * *

(f) Determining the total number offull-time equivalent residents for costreporting periods beginning on or afterJuly 1, 1991. (1) For cost reportingperiods beginning on or after July 1,1991, the count of full-time equivalentresidents for the purpose of determiningthe indirect medical educationadjustment is determined as follows:* * * * *

(vii) If a hospital establishes a newmedical residency training program, asdefined in § 413.86(g)(9) of thissubchapter, the hospital’s full-timeequivalent cap may be adjusted inaccordance with the provisions of§§ 413.86(g)(6)(i) through (iv) of thissubchapter.

(viii) A hospital that beganconstruction of its facility prior toAugust 5, 1997, and sponsored newmedical residency training programs on



or after January 1, 1995 and on or beforeAugust 5, 1997, that either receivedinitial accreditation by the appropriateaccrediting body or temporarily trainedresidents at another hospital(s) until thefacility was completed, may receive anadjustment to its full-time equivalentcap in accordance with the provisions of§ 413.86(g)(7) of this subchapter.

(ix) A hospital may receive atemporary adjustment to its full-timeequivalent cap to reflect residents addedbecause of another hospital’s closure ifthe hospital meets the criteria specifiedin § 413.86(g)(8) of this subchapter.* * * * *

(g) Indirect medical educationpayment for managed care enrollees.For portions of cost reporting periodsoccurring on or after January 1, 1998, apayment is made to a hospital forindirect medical education costs, asdetermined under paragraph (e) of thissection, for discharges associated withindividuals who are enrolled under arisk-sharing contract with an eligibleorganization under section 1876 of theAct or with a Medicare+Choiceorganization under title XVIII, Part C ofthe Act during the period, according tothe applicable payment percentagesdescribed in §§ 413.86(d)(3)(i) through(d)(3)(v) of this subchapter.

11. In § 412.106, the introductory textof paragraph (e) is republished andparagraphs (e)(4) and (e)(5) are revisedto read as follows:

§ 412.106 Special treatment: Hospitals thatserve a disproportionate share of low-income patients.

* * * * *(e) Reduction in payment for FYs

1998 through 2002. The amountsotherwise payable to a hospital underparagraph (d) of this section are reducedby the following:* * * * *

(4) For FY 2001, 3 percent.(5) For FY 2002, 4 percent.

* * * * *12. Section 412.230 is amended by:A. Adding a new paragraph (a)(5)(iv).B. Republishing the introductory text

of paragraph (e)(1).C. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(iii) and

(e)(1)(iv).

§ 412.230 Criteria for an individual hospitalseeking redesignation to another rural areaor an urban area.

(a) General. * * *(5) Limitations on redesignation.

* * *(iv) An urban hospital that has been

granted redesignation as rural under§ 412.103 cannot receive an additionalreclassification by the MGCRB based on

this acquired rural status as long as suchredesignation is in effect.* * * * *

(e) Use of urban or other rural area’swage index—(1) Criteria for use ofarea’s wage index. Except as providedin paragraphs (e)(3) and (e)(4) of thissection, to use an area’s wage index, ahospital must demonstrate thefollowing:* * * * *

(iii) One of the following conditionsapply:

(A) With respect to redesignations forFederal fiscal year 1994 through 2001,the hospital’s average hourly wage is atleast 108 percent of the average hourlywage of hospitals in the area in whichthe hospital is located; or

(B) With respect to redesignations forFederal fiscal year 2002 and later years,the hospital’s average hourly wage is, inthe case of a hospital located in a ruralarea, at least 106 percent, and, in thecase of a hospital located in an urbanarea, at least 108 percent of the averagehourly wage of hospitals in the area inwhich the hospital is located; and

(iv) One of the following conditionsapply:

(A) For redesignations effective beforefiscal year 1999, the hospital’s averagehourly wage weighted for occupationalcategories is at least 90 percent of theaverage hourly wages of hospitals in thearea to which it seeks redesignation.

(B) With respect to redesignations forfiscal year 1994 through 2001, thehospital’s average hourly wage is equalto at least 84 percent of the averagehourly wage of hospitals in the area towhich it seeks redesignation.

(C) With respect to redesignations forfiscal year 2002 and later years, thehospital’s average hourly wage is equalto, in the case of a hospital located ina rural area, at least 82 percent, and inthe case of a hospital located in anurban area, at least 84 percent of theaverage hourly wage of hospitals in thearea to which it seeks redesignation.* * * * *

PART 413—PRINCIPLES OFREASONABLE COSTREIMBURSEMENT; PAYMENT FOREND-STAGE RENAL DISEASESERVICES; OPTIONALPROSPECTIVELY DETERMINEDPAYMENT RATES FOR SKILLEDNURSING FACILITIES

C. Part 413 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for Part 413

is revised to read as follows:Authority: Secs. 1102, 1812(d), 1814(b),

1815, 1833(a), (i), and (n), 1871, 1881, 1883,and 1886 of the Social Security Act (42

U.S.C. 1302, 1395d(d), 1395f(b), 1395g,1395l(a), (i), and (n), 1395hh, 1395rr, 1395tt,and 1395ww).

2. In § 413.40, paragraph (a)(3) isamended by revising paragraph (B) ofthe definition of ‘‘ceiling’’ andparagraph (d)(4) is revised, to read asfollows:

§ 413.40 Ceiling on the rate of increase inhospital inpatient costs.

(a) Introduction. * * *(3) Definitions. * * *Ceiling. * * *(B) The hospital-within-a-hospital has

discharged to the other hospital andsubsequently readmitted more than 5percent (that is, in excess of 5.0 percent)of the total number of Medicareinpatients discharged from the hospital-within-a-hospital in that cost reportingperiod.* * * * *

(d) Application of the target amountin determining the amount of payment.* * *

(4) Continuous improvement bonuspayments. (i) For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 1997and ending before October 1, 2000,eligible hospitals (as defined inparagraph (d)(5) of this section) receivepayments in addition to those inparagraph (d)(2) of this section, asapplicable. These payments are equal tothe lesser of—

(A) 50 percent of the amount bywhich the operating costs are less thanthe expected costs for the period; or

(B) 1 percent of the ceiling.(ii) For cost reporting periods

beginning on or after October 1, 2000,and ending before September 30, 2001,eligible psychiatric hospitals and unitsand long-tern care hospitals (as definedin paragraph (d)(5) of this section)receive payments in addition to those inparagraph (d)(2) of this section, asapplicable. These payments are equal tothe lesser of—

(A) 50 percent of the amount bywhich the operating costs are less thanthe expected costs for the period; or

(B) 1.5 percent of the ceiling.(iii) For cost reporting periods

beginning on or after October 1, 2001,and before September 30, 2002, eligiblepsychiatric hospitals and units andlong-term care hospitals receivepayments in addition to those inparagraph (d)(5) of this section, asapplicable. These payments are equal tothe lesser of—

(A) 50 percent of the amount bywhich the operating costs are less thanthe expected costs for the periods; or

(B) 2 percent of the ceiling.* * * * *



3. Section 413.70 is revised to read asfollows:

§ 413.70 Payment for services of a CAH.(a) Payment for inpatient services

furnished by a CAH. (1) Payment forinpatient services of a CAH is thereasonable costs of the CAH inproviding CAH services to its inpatients,as determined in accordance withsection 1861(v)(1)(A) of the Act and theapplicable principles of costreimbursement in this part and in Part415 of this chapter, except that thefollowing payment principles areexcluded when determining paymentfor CAH inpatient services:

(i) Lesser of cost or charges;(ii) Ceilings on hospital operating

costs; and(iii) Reasonable compensation

equivalent (RCE) limits for physicianservices to providers.

(2) Payment to a CAH for inpatientservices does not include any costs ofphysician services or other professionalservices to CAH inpatients, and issubject to the Part A hospital deductibleand coinsurance, as determined undersubpart G of part 409 of this chapter.

(b) Payment for outpatient servicesfurnished by a CAH—(1) General.Unless the CAH elects to be paid forservices to its outpatients under themethod specified in paragraph (b)(3) ofthis section, the amount of payment foroutpatient services of a CAH is theamount determined under paragraph(b)(2) of this section.

(2) Reasonable costs for facilityservices. (i) Payment for outpatientservices of a CAH is the reasonable costsof the CAH in providing CAH servicesto its outpatients, as determined inaccordance with section 1861(v)(1)(A) ofthe Act and the applicable principles ofcost reimbursement in this part and inPart 415 of this chapter, except that thefollowing payment principles areexcluded when determining paymentfor CAH outpatient services:

(A) Lesser of costs or charges;(B) RCE limits;(C) Any type of reduction to operating

or capital costs under § 413.124 or§ 413.130(j)(7); and

(D) Blended payment amounts forambulatory surgical services, radiologyservices, and other diagnostic services;

(ii) Payment to a CAH underparagraph (b)(2) of this section does notinclude any costs of physician servicesor other professional services to CAHoutpatients, and is subject to the Part Bdeductible and coinsurance amounts, asdetermined under §§ 410.152(k),410.160, and 410.161 of this chapter.

(iii) The following payment principlesare used when determining payment for

outpatient clinical diagnostic laboratorytests.

(A) The amount paid is equal to 100percent of the least of—

(1) Charges determined under the feeschedule as set forth in section1833(h)(1) or section 1834(d)(1) of theAct;

(2) The limitation amount for that testdetermined under section 1833(h)(4)(B)of the Act or the amount of the chargesbilled for the test; or

(3) A negotiated rate establishedunder section 1833(h)(6) of the Act.

(B) Payment for outpatient clinicaldiagnostic laboratory tests is not subjectto the Medicare Part B deductible andcoinsurance amounts, as specified in§ 410.152(k) of this chapter.

(3) Election to be paid reasonablecosts for facility services plus feeschedule for professional services. (i) ACAH may elect to be paid for outpatientservices in any cost reporting periodunder the method described inparagraphs (b)(3)(ii) and (b)(3)(iii) of thissection. This election must be made inwriting, made on an annual basis, anddelivered to the intermediary at least 60days before the start of each affectedcost reporting period. An election of thispayment method, once made for a costreporting period, remains in effect forall of that period and applies to allservices furnished to outpatients duringthat period.

(ii) If the CAH elects payment underthis method, payment to the CAH foreach outpatient visit will be the sum ofthe following amounts:

(A) For facility services, not includingany services for which payment may bemade under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) ofthis section, the reasonable costs of theservices as determined under paragraph(b)(2)(i) of this section; and

(B) For professional servicesotherwise payable to the physician orother practitioner on a fee schedulebasis, the amounts that otherwise wouldbe paid for the services if the CAH hadnot elected payment under this method.

(iii) Payment to a CAH is subject tothe Part B deductible and coinsuranceamounts, as determined under§§ 410.152, 410.160, and 410.161 of thischapter.

(c) Final payment based on costreport. Final payment to the CAH forCAH facility services to inpatients andoutpatients furnished during a costreporting is based on a cost report forthat period, as required under§ 413.20(b).

4. Section 413.86 is amended by:A. Revising the first sentence of

paragraph (d)(3).B. Revising the introductory text of

paragraph (e)(3).

C. Redesignating paragraph (e)(4) asparagraph (e)(5).

D. Adding a new paragraph (e)(4).E. Revising newly designated

paragraph(e)(5)(i)(B).F. Adding a new paragraph (e)(5)(iv).

§ 413.86 Direct graduate medicaleducation payments.

* * * * *(d) Calculating payment for graduate

medical education costs. * * *(3) Step Three. For portions of cost

reporting periods occurring on or afterJanuary 1, 1998, the product derived instep one is multiplied by the proportionof the hospital’s inpatient daysattributable to individuals who areenrolled under a risk-sharing contractwith an eligible organization undersection 1876 of the Act and who areentitled to Medicare Part A or with aMedicare+Choice organization underTitle XVIII, Part C of the Act. * * *

(e) Determining per resident amountsfor the base period. * * *

(3) For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after July 1, 1986.Subject to the provisions of paragraph(e)(4) of this section, for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after July 1,1986, a hospital’s base-period perresident amount is adjusted as follows:* * * * *

(4) For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and ending on or before September 30,2005. For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and ending on or before September 30,2005, a hospital’s per resident amountfor each fiscal year is adjusted inaccordance with the followingprovisions:

(i) General provisions. For purposes of§ 413.86(e)(4)—

(A) Weighted average per residentamount. The weighted average perresident amount is established asfollows:

(1) Using data from hospitals’ costreporting periods ending during FY1997, HCFA calculates each hospital’ssingle per resident amount by addingeach hospital’s primary care and non-primary care per resident amounts,weighted by its respective FTEs, anddividing by the sum of the FTEs forprimary care and non-primary careresidents.

(2) Each hospital’s single per residentamount calculated under paragraph(e)(4)(i)(A)(1) of this section isstandardized by the 1999 geographicadjustment factor for the physician feeschedule area (as determined under§ 414.26 of this chapter) in which thehospital is located.



(3) HCFA calculates an average of allhospitals’ standardized per residentamounts that are determined underparagraph (e)(4)(i)(A)(2) of this section.The resulting amount is the weightedaverage per resident amount.

(B) Primary care/obstetrics andgynecology and non-primary care perresident amounts. A hospital’s perresident amount is an amount inclusiveof any CPI–U adjustments that thehospital may have received since thehospital’s base year, including any CPI–U adjustments the hospital may havereceived because the hospital trainsprimary care/obstetrics and gynecologyresidents and non-primary careresidents as specified under paragraph(e)(3)(ii) of this section.

(ii) Adjustment beginning in FY 2001and ending in FY 2005. For costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 2000 and ending on or beforeSeptember 30, 2005, a hospital’s perresident amount is adjusted inaccordance with paragraphs (e)(4)(ii)(A)through (e)(4)(ii)(C) of this section, inthat order:

(A) Updating the weighted averageper resident amount for inflation. Theweighted average per resident amount(as determined under paragraph(e)(4)(i)(A) of this section) is updated bythe estimated percentage increase in theCPI–U during the period beginning withthe month that represents the midpointof the cost reporting periods endingduring FY 1997 (that is, October 1,1996) and ending with the midpoint ofthe hospital’s cost reporting period thatbegins in FY 2001.

(B) Adjusting for locality. Theupdated weighted average per residentamount determined under paragraph(e)(4)(ii)(A) of this section (the nationalaverage per resident amount) is adjustedfor the locality of each hospital bymultiplying the national average perresident amount by the 1999 geographicadjustment factor for the physician Feeschedule area in which each hospital islocated, established in accordance with§ 414.26 of this subchapter.

(C) Determining necessary revisions tothe per resident amount. The locality-adjusted national average per residentamount, as calculated in accordancewith paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(B) of thissection, is compared to the hospital’sper resident amount is revised, ifappropriate, according to the followingthree categories:

(1) Floor. For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and on or before September 30, 2001, ifthe hospital’s per resident amountwould otherwise be less than 70 percentof the locality-adjusted national averageper resident amount for FY 2001 (as

determined under paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(B)of this section), the per resident amountis equal to 70 percent of the locality-adjusted national average per residentamount for FY 2001. For subsequentcost reporting periods, the hospital’s perresident amount is updated using themethodology specified under paragraph(e)(3)(i) of this section.

(2) Ceiling. If the hospital’s perresident amount is greater than 140percent of the locality-adjusted nationalaverage per resident amount, the perresident amount is adjusted as followsfor FY 2001 through FY 2005:

(i) FY 2001. For cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000and on or before September 30, 2001, ifthe hospital’s FY 2000 per residentamount exceeds 140 percent of the FY2001 locality-adjusted national averageper resident amount (as calculatedunder paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(B) of thissection), then, subject to the provisionstated in paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(C)(2)(iv) ofthis section, the hospital’s per residentamount is frozen at the FY 2000 perresident amount and is not updated forFY 2001 by the CPI–U factor.

(ii) FY 2002. For cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2001 and on or before September 30,2002, if the hospital’s FY 2001 perresident amount exceeds 140 percent ofthe FY 2002 locality-adjusted nationalaverage per resident amount, then,subject to the provision stated inparagraph (e)(4)(ii)(C)(2)(iv) of thissection, the hospital’s per residentamount is frozen at the FY 2001 perresident amount and is not updated forFY 2002 by the CPI–U factor.

(iii) FY 2003 through FY 2005. Forcost reporting periods beginning on orafter October 1, 2002 and on or beforeSeptember 30, 2005, if the hospital’s perresident amount for the previous costreporting period is greater than 140percent of the locality-adjusted nationalaverage per resident amount for thatsame previous cost reporting period (forexample, for cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 2003, compare thehospital’s per resident amount from theFY 2002 cost report to the hospital’slocality-adjusted national average perresident amount from FY 2002), then,subject to the provision stated inparagraph (e)(4)(ii)(C)(2)(iv) of thissection, the hospital’s per residentamount is adjusted using themethodology specified in paragraph(e)(3)(i) of this section, except that theCPI–U applied for a 12-month period isreduced (but not below zero) by 2percentage points.

(iv) General rule for hospitals thatexceed the ceiling. For cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,

2000 and on or before September 30,2005, if a hospital’s per resident amountexceeds 140 percent of the hospital’slocality-adjusted national average perresident amount and it is adjusted underany of the criteria (e)(4)(ii)(C)(2)(i)through (iii) of this section, the currentyear per resident amount cannot bereduced below 140 percent of thelocality-adjusted national average perresident amount.

(3) Per resident amounts greater thanor equal to the floor and less than orequal to the ceiling. For cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,2000 and on or before September 30,2005, if a hospital’s per esident amountis greater than or equal to 70 percentand less than or equal to 140 percent ofthe hospital’s locality-adjusted nationalaverage per resident amount for eachrespective fiscal year, the hospital’s perresident amount is updated using themethodology specified in paragraph(e)(3)(i) of this section.

(5) Exceptions—(i) Base period forcertain hospitals. * * *

(B) The weighted mean value of perresident amounts of hospitals located inthe same geographic wage area, as thatterm is used in the prospective paymentsystem under part 412 of this chapter,for cost reporting periods beginning inthe same fiscal years. If there are fewerthan three amounts that can be used tocalculate the weighted mean value, thecalculation of the per resident amountsincludes all hospitals in the hospital’sregion as that term is used in§ 412.62(f)(1)(i) of his chapter.* * * * *

(iv) Effective October 1, 2000, the perresident amounts established underparagraphs (e)(5)(i) through (iii) of thissection are subject to the provisions ofparagraph (e)(4) of this section.

PART 485—CONDITIONS OFPARTICIPATION: SPECIALIZEDPROVIDERS

D. Part 485 is amended as follows:1. The authority citation for part 485

continues to read as follows:Authority: Sec. 1820 of the Act (42 U.S.C.

1395i–1114), unless otherwise noted.2. A new § 485.643 is added to

subpart F to read as follows:

§ 485.643 Condition of participation:Organ, tissue, and eye procurement.

The CAH must have and implementwritten protocols that:

(a) Incorporate an agreement with anOPO designated under part 486 of thischapter, under which it must notify, ina timely manner, the OPO or a thirdparty designated by the OPO ofindividuals whose death is imminent or



who have died in the CAH. The OPOdetermines medical suitability for organdonation and, in the absence ofalternative arrangements by the CAH,the OPO determines medical suitabilityfor tissue and eye donation, using thedefinition of potential tissue and eyedonor and the notification protocoldeveloped in consultation with thetissue and eye banks identified by theCAH for this purpose;

(b) Incorporate an agreement with atleast one tissue bank and at least oneeye bank to cooperate in the retrieval,processing, preservation, storage anddistribution of tissues and eyes, as maybe appropriate to assure that all usabletissues and eyes are obtained frompotential donors, insofar as such anagreement does not interfere with organprocurement;

(c) Ensure, in collaboration with thedesignated OPO, that the family of eachpotential donor is informed of its optionto either donate or not donate organs,tissues, or eyes. The individualdesignated by the CAH to initiate therequest to the family must be adesignated requestor. A designatedrequestor is an individual who hascompleted a course offered or approvedby the OPO and designed in conjunctionwith the tissue and eye bank communityin the methodology for approachingpotential donor families and requestingorgan or tissue donation;

(d) Encourage discretion andsensitivity with respect to thecircumstances, views, and beliefs of thefamilies of potential donors;

(e) Ensure that the CAH workscooperatively with the designated OPO,tissue bank and eye bank in educatingstaff on donation issues, reviewingdeath records to improve identificationof potential donors, and maintainingpotential donors while necessary testingand placement of potential donatedorgans, tissues, and eyes take place.

(f) For purposes of these standards,the term ‘‘Organ’’ means a humankidney, liver, heart, lung, or pancreas.(Catalog of Federal Domestic AssistanceProgram No. 93.773, Medicare-HospitalInsurance)

Dated: July 24, 2000.Nancy Ann Min DeParle,Administrator, Health Care, FinancingAdministration

Dated: July 24, 2000.Donna E. Shalaa,Secretary.

[Editorial Note: The followingAddendum and appendixes will notappear in the Code of FederalRegulations.]

Addendum—Schedule of StandardizedAmounts Effective with DischargesOccurring On or After October 1, 2000 andUpdate Factors and Rate-of-IncreasePercentages Effective With Cost ReportingPeriods Beginning On or After October 1,2000

I. Summary and BackgroundIn this Addendum, we are setting forth the

amounts and factors for determiningprospective payment rates for Medicareinpatient operating costs and Medicareinpatient capital-related costs. We are alsosetting forth rate-of-increase percentages forupdating the target amounts for hospitals andhospital units excluded from the prospectivepayment system.

For discharges occurring on or afterOctober 1, 2000, except for sole communityhospitals, Medicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals, and hospitals located in PuertoRico, each hospital’s payment per dischargeunder the prospective payment system willbe based on 100 percent of the Federalnational rate.

Sole community hospitals are paid basedon whichever of the following rates yieldsthe greatest aggregate payment: the Federalnational rate, the updated hospital-specificrate based on FY 1982 cost per discharge, theupdated hospital-specific rate based on FY1987 cost per discharge, or, if qualified, 25percent of the updated hospital-specific ratebased on FY 1996 cost per discharge, plus 75percent of the updated FY 1982 or FY 1987hospital-specific rate. Section 405 of PublicLaw 106–113 amended section 1886(b)(3) ofthe Act to allow a sole community hospitalthat was paid for its cost reporting periodbeginning during FY 1999 on the basis ofeither its FY 1982 or FY 1987 hospital-specific rate to elect to rebase its hospital-specific ate based on its FY 1996 cost perdischarge.

Section 404 of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(d)(5)(G) of the Act toextend the special treatment for Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals. Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals are paidbased on the Federal national rate or, ifhigher, the Federal national rate plus 50percent of the difference between the Federalnational rate and the updated hospital-specific rate based on FY 1982 or FY 1987cost per discharge, whichever is higher.

For hospitals in Puerto Rico, the paymentper discharge is based on the sum of 50percent of a Puerto Rico rate and 50 percentof a Federal national rate.

As discussed below in section II of thisAddendum, we are making changes in thedetermination of the prospective paymentrates for Medicare inpatient operating costsfor FY 2001. The changes, to be appliedprospectively, affect the calculation of theFederal rates. In section III of thisAddendum, we finalize our proposal todiscontinue listing updates to the paymentsper unit for blood clotting factor provided tohospital inpatients who have hemophilia. Insection IV of this Addendum, we discuss ourchanges for determining the prospectivepayment rates for Medicare inpatient capital-related costs for FY 2001. Section V of thisAddendum sets forth our changes for

determining the rate-of-increase limits forhospitals excluded from the prospectivepayment system for FY 2001. The tables towhich we refer in the preamble to this finalrule are presented at the end of thisAddendum in section VI.

II. Changes to Prospective Payment RatesFor Inpatient Operating Costs for FY 2001

The basic methodology for determiningprospective payment rates for inpatientoperating costs is set forth at § 412.63 forhospitals located outside of Puerto Rico. Thebasic methodology for determining theprospective payment rates for inpatientoperating costs for hospitals located in PuertoRico is set forth at §§ 412.210 and 412.212.Below, we discuss the factors used fordetermining the prospective payment rates.The Federal and Puerto Rico rate changeswill be effective with discharges occurring onor after October 1, 2000. As required bysection 1886(d)(4)(C) of the Act, we must alsoadjust the DRG classifications and weightingfactors for discharges in FY 2001.

In summary, the standardized amounts setforth in Tables 1A and 1C of section VI ofthis Addendum reflect—

• Updates of 2.3 percent for all areas (thatis, the market basket percentage increase of3.4 percent minus 1.1 percentage points);

• An adjustment to ensure budgetneutrality as provided for in sections1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) and (d)(3)(E) of the Act byapplying new budget neutrality adjustmentfactors to the large urban and otherstandardized amounts;

• An adjustment to ensure budgetneutrality as provided for in section1886(d)(8)(D) of the Act by removing the FY2000 budget neutrality factor and applying arevised factor;

• An adjustment to apply the revisedoutlier offset by removing the FY 2000 outlieroffsets and applying a new offset; and

• An adjustment in the Puerto Ricostandardized amounts to reflect theapplication of a Puerto Rico-specific wageindex.

The standardized amounts set forth in table1E of section VI of this Addendum, whichapply to sole community hospitals, reflectupdates of 3.4 percent (that is, the full marketbasket percentage increase) as provided for insection 406 of Public Law 106–113, butotherwise reflect the same adjustments as thenational standardized amounts.

A. Calculation of Adjusted StandardizedAmounts

1. Standardization of Base-Year Costs orTarget Amounts

Section 1886(d)(2)(A) of the Act requiredthe establishment of base-year cost datacontaining allowable operating costs perdischarge of inpatient hospital services foreach hospital. The preamble to theSeptember 1, 1983 interim final rule (48 FR39763) contains a detailed explanation ofhow base-year cost data were established inthe initial development of standardizedamounts for the prospective payment systemand how they are used in computing theFederal rates.

Section 1886(d)(9)(B)(i) of the Act requiredus to determine the Medicare target amounts



for each hospital located in Puerto Rico forits cost reporting period beginning in FY1987. The September 1, 1987 final rule (52FR 33043, 33066) contains a detailedexplanation of how the target amounts weredetermined and how they are used incomputing the Puerto Rico rates.

The standardized amounts are based on perdischarge averages of adjusted hospital costsfrom a base period or, for Puerto Rico,adjusted target amounts from a base period,updated and otherwise adjusted inaccordance with the provisions of section1886(d) of the Act. Sections 1886(d)(2)(B)and (d)(2)(C) of the Act required us to updatebase-year per discharge costs for FY 1984 andthen standardize the cost data in order toremove the effects of certain sources of costvariations among hospitals. These effectsinclude case-mix, differences in area wagelevels, cost-of-living adjustments for Alaskaand Hawaii, indirect medical educationcosts, a payments to hospitals serving adisproportionate share of low-incomepatients.

Under sections 1886(d)(2)(H) and (d)(3)(E)of the Act, in making payments under theprospective payment system, the Secretaryestimates from time to time the proportion ofcosts that are wages and wage-related costs.Since October 1, 1997, when the marketbasket was last revised, we have considered71.1 percent of costs to be labor-related forpurposes of the prospective payment system.The average labor share in Puerto Rico is 71.3percent. We are revising the discharge-weighted national standardized amount forPuerto Rico to reflect the proportion ofdischarges in large urban and other areasfrom the FY 1999 MedPAR file.

Comment: One commenter asserted thatour labor share of 71.1 percent is overstatedand particularly disadvantageous to smallrural hospitals. The commenter questionedhow we arrived at this percentage when theirinformal survey of 300 hospitals found nonewith salaries and benefits in excess of 56percent of total operating costs. Thecommenter proposed that HCFA should onlyrecognize costs that are included in the wageindex survey on the cost report whenrecalculating the labor share.

Response: We set forth the latest revisionof the labor share calculation in the August29, 1997 final rule (62 FR 45993) afterconsidering comments in response to ourproposal set forth in the June 2, 1997proposed rule (62 FR 29920). We feel that ourcurrent methodology accurately captures, onaverage, the operating costs faced byhospitals that are affected by local labormarkets. It should also be noted that the wageand benefit shares of the prospectivepayment system’s market basket aredetermined using the wage index survey dataprovided in the Medicare Cost Reports.However, we will take these comments intoconsideration when we perform our nextperiodic revision of the hospital operatingmarket basket.

2. Computing Large Urban and Other AreaAverages

Sections 1886(d)(2)(D) and (d)(3) of the Actrequire the Secretary to compute two averagestandardized amounts for dischargesoccurring in a fiscal year: one for hospitals

located in large urban areas and one forhospitals located in other areas. In addition,under sections 1886(d)(9)(B)(iii) and(d)(9)(C)(i) of the Act, the averagestandardized amount per discharge must bedetermined for hospitals located in urbanand other areas in Puerto Rico. Hospitals inPuerto Rico are paid a blend of 50 percentof the applicable Puerto Rico standardizedamount and 50 percent of a nationalstandardized payment amount.

Section 1886(d)(2)(D) of the Act defines‘‘urban area’’ as those areas within aMetropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). A ‘‘largeurban area’’ is defined as an urban area witha population of more than 1 million. Inaddition, section 4009(i) of Public Law 100–203 provides that a New England CountyMetropolitan Area (NECMA) with apopulation of more than 970,000 is classifiedas a large urban area. As required by section1886(d)(2)(D) of the Act, population size isdetermined by the Secretary based on thelatest population data published by theBureau of the Census. Urban areas that do notmeet the definition of a ‘‘large urban area’’are referred to as ‘‘other urban areas.’’ Areasthat are not included in MSAs are considered‘‘rural areas’’ under section 1886(d)(2)(D) ofthe Act. Payment for discharges fromhospitals located in large urban areas will bebased on the large urban standardizedamount. Payment for discharges fromhospitals located in other urban and ruralareas will be based on the other standardizedamount.

Based on 1998 population estimatespublished by the Bureau of the Census, 61areas meet the criteria to be defined as largeurban areas for FY 2001. These areas areidentified by a footnote in Table 4A.

3. Updating the Average StandardizedAmounts

Under section 1886(d)(3)(A) of the Act, weupdate the area average standardizedamounts each year. In accordance withsection 1886(d)(3)(A)(iv) of the Act, we areupdating the large urban areas’ and the otherareas’ average standardized amounts for FY2001 using the applicable percentageincreases specified in section 1886(b)(3)(B)(i)of the Act. Section 1886(b)(3)(B)(i)(XVI) ofthe Act specifies an update factor for thestandardized amounts for FY 2001 equal tothe market basket percentage increase minus1.1 percentage points for hospitals, exceptsole community hospitals, in all areas. TheAct, as amended by section 406 of PublicLaw 106–113, specifies an update factorequal to the market basket percentageincrease for sole community hospitals.

The percentage change in the marketbasket reflects the average change in the priceof goods and services purchased by hospitalsto furnish inpatient care. The most recentforecast of the hospital market basketincrease for FY 2001 is 3.4 percent. Thus, forFY 2001, the update to the averagestandardized amounts equals 3.4 percent forsole community hospitals and 2.3 percent forother hospitals.

As in the past, we are adjusting the FY2000 standardized amounts to remove theeffects of the FY 2000 geographicreclassifications and outliner paymentsbefore applying the FY 2001 updates. That is,

we are increasing the standardized amountsto restore the reductions that were made forthe effects of geographic reclassification andoutliners. We then apply the new offsets tothe standardized amounts for outliners andgeographic reclassifications for FY 2001.

Although the update factors for FY 2001are set by law, we are required by section1886(e)(3) of the Act to report to the Congressour initial recommendation of update factorsfor FY2001 for both prospective paymenthospitals and hospitals excluded from theprospective payment system. We haveincluded our final recommendations inAppendix C to this final rule.

4. Other Adjustments to the AverageStandardized Amounts

a. Recalibration of DRG Weights andUpdated Wage Index—Budget NeutralityAdjustment. Section 1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) of theAct specifies that, beginning in FY 1991, theannual DRG reclassification and recalibrationof the relative weights must be made in amanner that ensures that aggregate paymentsto hospitals are not affected. As discussed insection II of the preamble, we normalized therecalibrated DRG weights by an adjustmentfactor, so that the average case weight afterrecalibration is equal to the average caseweight prior to recalibration.

Section 1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act requires usto update the hospital wage index on anannual basis beginning October 1, 1993. Thisprovision also requires us to make anyupdates or adjustments to the wage index ina manner that ensures that aggregatepayments to hospitals are not affected by thechange in the wage index.

To comply with the requirement of section1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) of the Act that DRGreclassification and recalibration of therelative weights be budget neutral, and therequirement in section 1886(d)(3)(E) of theAct that the updated wage index be budgetneutral, we used historical discharge data tosimulate payments and compared aggregatepayments using the FY 2000 relative weightsand wage index to aggregate payments usingthe FY 2001 relative weights and wage index.The same methodology was used for the FY2000 budget neutrality adjustment. (See thediscussion in the September 1, 1992 finalrule (57 FR 39832).) Based on thiscomparison, we computed a budgetneutrality adjustment factor equal to0.997225. We also adjusted the Puerto Rico-specific standardized amounts to adjust forthe effects of DRG reclassification andrecalibration. We computed a budgetneutrality adjustment factor for Puerto Rico-specific standardized amounts equal to0.999649. These budget neutrality adjustmentfactors are applied to the standardizedamounts without removing the effects of theFY 2000 budget neutrality adjustments. Wedo not remove the prior budget neutralityadjustment because estimated aggregatepayments after the changes in the DRGrelative weights and wage index should equalestimated aggregate payments prior to thechanges. If we removed the prior yearadjustment, we would not satisfy thiscondition.

In addition, we will continue to applythese same adjustment factors to the hospital-specific rates that are effective for cost



reporting periods beginning in on or afterOctober 1, 2000. (See the discussion in theSeptember 4, 1990 final rule (55 FR 6073).)

b. Reclassified Hospitals—BudgetNeutrality Adjustment. Section 1886(d)(8)(B)of the Act provides that, effective withdischarges occurring on or after October 1,1988, certain rural hospitals are deemedurban. In addition, section 1886(d)(10) of theAct provides for the reclassification ofhospitals based on determinations by theMedicare Georgraphic Classification ReviewBoard (MGCRB). Under section 1886(d)(10)of the Act, a hospital may be reclassified forpurposes of the standardized amount or thewage index, or both.

Under section 1886(d)(8)(D) of the Act, theSecretary is required to adjust thestandardized amounts so as to ensure thataggregate payments under the prospectivepayment system after implementation of theprovisions of sections 1886(d)(8)(B) and (C)and 1886(d)(10) of the Act are equal to theaggregate prospective payments that wouldhave been made absent these provisions.Section 152(b) of Public Law 106–113requires reclassifications under thatsubsection to be treated as reclassificationsunder section 1886(d)(10) of the Act. Tocalculate this budget neutrality factor, weused historical discharge data to simulatepayments, and compared total prospectivepayments (including IME and DSHpayments) prior to any reclassifications tototal prospective payments afterreclassifications. In the May 5, 2000proposed rule, based on these simulations,we applied an adjustment factor of 0.994270to ensure that the effects of reclassificationare budget neutral. The final budgetneutrality adjustment factor is 0.993187.

The adjustment factor is applied to thestandardized amounts after removing theeffects of the FY 2000 budget neutralityadjustment factor. We note that the proposedFY 2001 adjustment reflected wage index andstandardized amount reclassificationsapproved by the MGCRB or theAdministrator as of February 29, 2000. Theeffects of any additional reclassificationchanges that occurred as a result of appealsand reviews of MGCRB decisions for FY 2001or hospitals’ withdrawal of reclassificationrequests are reflected in the final budgetneutrality adjustment required under section1886(d)(8)(D) of the Act and published in thisfinal rule.

c. Outliers. Section 1886(d)(5)(A) of the Actprovides for payments in addition to thebasic prospective payments for ‘‘outlier’’cases, cases involving extraordinarily highcosts (cost outliers). Section 1886(d)(3)(B) ofthe Act requires the Secretary to adjust boththe large urban and other area nationalstandardized amounts by the same factor toaccount for the estimated proportion of totalDRG payments made to outlier cases.Similarly, section 1886(d)(9)(B)(iv) of the Actrequires the Secretary to adjust the largeurban and other standardized amountsapplicable to hospitals in Puerto Rico toaccount for the estimated proportion of totalDRG payments made to outlier cases.Furthermore, under section 1886(d)(5)(A)(iv)of the Act, outlier payments for any yearmust be projected to be not less than 5

percent nor more than 6 percent of totalpayments based on DRG prospectivepayment rates.

i. FY 2001 outlier thresholds. For FY 2000,the fixed loss cost outlier threshold wasequal to the prospective payment for the DRGplus $14,050 ($12,827 for hospitals that havenot yet entered the prospective paymentsystem for capital-related costs). Themarginal cost factor for cost outliers (thepercent of costs paid after costs for the caseexceed the threshold) was 80 percent. Weapplied an outlier adjustment to the FY 2000standardized amounts of 0.948859 for thelarge urban and other areas rates and 0.9402for the capital Federal rate.

For FY 2001, we proposed to establish afixed loss cost outlier threshold equal to theprospective payment rate for the DRG plusthe IME and DSH payments plus $17,250($15,763 for hospitals that have not yetentered the prospective payment system forcapital-related costs). In addition, weproposed to maintain the marginal cost factorfor cost outliers at 80 percent. In setting thefinal FY 2001 outlier thresholds, we usedupdated data. In this final rule, we areestablishing a fixed loss cost outlierthreshold equal to the prospective paymentrate for the DRG plus the IME and DSHpayments plus $17,550 ($16,036 for hospitalsthat have not yet entered the prospectivepayment system for capital-related costs). Inaddition, we are maintaining the marginalcost factor for cost outliers at 80 percent. Aswe have explained in the past, to calculateoutlier thresholds we apply a cost inflationfactor to update costs for the cases used tosimulate payments. For FY 1999, we used acost inflation factor of minus 1.724 percent(a cost per case decrease of 1.724 percent).For FY 2000, we used a cost inflation factorof zero percent. To set the proposed FY 2001outlier thresholds, we used a cost inflationfactor of 1.0 percent. We are using a costinflation actor of 1.8 percent to set the finalFY 2001 outlier thresholds. This factorreflects our analysis of the best available costreport data as well as calculations (using thebest available data) indicating that thepercentage of actual outlier payments for FY1999 is higher than we projected before thebeginning of FY 1999, and that thepercentage of actual outlier payments for FY2000 will likely be higher than we projectedbefore the beginning of FY 2000. Thecalculations of ‘‘actual’’ outlier payments arediscussed below.

ii. Other changes concerning outliers. Inaccordance with section 1886(d)(5)(A)(iv) ofthe Act, we calculated outlier thresholds sothat outlier payments are projected to equal5.1 percent of total payments based on DRGprospective payment rates. In accordancewith section 1886(d)(3)(E), we reduced theFY 2001 standardized amounts by the samepercentage to account for the projectedproportion of payments paid to outliers.

As stated in the September 1, 1993 finalrule (58 FR 46348), we established outlierthresholds that are applicable to bothinpatient operating costs and inpatientcapital-related costs. When we modeled thecombined operating and capital outlierpayments, we found that using a common setof thresholds resulted in a higher percentage

of outlier payments for capital-related coststhan for operating costs. We project that thethresholds for FY 2001 will result in outlierpayments equal to 5.1 percent of operatingDRG payments and 5.9 percent of capitalpayments based on the Federal rate.

The proposed outlier adjustmentfactors applied to the standardizedamounts for FY 2001 were as follows:

Operatingstandard-

izedamounts

Capital fed-eral rate

National ............. 0.948865 0.9416Puerto Rico ....... 0.975408 0.9709

The final outlier adjustment factorsapplied to the standardized amounts forFY 2001 are as follows:

Operatingstandard-

izedamounts

Capital fed-eral rate

National ............. 0.948908 0.9409Puerto Rico ....... 0.974791 0.9699

As in the proposed rule, we apply theoutlier adjustment factors afterremoving the effects of the FY 2000outlier adjustment factors on thestandardized amounts.

Table 8A in section VI of thisAddendum contains the updatedStatewide average operating cost-to-charge ratios for urban hospitals and forrural hospitals to be used in calculatingcost outlier payments for those hospitalsfor which the fiscal intermediary isunable to compute a reasonablehospital-specific cost-to-charge ratio.These Statewide average ratios replacethe ratios published in the July 30, 1999final rule (64 FR 41620). Table 8Bcontains comparable Statewide averagecapital cost-to-charge ratios. Theseaverage ratios will be used to calculatecost outlier payments for those hospitalsfor which the fiscal intermediarycomputes operating cost-to-charge ratioslower than 0.200265 or greater than1.298686 and capital cost-to-chargeratios lower than 0.01262 greater than0.16792. This range represents 3.0standard deviations (plus or minus)from the mean of the log distribution ofcost-to-charge ratios for all hospitals.We note that the cost-to-charge ratios inTables 8A and 8B will be used duringFY 2001 when hospital-specific cost-to-charge ratios based on the latest settledcost report are either not available oroutside the three standard deviationsrange.

iii. FY 1999 and FY 2000 outlierpayments. In the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41547), we stated that, based onavailable data, we estimated that actual



FY 1999 outlier payments would beapproximately 6.3 percent of actual totalDRG payments. This was computed bysimulating payments using the March1998 bill data available at the time. Thatis, the estimate of actual outlierpayments did not reflect actual FY 1999bills but instead reflected theapplication of FY 1999 rates andpolicies to available FY 1998 bills. Ourcurrent estimate, using available FY1999 bills, indicates that actual outlierpayments for FY 1999 wereapproximately 7.6 percent of actual totalDRG payments. We note that theMedPAR file for FY 1999 dischargescontinues to be updated. Thus, the dataindicate that, for FY 1999, thepercentage of actual outlier paymentsrelative to actual total payments ishigher than we projected before FY 1999(and thus exceeds the percentage bywhich we reduced the standardizedamounts for FY 1999). In fact, the dataindicate that the proportion of actualoutlier payments for FY 1999 exceeds 6percent. Nevertheless, consistent withthe policy and statutory interpretationwe have maintained since the inceptionof the prospective payment system, wedo not plan to recoup money and makeretroactive adjustments to outlierpayments for FY 1999.

We currently estimate that actualoutlier payments for FY 2000 will beapproximately 6.2 percent of actual totalDRG payments, higher than the 5.1percent we projected in setting outlierpolicies for FY 2000. This estimate isbased on simulations using the March2000 update of the provider-specific fileand the March 2000 update of the FY1999 MedPAR file (discharge data forFY 1999 bills). We used these data tocalculate an estimate of the actualoutlier percentage for FY 2000 byapplying FY 2000 rates and policies toavailable FY 1999 bills.

Comment: Several commentersopposed the proposed change in thecost outlier fixed loss amount from$14,050 to $17,250. The commentersstated that our rationale for this changeis that outlier payments wereapproximately 7.5 percent of total actualDRG payments in FY 1999 and areanticipated to be 6.1 percent in FY 2000.The commenters observed that noadditional payments were made inprevious years when outlier paymentsfell below 5.1 percent. The commentersstated that cost outlier thresholds wereadjusted as a result of changes made byPublic Law 105–33 and that the reasoncurrent payments exceed the 5.1 percenttarget was due to these changes. Thecommenters also noted that the majorityof hospitals did not reap windfall profitson outlier cases, merely mitigated their

losses. The commenters characterizedthese losses as particularly devastatingas they come at a time when MedPAC’sanalyses show that hospitals’ financialperformance is deteriorating. Onecommenter suggested that the Secretaryconsider acting independently ofCongress by lowering the FY 2001outlier threshold without furtherreducing the standardized paymentamount.

Response: We believe the commentersmisunderstood the methodology forcalculating the FY 2001 outlier fixedloss amount. Under section1886(d)(5)(A)(iv) of the Act, we arerequired to set the outlier threshold ata level such that outlier payments areprojected to be not less than 5 percentnor more than 6 percent of totalpayments based on DRG prospectivepayment rates. That FY 2000 outlierpayments are now anticipated to exceed5.1 percent of total payments is anindication that costs are rising fasterthan we predicted when setting theoutlier fixed loss amount prior to thebeginning of FY 2000. This was one ofseveral factors taken into considerationwhen we estimated FY 2001 costs tomodel projected outlier payments for FY2001. The outlier fixed loss amount isset to meet the aforementioned statutoryrequirement. Each year we set theoutlier thresholds for the upcomingfiscal year by making projections basedon the best available data; we do notmake the thresholds more stringentsimply because current data indicatethat, in a previous year, actual outlierpayments turned out to be more than weprojected when we set the outlierthresholds for that year. Thus, thechange in the outlier fixed loss amountfrom $14,050 (for FY 2000) to $17,250(proposed FY 2001) reflects estimatesand projections about costs in FY 2001.We did not increase the outlier fixedloss amount simply because we nowexpect that actual outlier paymentsexceed 5.1 percent of actual total DRGpayments for FY 1999 and FY 2000respectively.

We do not concur with thecommenters’ assertion that changes tothe outlier methodology made by PublicLaw 105–33 caused current outlierpayments to exceed 5.1 percent. PublicLaw 105–33 did not change thestatutory requirement that projectedoutlier payments be between 5 percentand 6 percent of projected totalpayments based on DRG prospectivepayment rates. Again, we believe thatcurrent outlier payments are greaterthan expected in part because actualhospital costs may be higher thanreflected in the methodology used to setthe outlier threshold.

Finally, we believe in the concept ofoutlier payments as a protection againstthe financial effects of treatingextraordinarily high-cost cases throughan offsetting adjustment to thestandardized amounts according to thestatutory requirements set forth asrequired in sections 1886(d)(5)(A)(iv)and 1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act. Thesesections of the Act require that outlierthresholds be calculated so that outlierpayments are projected to equalbetween 5 and 6 percent of totalpayments based on DRG prospectivepayment rates and the standardizedamounts are to be reduced by the samepercentage to account for the projectedproportion of payments paid to outliers.

5. FY 2001 Standardized AmountsThe adjusted standardized amounts

are divided into labor and nonlaborportions. Table 1A (Table 1E for solecommunity hospitals) contains the twonational standardized amounts that areapplicable to all hospitals, excepthospitals in Puerto Rico. Under section1886(d)(9)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Federalportion of the Puerto Rico payment rateis based on the discharge-weightedaverage of the national large urbanstandardized amount and the nationalother standardized amount (as set forthin Table 1A). The labor and nonlaborportions of the national averagestandardized amounts for Puerto Ricohospitals are set forth in Table 1C. Thistable also includes the Puerto Ricostandardized amounts.

B. Adjustments for Area Wage Levelsand Cost of Living

Tables 1A, 1C and 1E, as set forth inthis Addendum, contain the labor-related and nonlabor-related shares usedto calculate the prospective paymentrates for hospitals located in the 50States, the District of Columbia, andPuerto Rico. This section addresses twotypes of adjustments to the standardizedamounts that are made in determiningthe prospective payment rates asdescribed in this Addendum.

1. Adjustment for Area Wage LevelsSections 1886(d)(3)(E) and

1886(d)(9)(C)(iv) of the Act require thatwe make an adjustment to the labor-related portion of the prospectivepayment rates to account for areadifferences in hospital wage levels. Thisadjustment is made by multiplying thelabor-related portion of the adjustedstandardized amounts by theappropriate wage index for the area inwhich the hospital is located. In sectionIII of this preamble, we discuss the dataand methodology for the FY 2001 wageindex. The wage index is set forth in



Tables 4A through 4F of thisAddendum.

2. Adjustment for Cost-of-Living inAlaska and Hawaii

Section 1886(d)(5)(H) of the Actauthorizes an adjustment to take intoaccount the unique circumstances ofhospitals in Alaska and Hawaii. Higherlabor-related costs for these two Statesare taken into account in the adjustmentfor area wages described above. For FY2001, we are adjusting the payments forhospitals in Alaska and Hawaii bymultiplying the nonlabor portion of thestandardized amounts by theappropriate adjustment factor containedin the table below.

TABLE OF COST-OF-LIVING ADJUST-MENT FACTORS, ALASKA AND HAWAIIHOSPITALS

Alaska:All areas .................................... 1.25

Hawaii:County of Honolulu .................... 1.25County of Hawaii ....................... 1.15County of Kauai ......................... 1.225County of Maui .......................... .1.225County of Kalawao .................... 1.225

The above factors are based on data ob-tained from the U.S. Office of PersonnelManagement.

C. DRG Relative WeightsAs discussed in section II of the

preamble, we have developed aclassification system for all hospitaldischarges, assigning them into DRGs,and have developed relative weights foreach DRG that reflect the resourceutilization of cases in each DRG relativeto Medicare cases in other DRGs. Table5 of section VI of this Addendumcontains the relative weights that wewill use for discharges occurring in FY2001. These factors have beenrecalibrated as explained in section II ofthe preamble.

D. Calculation of Prospective PaymentRates for FY 2001

General Formula for Calculation ofProspective Payment Rates for FY 2001

The prospective payment rate for allhospitals located outside of Puerto Ricoexcept sole community hospitals andMedicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals = Federal rate.

The prospective payment rate for solecommunity hospitals = whichever of thefollowing rates yields the greatestaggregate payment: The Federal nationalrate, the updated hospital-specific ratebased on FY 1982 cost per discharge,the updated hospital-specific rate basedon FY 1987 cost per discharge, or, if thesole community hospital was paid for

its cost reporting period beginningduring FY 1999 on the basis of either itsFY 1982 or FY 1987 hospital-specificrate and elects rebasing, 25 percent of itsupdated hospital-specific rate based onFY 1996 cost per discharge plus 75percent of its updated FY 1982 or FY1987 hospital-specific rate.

Prospective payment rate forMedicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals = 100 percent of the Federalrate, or, if the greater of the updated FY1982 hospital-specific rate or theupdated FY 1987 hospital-specific rateis higher than the Federal rate, 100percent of the Federal rate plus 50percent of the difference between theapplicable hospital-specific rate and theFederal rate.

Prospective payment rate for PuertoRico = 50 percent of the Puerto Rico rate+ 50 percent of a discharge-weightedaverage of the national large urbanstandardized amount and the Federalnational other standardized amount.

1. Federal Rate

For discharges occurring on or afterOctober 1, 2000 and before October 1,2001, except for sole communityhospitals, Medicare-dependent, smallrural hospitals and hospitals in PuertoRico, the hospital’s payment is basedexclusively on the Federal national rate.

The payment amount is determined asfollows:

Step 1—Select the appropriatenational standardized amountconsidering the type of hospital anddesignation of the hospital as largeurban or other (see Table 1A or 1E1 insection VI of this Addendum).

Step 2—Multiply the labor-relatedportion of the standardized amount bythe applicable wage index for thegeographic area in which the hospital islocated (see Tables 4A, 4B, and 4C ofsection VI of this Addendum).

Step 3—For hospitals in Alaska andHawaii, multiply the nonlabor-relatedportion of the standardized amount bythe appropriate cost-of-livingadjustment factor.

Step 4—Add the amount from Step 2and the nonlabor-related portion of thestandardized amount (adjusted, ifappropriate, under Step 3).

Step 5—Multiply the final amountfrom Step 4 by the relative weightcorresponding to the appropriate DRG(see Table 5 of section VI of thisAddendum).

2. Hospital-Specific Rate (ApplicableOnly to Sole Community Hospitals andMedicare-Dependent, Small RuralHospitals)

Section 1886(b)(3)(C) of the Act, asamended by section 405 of Public Law

106–113, provides that sole communityhospitals are paid based on whicheverof the following rates yields the greatestaggregate payment: the Federal nationalrate, the updated hospital-specific ratebased on FY 1982 cost per discharge,the updated hospital-specific rate basedon FY 1987 cost per discharge, or, if thesole community hospital was paid forits cost reporting period beginningduring FY 1999 on the basis of either itsFY 1982 or FY 1987 hospital-specificrate and elects rebasing, 25 percent of itsupdated hospital-specific rate based onFY 1996 cost per discharge plus 75percent of the updated FY 1982 or FY1987 hospital-specific rate.

Section 1886(d)(5)(G) of the Act, asamended by section 404 of Public Law106–113, provides that Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals arepaid based on whichever of thefollowing rates yields the greatestaggregate payment: the Federal rate orthe Federal rate plus 50 percent of thedifference between the Federal rate andthe greater of the updated hospital-specific rate based on FY 1982 and FY1987 cost per discharge.

Hospital-specific rates have beendetermined for each of these hospitalsbased on either the FY 1982 cost perdischarge, the FY 1987 cost perdischarge or, for qualifying solecommunity hospitals, the FY 1996 costper discharge. For a more detaileddiscussion of the calculation of thehospital-specific rates, we refer thereader to the September 1, 1983 interimfinal rule (48 FR 39772); the April 20,1990 final rule with comment (55 FR15150); and the September 4, 1990 finalrule (55 FR 35994).

a. Updating the FY 1982 and FY 1987Hospital-Specific Rates for FY 2001. Weare increasing the hospital-specific ratesby 3.4 percent (the hospital marketbasket rate of increase) for solecommunity hospitals and by 2.3 percent(the hospital market basket percentageincrease minus 1.1 percentage points)for Medicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals for FY 2001. Section1886(b)(3)(C)(iv) of the Act provides thatthe update factor applicable to thehospital-specific rates for solecommunity hospitals equal the updatefactor provided under section1886(b)(3)(B)(iv) of the Act, which, forsole community hospitals in FY 2001, isthe market basket rate of increase.Section 1886(b)(3)(D) of the Actprovides that the update factorapplicable to the hospital-specific ratesfor Medicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals equal the update factorprovided under section 1886(b)(3)(B)(iv)of the Act, which, for FY 2001, is the



market basket rate of increase minus 1.1percentage points.

b. Calculation of Hospital-SpecificRate. For sole community hospitals, theapplicable FY 2001 hospital-specificrate is the greater of the following: thehospital-specific rate for the precedingfiscal year, increased by the applicableupdate factor (3.4 percent); or, if thehospital qualifies to rebase its hospital-specific rate based on cost per case inFY 1996 and elects rebasing, 75 percentof the hospital-specific rate for thepreceding fiscal year, increased by theapplicable update factor, plus 25percent of its rebased FY 1996 hospital-specific rate updated through FY 2001.For Medicare-dependent, small ruralhospitals, the applicable FY 2001hospital-specific rate is calculated byincreasing the hospital’s hospital-specific rate for the preceding fiscal yearby the applicable update factor (2.3percent), which is the same as theupdate for all prospective paymenthospitals, except sole communityhospitals. In addition, the hospital-specific rate is adjusted by the budgetneutrality adjustment factor (that is,0.997225) as discussed in sectionII.A.4.a. of this Addendum. Theresulting rate is used in determiningunder which rate a sole communityhospital or Medicare-dependent, smallrural hospital is paid for its dischargesbeginning on or after October 1, 2000,based on the formula set forth above.

3. General Formula for Calculation ofProspective Payment Rates for HospitalsLocated in Puerto Rico Beginning on orAfter October 1, 2000 and BeforeOctober 1, 2001

a. Puerto Rico Rate. The Puerto Ricoprospective payment rate is determinedas follows:

Step 1—Select the appropriateadjusted average standardized amountconsidering the large urban or otherdesignation of the hospital (see Table 1Cof section VI of the Addendum).

Step 2—Multiply the labor-relatedportion of the standardized amount bythe appropriate Puerto Rico-specificwage index (see Table 4F of section VIof the Addendum).

Step 3—Add the amount from Step 2and the nonlabor-related portion of thestandardized amount.

Step 4—Multiply the result in Step 3by 50 percent.

Step 5—Multiply the amount fromStep 4 by the appropriate DRG relativeweight (see Table 5 of section VI of theAddendum).

b. National Rate. The nationalprospective payment rate is determinedas follows:

Step 1—Multiply the labor-relatedportion of the national averagestandardized amount (see Table 1C ofsection VI of the Addendum) by theappropriate national wage index (seeTables 4A and 4B of section VI of theAddendum).

Step 2—Add the amount from Step 1and the nonlabor-related portion of thenational average standardized amount.

Step 3—Multiply the result in Step 2by 50 percent.

Step 4—Multiply the amount fromStep 3 by the appropriate DRG relativeweight (see Table 5 of section VI of theAddendum).

The sum of the Puerto Rico rate andthe national rate computed above equalsthe prospective payment for a givendischarge for a hospital located inPuerto Rico.

III. Changes to the Payment Rates forBlood Clotting Factor for HemophiliaInpatients

For the past 2 years in the FederalRegister (63 FR 41010 and 64 FR41549), we have discussed section 4452of Public Law 105–33, which amendedsection 6011(d) of Public Law 101–239to reinstate the add-on payment for thecosts of administering blood clottingfactor to Medicare beneficiaries whohave hemophilia and who are hospitalinpatients for discharges occurring on orafter October 1, 1997. In these priorrules, we have described the paymentpolicy that the payment amount forclotting factors covered by this inpatientbenefit is equal to 85 percent of theAWP, subject to the Part A deductibleand coinsurance requirements, andspecifically listed the updated add-onpayment amounts for each clottingfactor, as described by HCFA’s CommonProcedure Coding System (HCPCS).Because we are not changing the policyestablished 2 years ago, we arediscontinuing the practice of listingthese amounts in the annual proposedand final rules. Instead, the programmanuals will instruct fiscalintermediaries to follow this policy andobtain the average wholesale price(AWP) for each relevant HCPCS fromeither their corresponding local carrieror the Medicare durable medicalequipment regional carrier (DMERC)that has jurisdiction in their area.Carriers already calculate the AWPbased on the median AWP of the severalproducts available in each category offactor.

The payment amounts will bedetermined using the most recent AWPdata available to the carrier at the timethe intermediary performs these annualupdate calculations.

These amounts are updated annuallyand are effective for dischargesbeginning on or after October 1 of thecurrent year through September 30 ofthe following year. Payment will bemade for blood clotting factor only ifthere is an ICD–9–CM diagnosis code forhemophilia included on the bill.

Comment: One commenter disagreedwith our proposal to have individualMedicare contractors determine thepayment allowance for the pass-throughamount payable for clotting factors forinpatients with hemophilia. Thecommenter stated that individualMedicare contractors would notmaintain a uniform payment amountand this inconsistency would result inwide disparities in reimbursement. Thecommenter recommended that HCFAcontinue to set a standard national ratethat would be the same for everyone.The commenter also expressed concernthat updates in payment allowances forclotting factors would vary widelyamong contractors.

Response: We continue to believe thatour carriers are the most appropriateentities to obtain the AWP for thesefactors, and are therefore proceedingwith our proposed change. While we donot anticipate inconsistency in thepayment allowances for these productsaround the country, we do not want tojeopardize access to these essentialbiologicals for Medicare beneficiarieswho are hemophiliacs. Therefore, wehave determined that a moreappropriate approximation for the costof clotting factor furnished on aninpatient basis is 95 percent of theAWP, consistent with the Part B benefitfor the same factors. This increase from85 percent to 95 percent of the AWPwill assure access despite possibleMedicare contractor variations in theapplicable AWP.

IV. Changes to Payment Rates forInpatient Capital-Related Costs for FY2001

The prospective payment system forhospital inpatient capital-related costswas implemented for cost reportingperiods beginning on or after October 1,1991. Effective with that cost reportingperiod and during a 10-year transitionperiod extending through FY 2001,hospital inpatient capital-related costsare paid on the basis of an increasingproportion of the capital prospectivepayment system Federal rate and adecreasing proportion of a hospital’shistorical costs for capital.

The basic methodology fordetermining capital Federal prospectiverates is set forth at §§ 412.308 through412.352. Below we discuss the factorsthat we used to determine the capital



Federal rate and the hospital-specificrates and the hospital-specific rates forFY 2001. The rates will be effective fordischarges occurring on or after October1, 2000.

For FY 1992, we computed thestandard Federal payment rate forcapital-related costs under theprospective payment system byupdating the FY 1989 Medicareinpatient capital cost per case by anactuarial estimate of the increase inMedicare inpatient capital costs percase. Each year after FY 1992, weupdate the standard capital Federal rate,as provided in § 412.308(c)(1), toaccount for capital input price increasesand other factors. Also, § 412.308(c)(2)provides that the capital Federal rate isadjusted annually by a factor equal tothe estimated proportion of outlierpayments under the capital Federal rateto total capital payments under thecapital Federal rate. In addition,§ 412.308(c)(3) requires that the capitalFederal rate be reduced by anadjustment factor equal to the estimatedproportion of payments for exceptionsunder § 412.348. Furthermore,§ 412.308(c)(4)(ii) requires that thecapital Federal rate be adjusted so thatthe annual DRG reclassification and therecalibration of DRG weights andchanges in the geographic adjustmentfactor are budget neutral. For FYs 1992through 1995, § 412.352 required thatthe capital Federal rate also be adjustedby a budget neutrality factor so thataggregate payments for inpatienthospital capital costs were projected toequal 90 percent of the payments thatwould have been made for capital-related costs on a reasonable cost basisduring the fiscal year. That provisionexpired in FY 1996. Section412.308(b)(2) describes the 7.4 percentreduction to the rate that was made inFY 1994, and § 412.308(b)(3) describesthe 0.28 percent reduction to the ratemade in FY 1996 as a result of therevised policy of paying for transfers. Inthe FY 1998 final rule with commentperiod (62 FR 45966), we implementedsection 4402 of Public Law 105–33,which requires that for dischargesoccurring on or after October 1, 1997,and before October 1, 2002, theunadjusted standard capital Federal rateis reduced by 17.78 percent. A smallpart of that reduction will be restoredeffective October 1, 2002.

For each hospital, the hospital-specific rate was calculated by dividingthe hospital’s Medicare inpatientcapital-related costs for a specified baseyear by its Medicare discharges(adjusted for transfers), and dividing theresult by the hospital’s case mix index(also adjusted for transfers). The

resulting case-mix adjusted average costper discharge was then updated to FY1992 based on the national averageincrease in Medicare’s inpatient capitalcost per discharge and adjusted by theexceptions payment adjustment factorand the budget neutrality adjustmentfactor to yield the FY 1992 hospital-specific rate. Since FY 1992, thehospital-specific rate has been updatedannually for inflation and for changes inthe exceptions payment adjustmentfactor. For FYs 1992 through 1995, thehospital-specific rate was also adjustedby a budget neutrality adjustment factor.Section 4402 of Public Law 105–33 alsorequires that fFor discharges occurringon or after October 1, 1997, and beforeOctober 1, 2002, the unadjustedhospital-specific rate is reduced by17.78 percent. A small part of thisreduction will be restored effectiveOctober 1, 2002.

To determine the appropriate budgetneutrality adjustment factor and theexceptions payment adjustment factor,we developed a dynamic model ofMedicare inpatient capital-related costs,that is, a model that projects changes inMedicare inpatient capital-related costsover time. With the expiration of thebudget neutrality provision, the modelis still used to estimate the exceptionspayment adjustment and other factors.The model and its application aredescribed in greater detail in AppendixB of this final rule.

In accordance with section1886(d)(9)(A) of the Act, under theprospective payment system forinpatient operating costs, hospitalslocated in Puerto Rico are paid foroperating costs under a special paymentformula. Prior to FY 1998, hospitals inPuerto Rico were paid a blended ratethat consisted of 75 percent of theapplicable standardized amount specificto Puerto Rico hospitals and 25 percentof the applicable national averagestandardized amount. However,effective October 1, 1997, as a result ofsection 4406 of Public Law 105–33,operating payments to hospitals inPuerto Rico are based on a blend of 50percent of the applicable standardizedamount specific to Puerto Rico hospitalsand 50 percent of the applicablenational average standardized amount.In conjunction with this change to theoperating blend percentage, effectivewith discharges on or after October 1,1997, we compute capital payments tohospitals in Puerto Rico based on ablend of 50 percent of the Puerto Ricorate and 50 percent of the capitalFederal rate.

Section 412.374 provides for the useof this blended payment system forpayments to Puerto Rico hospitals under

the prospective payment system forinpatient capital-related costs.Accordingly, for capital-related costs,we compute a separate payment ratespecific to Puerto Rico hospitals usingthe same methodology used to computethe national Federal rate for capital.

A. Determination of Federal InpatientCapital-Related Prospective PaymentRate Update

In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR41551), we established a capital Federalrate of $377.03 for FY 2000. In theproposed rule, we stated that, as a resultof the changes we proposed to thefactors used to establish the capitalFederal rate, the proposed FY 2001capital Federal rate was $383.06. In thisfinal rule, we are establishing a FY 2001capital Federal rate of $382.03.

In the discussion that follows, weexplain the factors that were used todetermine the FY 2001 capital Federalrate. In particular, we explain why theFY 2001 capital Federal rate hasincreased 1.33 percent compared to theFY 2000 capital Federal rate. We alsoestimate aggregate capital payments willincrease by 5.48 percent during thissame period. This increase is primarilydue to the increase in the number ofhospital admissions, the increase incase-mix, and the increase in theFederal blend percentage from 90 to 100percent for fully prospective paymenthospitals.

Total payments to hospitals under theprospective payment system arerelatively unaffected by changes in thecapital prospective payments. Sincecapital payments constitute about 10percent of hospital payments, a 1percent change in the capital Federalrate yields only about 0.1 percentchange in actual payments to hospitals.Aggregate payments under the capitalprospective payment transition systemare estimated to increase in FY 2001compared to FY 2000.

1. Standard Capital Federal Rate Updatea. Description of the Update

Framework. Under § 412.308(c)(1), thestandard capital Federal rate is updatedon the basis of an analytical frameworkthat takes into account changes in acapital input price index and otherfactors. The update framework consistsof a capital input price index (CIPI) andseveral policy adjustment factors.Specifically, we have adjusted theprojected CIPI rate of increase asappropriate each year for case-mixindex-related changes, for intensity, andfor errors in previous CIPI forecasts. Theproposed rule reflected an update factorfor FY 2001 under that framework of 0.9percent, based on data available at that



time. Under the update framework, thefinal update factor for FY 2001 is 0.9percent. This update factor is based ona projected 0.9 percent increase in theCIPI, a 0.0 percent adjustment forintensity, a 0.0 percent adjustment forcase-mix, a 0.0 percent adjustment forthe FY 1999 DRG reclassification andrecalibration, and a forecast errorcorrection of 0.0 percent. We explainthe basis for the FY 2001 CIPI projectionin section II.D of this Addendum. In thissection IV of the Addendum, wedescribe the policy adjustments thathave been applied.

The case-mix index is the measure ofthe average DRG weight for cases paidunder the prospective payment system.Because the DRG weight determines theprospective payment for each case, anypercentage increase in the case-mixindex corresponds to an equalpercentage increase in hospitalpayments.

The case-mix index can change forany of several reasons:

• The average resource use ofMedicare patients changes (‘‘real’’ case-mix change);

• Changes in hospital coding ofpatient records result in higher weightDRG assignments (‘‘coding effects’’); and

• The annual DRG reclassificationand recalibration changes may not bebudget neutral (‘‘reclassificationeffect’’).

We define real case-mix change asactual changes in the mix (and resourcerequirements) of Medicare patients asopposed to changes in coding behaviorthat result in assignment of cases tohigher weighted DRGs but do not reflecthigher resource requirements. In theupdate framework for the prospectivepayment system for operating costs, weadjust the update upwards to allow forreal case-mix change, but remove theeffects of coding changes on the case-mix index. We also remove the effect ontotal payments of prior changes to theDRG classifications and relativeweights, in order to retain budgetneutrality for all case-mix index-relatedchanges other than patient severity. (Forexample, we adjusted for the effects ofthe FY 1999 DRG reclassification andrecalibration as part of our FY 2001update recommendation.) We haveadopted this case-mix index adjustmentin the capital update framework as well.

For FY 2001, we are projecting a 0.5percent increase in the case-mix index.We estimate that real case-mix increasewill equal 0.5 percent in FY 2001.Therefore, the net adjustment for case-mix change in FY 2001 is 0.0 percentagepoints.

Comment: One commenter stated thatthe magnitude of the upward

adjustment of 0.5 percent for real case-mix change and the downwardadjustment of 0.5 percent for projectedcase-mix change (a net case-mixadjustment of 0.0 percent) for FY 2001appears inconsistent with past numberspublished by HCFA. They recommendthat we review our adjustment for case-mix and provide a basis for theseadjustment amounts.

Response: HCFA’s Office of theActuary estimates the projection of totalcase-mix changes used in the capitaland operating update frameworks. Theestimate of case-mix change for FY 2001is the same as the estimate of case-mixchange for FY 2000 published in theJuly 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR 41551).This estimate of case-mix change for FY2001 is also very close to what has beenused for the past 5 years. Past estimatesof case-mix change have alwaysassumed that most of the case-mixchange will be real, and therefore thenet adjustments for case-mix changehave always been small or zero. Againthis year, our estimate assumes the samekind of relationship. Therefore, webelieve that our projection of a 0.5percent increase in the case-mix indexand our estimate that real case-mixincrease will equal 0.5 percent (for a netcase-mix adjustment of 0.0 percent) inFY 2001 is consistent with past case-mix change update recommendations.As more experience develops we may beable to develop a better estimate of thereal part of the case-mix increase.

We estimate that FY 1999 DRGreclassification and recalibration willresult in a 0.0 percent change in thecase-mix when compared with the case-mix index that would have resulted ifwe had not made the reclassificationand recalibration changes to the DRGs.Therefore, we are making a 0.0 percentadjustment for DRG reclassification andrecalibration in the updaterecommendation for FY 2001.

The capital update frameworkcontains an adjustment for forecasterror. The input price index forecast isbased on historical trends andrelationships ascertainable at the timethe update factor is established for theupcoming year. In any given year theremay be unanticipated price fluctuationsthat may result in differences betweenthe actual increase in prices and theforecast used in calculating the updatefactors. In setting a prospective paymentrate under the framework, we make anadjustment for forecast error only if ourestimate of the change in the capitalinput price index for any year is off by0.25 percentage points or more. There isa 2-year lag between the forecast and themeasurement of the forecast error. Aforecast error of 0.0 percentage points

was calculated for the FY 1999 update.That is, current historical data indicatethat the FY 1999 CIPI used incalculating the forecasted FY 1999update factor did not overstate orunderstate realized price increases. Wetherefore are making a 0.0 percentadjustment for forecast error in theupdate for FY 2001.

Under the capital prospectivepayment system framework, we alsomake an adjustment for changes inintensity. We calculate this adjustmentusing the same methodology and data asin the framework for the operatingprospective payment system. Theintensity factor for the operating updateframework reflects how hospitalservices are utilized to produce the finalproduct, that is, the discharge. Thiscomponent accounts for changes in theuse of quality-enhancing services,changes in within-DRG severity, andexpected modification of practicepatterns to remove cost-ineffectiveservices.

We calculate case-mix constantintensity as the change in total chargesper admission, adjusted for price levelchanges (the CPI for hospital and relatedservices), and changes in real case-mix.The use of total charges in thecalculation of the proposed intensityfactor makes it a total intensity factor,that is, charges for capital services arealready built into the calculation of thefactor. Therefore, we have incorporatedthe intensity adjustment from theoperating update framework into thecapital update framework. Withoutreliable estimates of the proportions ofthe overall annual intensity increasesthat are due, respectively, to ineffectivepractice patterns and to the combinationof quality-enhancing new technologiesand within-DRG complexity, weassume, as in the revised operatingupdate framework, that one-half of theannual increase is due to each of thesefactors. The capital update frameworkthus provides an add-on to the inputprice index rate of increase of one-halfof the estimated annual increase inintensity to allow for within-DRGseverity increases and the adoption ofquality-enhancing technology.

For FY 2001, we have developed aMedicare-specific intensity measurebased on a 5-year average using FY 1995through 1999 data. In determining case-mix constant intensity, we found thatobserved case-mix increase was 1.7percent in FY 1995, 1.6 percent in FY1996, 0.3 percent in FY 1997, ¥0.4percent in FY 1998, and ¥0.3 percentin FY 1999. For FY 1995 and FY 1996,we estimate that real case-mix increasewas 1.0 to 1.4 percent each year. Theestimate for those years is supported by



past studies of case-mix change by theRAND Corporation. The most recentstudy was ‘‘Has DRG Creep Crept Up?Decomposing the Case Mix IndexChange Between 1987 and 1988’’ by G.M. Carter, J. P. Newhouse, and D. A.Relles, R–4098–HCFA/ProPAC (1991).The study suggested that real case-mixchange was not dependent on totalchange, but was usually a fairly steady1.0 to 1.5 percent per year. We use 1.4percent as the upper bound because theRAND study did not take into accountthat hospitals may have induced doctorsto document medical records morecompletely in order to improvepayment. Following that study, weconsider up to 1.4 percent of observedcase-mix change as real for FY 1995through FY 1999. Based on thisanalysis, we believe that all of theobserved case-mix increase for FY 1997,FY 1998, and FY 1999 is real. Theincreases for FY 1995 and FY 1996 werein excess of our estimate of real case-mix increase.

We calculate case-mix constantintensity as the change in total chargesper admission, adjusted for price levelchanges (the CPI for hospital and relatedservices), and changes in real case-mix.Given estimates of real case-mix of 1.0percent for FY 1995, 1.0 percent for FY1996, 0.3 percent for FY 1997, ¥0.4percent for FY 1998, and ¥0.3 percentfor FY 1999, we estimate that case-mixconstant intensity declined by anaverage 0.7 percent during FYs 1995through 1999, for a cumulative decreaseof 3.6 percent. If we assume that realcase-mix increase was 1.4 percent forFY 1995, 1.4 percent for FY 1996, 0.3percent for FY 1997, ¥0.4 percent forFY 1998, and ¥0.3 percent for FY 1999,we estimate that case-mix constantintensity declined by an average 0.9percent during FYs 1995 through 1999,for a cumulative decrease of 4.5 percent.Since we estimate that intensity hasdeclined during that period, we arerecommending a 0.0 percent intensityadjustment for FY 2001.

We note that the operatingrecommendation addressed inAppendix C of this final rule reflects thepossible range that a negativeadjustment could span (¥0.6 percent to0.0 percent adjustment) based on ouranalyses that intensity has declinedduring that 5-year period. While thecalculation of the adjustment forintensity is identical in both the capitaland the operating update frameworks,consistent with past capital updaterecommendations and the FY 2001operating recommendation, we did notmake a negative adjustment for intensityin the FY 2001 capital update.

b. Comparison of HCFA and MedPACUpdate Recommendations. MedPAC’sFY 2001 update recommendation forcapital prospective payments was notincluded in its March 2000 Report toCongress. In the May 5, 2000 proposedrule, we stated that we would addressthe comparison of HCFA’s updaterecommendation and MedPAC’s updaterecommendation in this final rule, oncewe have had the opportunity to reviewthe data analyses that substantiateMedPAC’s recommendation.

In its June 2000 Report to Congress,MedPAC presented a combinedoperating and capital update forhospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem payments for FY 2001, andrecommended that Congress implementa single combined (operating andcapital) prospective payment systemrate. With the end of the transition tofully prospective capital paymentsending with FY 2001, both operatingand capital prospective systempayments will be made using standardFederal rates adjusted by hospitalspecific payment variables. Currently,section 1886(b)(3)(B)(i)(XVI) of the Actsets forth the FY 2001 percentageincrease in the prospective paymentsystem operating cost standardizedamounts. The prospective paymentsystem capital update is set under theframework established by the Secretaryoutlined in § 412.308(c)(1).

For FY 2001, MedPAC’s updateframework supports a combinedoperating and capital update forhospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem payments of 3.5 percent to 4.0percent (or between the increase in thecombined operating and capital marketbasket plus 0.6 percentage points andthe increase in the combined operatingand capital market basket plus 1.1percentage points). MedPAC also notesthat while the number of hospitals withnegative inpatient hospital margins haveincreased in FY 1998 (mostly likely asthe result of the implementation of Pub.L. 105–33), overall high inpatientMedicare margins generally offsethospital losses on other lines ofMedicare services. MedPAC continuesto project positive (greater than 11percentage points) Medicare inpatienthospital margins through FY 2002.

MedPAC’s FY 2001 combinedoperating and capital update frameworkuses a weighted average of HCFA’sforecasts of the operating (PPS InputPrice Index) and capital (CIPI) marketbaskets. This combined market basket isused to develop an estimate of thechange in overall operating and capitalprices. MedPAC calculated a combinedmarket basket forecast by weighting theoperating market basket forecast by 0.92

and the capital market basket forecast by0.08, since operating costs are estimatedto represent 92 percent of total hospitalcosts (capital costs are estimated torepresent the remaining 8 percent oftotal hospital costs). MedPAC’scombined market basket for FY 2001 isestimated to increase by 2.9 percent,based on HCFA’s March 2000 forecastedoperating market basket increase of 3.1percent and HCFA’s March 2000forecasted capital market basketincrease of 0.9 percent.

HCFA’s Response to MedPAC’sRecommendation: As we stated in theMay 5, 2000 proposed rule (65 FR26317), we responded to a similarcomment in the July 30, 1999 final rule(64 FR 41552), the July 31, 1998 finalrule (63 FR 41013), and the September1, 1995 final rule (60 FR 45816). Inthose rules, we stated that our long-termgoal was to develop a single updateframework for operating and capitalprospective payments and that wewould begin development of a unifiedframework. However, we have not yetdeveloped such a single framework asthe actual operating system update hasbeen determined by Congress throughFY 2002. In the meantime, we intend tomaintain as much consistency aspossible with the current operatingframework in order to facilitate theeventual development of a unifiedframework. We maintain our goal ofcombining the update frameworks at theend of the 10-year capital transitionperiod (the end of FY 2001) and mayexamine combining the paymentsystems post-transition. Because of thesimilarity of the update frameworks, webelieve that they could be combinedwith little difficulty.

Our recommendation for updating theprospective payment system capitalFederal rate is supported by thefollowing analyses that measure changesin scientific and technological advances,practice pattern changes, changes incase-mix, the effect of reclassificationand recalibration, and forecast errorcorrection. MedPAC recommends a 3.5to 4.0 percent combined operating andcapital update for hospital inpatientprospective payments. Under ourexisting capital update framework, weare recommending a 0.9 percent updateto the capital Federal rate. For purposesof comparing HCFA’s capital updaterecommendation and MedPAC’s updaterecommendation for FY 2001, we haveisolated the capital component ofMedPAC’s combined market basketforecast, which was based on HCFA’sMarch 2000 CIPI forecast of 0.9 percent.As a result, MedPAC’s updaterecommendation for FY 2001 for capital



payments is between 1.4 percent and 1.9percent (see Table 1).

There are some differences betweenHCFA’s and MedPAC’s updateframeworks, which account for thedifference in the respective updaterecommendations. In it’s combined FY2001 update recommendation, MedPACuses HCFA’s capital input price index(the CIPI) as the starting point forestimating the change in prices since theprevious year. HCFA’s CIPI includesprice measures for interest expense,which are an indicator of the interestrates facing hospitals during theircapital purchasing decisions.Previously, MedPAC’s capital marketbasket did not include interest expense;instead it included a financing policyadjustment when necessary to accountfor the prolonged changes in interestrates. HCFA’s CIPI is vintage-weighted,meaning that it takes into account pricechanges from past purchases of capitalwhen determining the current periodupdate. In the past, MedPAC’s capitalmarket basket was not vintage-weighted,and only accounted for the current yearprice changes. This year, both HCFA’sand MedPAC’s FY 2001 updateframeworks use HCFA’s CIPI, which iscurrently forecast at 0.9 percent.

MedPAC and HCFA also differ in theadjustments they make in theirrespective frameworks. (See Table 1 fora comparison of HCFA and MedPAC’supdate recommendations.) MedPACmakes an adjustment for scientific andtechnological advances, which is offsetby a fixed standard for productivitygrowth. HCFA has not adopted aseparate adjustment for capital scienceand technology or productivity andefficiency. Instead, we have identified atotal intensity factor, which reflectsscientific and technological advances,but we have not identified an adequatetotal productivity measure. TheCommission also includes a site-of-caresubstitution adjustment (unbundling ofthe payment unit) to account for thedecline in the average length ofMedicare acute inpatient stays. Thisadjustment is designed to shift fundingalong with associated costs when

Medicare patients are discharged topostacute settings that replace acuteimpatient days. Other factors, such astechnological advances that allow for adecreased need in follow-up care andBBA mandated policy on payment fortransfer cases that limits paymentswithin certain DRGs, are reflected in thesite-of-care substitution adjustment aswell. A negative intensity adjustmentwould capture the site-of-caresubstitution accounted for in MedPAC’supdate framework. However, we did notmake a negative adjustment for intensitythis year. We may examine theappropriateness of adopting a negativeintensity adjustment at a later date.

For FY 2001, MedPAC recommends a0.0 percent combined adjustment forsite-of-care substitutions. MedPACrecommends a 0.0 to a 0.5 percentcombined adjustment for scientific andtechnological advances, which wasoffset by a fixed productivity standardof 0.5 percent for FY 2001. Werecommend a 0.0 percent intensityadjustment.

Additionally, MedPAC has includedan adjustment for one-time factors toaccount for significant costs incurred byhospitals for unusual, non-recurringevents or for the costs of major newregulatory requirements. TheCommission is not recommending anyadditional allowance for FY 2001 andrecommends a 0.0 percent combinedadjustment for one-time factors for FY2001.

MedPAC makes a two-part adjustmentfor case-mix changes, which takes intoaccount changes in case-mix in the pastyear. They recommend a 0.5 percentcombined adjustment for DRG codingchange and a 0.0 percent combinedadjustment for within-DRG complexitychange. This results in a combined totalcase mix adjustment of 0.5 percent. Werecommend a 0.0 percent total case-mixadjustment, since we are projecting a 0.5percent increase in the case-mix indexand we estimate that real case-mixincrease will equal 0.5 percent in FY2001.

We recommend a 0.0 percentadjustment for forecast error correction.

MedPAC’s combined FY 2001 updaterecommendation includes a 0.1 percentadjustment for forecast error correction.However, they noted that this forecasterror adjustment is a result of thedifference between the forecasted FY1999 operating market basket of 2.4percent and the actual FY 1999operating market basket increase of 2.5percent. The FY 1999 capital marketbasket forecast was equal to the actualobserved increase of 0.7 percent forcapital costs. Therefore, we haveincluded 0.0 percent adjustment for FY1999 forecast error correction in thecomparison of MedPAC’s and HCFA’supdate recommendations for FY 2001shown below in Table 1.

We applied MedPAC’s ratio ofhospital capital costs to total hospitalcosts (8 percent) to the adjustmentfactors in their update framework forcomparison with HCFA’s capital updateframework. The net result of theseadjustments is that MedPAC hasrecommended a 0.9 to 1.0 percentupdate to the capital Federal rate for FY2001. MedPAC believes that the annualupdates to the capital and operatingpayments under the prospectivepayment system should not differsubstantially, even though they aredetermined separately, since theycorrespond to costs generated byproviding the same inpatient hospitalservices to the same Medicare patients.We describe the basis for our 0.9 percenttotal capital update for FY 2001 in thepreceding section. While ourrecommendation is below the rangerecommended by MedPAC, in past yearsour update recommendation has beenabove the lower limit of MedPAC’supdate recommendation. For instance,for FY 2000 MedPAC’s updaterecommendation was ¥1.1 percent to1.8 percent. HCFA’s FY 2000 updatefactor was 0.3 percent, which is 1.4percentage points higher than the lowerlimit of MedPAC’s updaterecommendation. For FY 2001, ourupdate 0.9 percent is only 0.5percentage points below MedPAC’slower limit of their recommendation.

TABLE 1.—HCFA’S FY 2001 UPDATE FACTOR AND MEDPAC’S RECOMMENDATION

HCFA’s up-date factor

MedPAC’srec-

ommenda-tion

Capital Input Price Index ................................................................................................................................................... 0.9 0.91

Policy Adjustment Factors

Intensity .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.0Science and Technology ............................................................................................................................................ .................... 0.0 to 0.5Intensity ...................................................................................................................................................................... .................... (2)



TABLE 1.—HCFA’S FY 2001 UPDATE FACTOR AND MEDPAC’S RECOMMENDATION—Continued

HCFA’s up-date factor

MedPAC’srec-

ommenda-tion

Real within DRG Change ........................................................................................................................................... .................... (3)

Site-of-Care Substitution .................................................................................................................................................... .................... 0.0

Subtotal ....................................................................................................................................................................... 0.0 0.0 to 0.5

Case-Mix Adjustment Factors

Projected Case-Mix Change .............................................................................................................................................. ¥0.5Real Across DRG Change ................................................................................................................................................ 0.5Coding Change .................................................................................................................................................................. .................... 0.5Real within DRG Change .................................................................................................................................................. 4 0.0

Subtotal ....................................................................................................................................................................... 0.0 0.5

One-Time Factors .............................................................................................................................................................. .................... 0.0Effect of FY 1998 Reclassification and Recalibration ....................................................................................................... 0.0Forecast Error Correction .................................................................................................................................................. 0.0 0.0

Total Update ............................................................................................................................................................... 0.9 1.4 to 1.9

1 Used HCFA’s March 2000 capital market basket forecast in its combined update recommendations.2 Included in MedPAC’s productivity offset in its science and technology adjustment.3 Included in MedPAC’s case-mix adjustment.4 Included in HCFA’s intensity factor.

2. Outlier Payment Adjustment Factor

Section 412.312(c) establishes aunified outlier methodology forinpatient operating and inpatientcapital-related costs. A single set ofthresholds is used to identify outliercases for both inpatient operating andinpatient capital-related payments.Outlier payments are made only on theportion of the capital Federal rate thatis used to calculate the hospital’sinpatient capital-related payments (forexample, 100 percent for cost reportingperiods beginning in FY 2001 forhospitals paid under the fullyprospective payment methodology).Section 412.308(c)(2) provides that thestandard Federal rate for inpatientcapital-related costs be reduced by anadjustment factor equal to the estimatedproportion of outlier payments underthe capital Federal rate to total inpatientcapital-related payments under thecapital Federal rate. The outlierthresholds are set so that operatingoutlier payments are projected to be 5.1percent of total operating DRGpayments. The inpatient capital-relatedoutlier reduction factor reflects theinpatient capital-related outlierpayments that would be made if allhospitals were paid 100 percent of thecapital Federal rate. For purposes ofcalculating the outlier thresholds andthe outlier reduction factor, we modelpayments as if all hospitals were paid100 percent of the capital Federal ratebecause, as explained above, outlier

payments are made only on the portionof the capital Federal rate that isincluded in the hospital’s inpatientcapital-related payments.

In the July 30, 1999 final rule, weestimated that outlier payments forcapital in FY 2000 would equal 5.98percent of inpatient capital-relatedpayments based on the capital Federalrate (64 FR 41553). Accordingly, weapplied an outlier adjustment factor of0.9402 to the capital Federal rate. Basedon the thresholds as set forth in sectionII.A.4.d. of this Addendum, we estimatethat outlier payments for capital willequal 5.91 percent of inpatient capital-related payments based on the capitalFederal rate in FY 2001. Therefore, weare establishing an outlier adjustmentfactor of 0.9409 to the capital Federalrate. Thus, the projected percentage ofcapital outlier payments to total capitalstandard payments for FY 2001 is lowerthan the percentage for FY 2000.

The outlier reduction factors are notbuilt permanently into the rates; that is,they are not applied cumulatively indetermining the capital Federal rate.Therefore, the net change in the outlieradjustment to the capital Federal rate forFY 2001 is 1.0007 (0.9409/0.9402). Theoutlier adjustment increases the FY2001 capital Federal rate by 0.07 percentcompared with the FY 2000 outlieradjustment.

3. Budget Neutrality Adjustment Factorfor Changes in DRG Classifications andWeights and the Geographic AdjustmentFactor

Section 412.308(c)(4)(ii) requires thatthe capital Federal rate be adjusted sothat aggregate payments for the fiscalyear based on the capital Federal rateafter any changes resulting from theannual DRG reclassification andrecalibration and changes in the GAFare projected to equal aggregatepayments that would have been madeon the basis of the capital Federal ratewithout such changes. We use theactuarial model, described in AppendixB of this final rule, to estimate theaggregate payments that would havebeen made on the basis of the capitalFederal rate without changes in the DRGclassifications and weights and in theGAF. We also use the model to estimateaggregate payments that would be madeon the basis of the capital Federal rateas a result of those changes. We then usethese figures to compute the adjustmentrequired to maintain budget neutralityfor changes in DRG weights and in theGAF.

For FY 2000, we calculated a GAF/DRG budget neutrality factor of 0.9985.In the proposed rule for FY 2001, weproposed a GAF/DRG budget neutralityfactor of 0.9986. In this final rule, basedon calculations using updated data, weare applying a factor of 0.9979. TheGAF/DRG budget neutrality factors arebuilt permanently into the rates; that is,



they are applied cumulatively indetermining the capital Federal rate.This follows from the requirement thatestimated aggregate payments each yearbe no more than they would have beenin the absence of the annual DRGreclassification and recalibration andchanges in the GAF. The incrementalchange in the adjustment from FY 2000to FY 2001 is 0.9979. The cumulativechange in the rate due to thisadjustment is 0.9993 (the product of theincremental factors for FY 1993, FY1994, FY 1995, FY 1996, FY 1997, FY1998, FY 1999, FY 2000, and FY 2001:0.9980 × 1.0053 × 0.9998 × 0.9994 ×0.9987 × 0.9989 × 1.0028 × 0.9985 ×0.9979 = 0.9993).

This factor accounts for DRGreclassifications and recalibration andfor changes in the GAF. It alsoincorporates the effects on the GAF ofFY 2001 geographic reclassificationdecisions made by the MGCRBcompared to FY 2000 decisions.However, it does not account forchanges in payments due to changes inthe DSH and IME adjustment factors orin the large urban add-on.

4. Exceptions Payment AdjustmentFactor

Section 412.308(c)(3) requires that thestandard capital Federal rate forinpatient capital-related costs bereduced by an adjustment factor equalto the estimated proportion ofadditional payments for exceptionsunder § 412.348 relative to totalpayments under the hospital-specificrate and capital Federal rate. We use themodel originally developed fordetermining the budget neutralityadjustment factor to determine theexceptions payment adjustment factor.We describe that model in Appendix Bto this final rule.

For FY 2000, we estimated thatexceptions payments would equal 2.70

percent of aggregate payments based onthe capital Federal rate and the hospital-specific rate. Therefore, we applied anexceptions reduction factor of 0.9730 (1¥0.0270) in determining the capitalFederal rate. In the May 5, 2000proposed rule, we estimated thatexceptions payments for FY 2001 wouldequal 2.04 percent of aggregatepayments based on the capital Federalrate and the hospital-specific rate.Therefore, we proposed an exceptionspayment reduction factor of 0.9796 tothe capital Federal rate for FY 2001. Theproposed exceptions reduction factor forFY 2001 was 0.68 percent higher thanthe factor for FY 2000. For this finalrule, based on updated data, weestimate that exceptions payments forFY 2001 will equal 2.15 percent ofaggregate payments based on the capitalFederal rate and the hospital-specificrate. We are, therefore, applying anexceptions payment reduction factor of0.9785 (1 ¥ 0.0215) to the capitalFederal rate for FY 2001. The finalexceptions reduction factor for FY 2001is 0.57 percent higher than the factor forFY 2000 and 0.11 percent lower thanthe factor in the FY 2001 proposed rule.

The exceptions reduction factors arenot built permanently into the rates; thatis, the factors are not appliedcumulatively in determining the capitalFederal rate. Therefore, the netadjustment to the FY 2001 capitalFederal rate is 0.9785/0.9730, or 1.0057.

5. Standard Capital Federal Rate for FY2001

For FY 2000, the capital Federal ratewas $377.03. As a result of changes thatwe proposed to the factors used toestablish the capital Federal rate, weproposed that the FY 2001 capitalFederal rate would be $383.06. In thisfinal rule, we are establishing the capitalFederal rate of $382.03. The capital

Federal rate for FY 2001 was calculatedas follows:

• The FY 2001 update factor is1.0090; that is, the update is 0.90percent.

• The FY 2001 budget neutralityadjustment factor that is applied to thestandard capital Federal payment ratefor changes in the DRG relative weightsand in the GAF is 0.9979.

• The FY 2001 outlier adjustmentfactor is 0.9409.

• The FY 2001 exceptions paymentsadjustment factor is 0.9785.

Since the capital Federal rate hasalready been adjusted for differences incase-mix, wages, cost-of-living, indirectmedical education costs, and paymentsto hospitals serving a disproportionateshare of low-income patients, we havemade no additional adjustments in thestandard capital Federal rate for thesefactors other than the budget neutralityfactor for changes in the DRG relativeweights and the GAF.

We are providing a chart that showshow each of the factors and adjustmentsfor FY 2001 affected the computation ofthe FY 2001 capital Federal rate incomparison to the FY 2000 capitalFederal rate. The FY 2001 update factorhas the effect of increasing the capitalFederal rate by 0.90 percent comparedto the rate in FY 2000, while thegeographic and DRG budget neutralityfactor has the effect of decreasing thecapital Federal rate by 0.21 percent. TheFY 2001 outlier adjustment factor hasthe effect of increasing the capitalFederal rate by 0.07 percent comparedto FY 2000. The FY 2001 exceptionsreduction factor has the effect ofincreasing the capital Federal rate by0.57 percent compared to the exceptionsreduction for FY 2000. The combinedeffect of all the changes is to increasethe capital Federal rate by 1.33 percentfor FY 2001 compared to the capitalFederal rate for FY 2000.

COMPARISON OF FACTORS AND ADJUSTMENTS: FY 2000 CAPITAL FEDERAL RATE AND FY 2001 CAPITAL FEDERAL RATE

FY 2000 FY 2001 Change Percentchange

Update factor 1 ................................................................................................................. 1.0030 1.0090 1.0090 0.90GAF/DRG Adjustment Factor 1 ........................................................................................ 0.9985 0.9979 0.9979 ¥0.21Outlier Adjustment Factor 2 .............................................................................................. 0.9402 0.9409 1.0007 0.07Exceptions Adjustment Factor 2 ....................................................................................... 0.9730 0.9785 1.0057 0.57Federal Rate .................................................................................................................... $377.03 $382.03 1.0133 1.33

1 The update factor and the GAF/DRG budget neutrality factors are built permanently into the rates. Thus, for example, the incremental changefrom FY 2000 to FY 2001 resulting from the application of the 0.9979 GAF/DRG budget neutrality factor for FY 2001 is 0.9979.

2 The outlier reduction factor and the exceptions reduction factor are not built permanently into the rates; that is, these factors are not appliedcumulatively in determining the rates. Thus, for example, the net change resulting from the application of the FY 2001 outlier reduction factor is0.9409/0.9402, or 1.0007.

As stated previously in this section,the FY 2001 capital Federal rate has

increased 1.33 percent compared to theFY 2000 capital Federal rate as a result

of the combination of the FY 2001factors and adjustments applied to the



capital Federal rate. Specifically, thecapital update factor increased the FY2001 capital Federal rate 0.90 percentover FY 2000. The exceptions reductionfactor increased 0.57 percent from0.9730 for FY 2000 to 0.9785 for FY2001, which results in an increase to thecapital Federal rate for FY 2001compared to FY 2000. Also, the outlier

adjustment factor increased 0.07 percentfrom 0.9402 for FY 2000 to 0.9409 forFY 2001, which results in an increase tothe capital Federal rate for FY 2001compared to FY 2000. The GAF/DRGadjustment factor decreased 0.21percent from 0.9986 for FY 2000 to0.9979 for FY 2001, which results in adecrease the capital Federal rate for FY

2001 compared to FY 2000. The effectof all of these changes is a 1.33 percentincrease in the FY 2001 capital Federalrate compared to FY 2000.

We are also providing a chart thatshows how the final FY 2001 capitalFederal rate differs from the proposedFY 2001 capital Federal rate.

COMPARISON OF FACTORS AND ADJUSTMENTS: FY 2001 PROPOSED CAPITAL FEDERAL RATE AND FY 2001 FINALCAPITAL FEDERAL RATE

ProposedFY 2001

Final FY2001 Change Percent

change

Update Factor1 ................................................................................................................ 1.0090 1.0090 1.0000 0.00GAF/DRG Adjustment Factor .......................................................................................... 0.9986 0.9979 0.9992 ¥0.08Outlier Adjustment Factor ................................................................................................ 0.9416 0.9409 0.9992 ¥0.08Exceptions Adjustment Factor ......................................................................................... 0.9796 0.9785 0.9989 ¥0.11Federal Rate .................................................................................................................... $383.06 $382.03 0.9973 ¥0.27

6. Special Rate for Puerto Rico HospitalsAs explained at the beginning of

section IV of this Addendum, hospitalsin Puerto Rico are paid based on 50percent of the Puerto Rico rate and 50percent of the capital Federal rate. ThePuerto Rico rate is derived from thecosts of Puerto Rico hospitals only,while the capital Federal rate is derivedfrom the costs of all acute care hospitalsparticipating in the prospectivepayment system (including PuertoRico). To adjust hospitals’ capitalpayments for geographic variations incapital costs, we apply a geographicadjustment factor (GAF) to both portionsof the blended rate. The GAF iscalculated using the operatingprospective payment system wage indexand varies depending on the MSA orrural area in which the hospital islocated. We use the Puerto Rico wageindex to determine the GAF for thePuerto Rico part of the capital-blendedrate and the national wage index todetermine the GAF for the national partof the blended rate.

Since we implemented a separateGAF for Puerto Rico in FY 1998, we alsoapply separate budget neutralityadjustments for the national GAF andfor the Puerto Rico GAF. However, weapply the same budget neutrality factorfor DRG reclassifications andrecalibration nationally and for PuertoRico. The Puerto Rico GAF budgetneutrality factor is 1.0037, while theDRG adjustment is 1.0001, for acombined cumulative adjustment of1.0037.

In computing the payment for aparticular Puerto Rico hospital, the

Puerto Rico portion of the rate (50percent) is multiplied by the PuertoRico-specific GAF for the MSA in whichthe hospital is located, and the nationalportion of the rate (50 percent) ismultiplied by the national GAF for theMSA in which the hospital is located(which is computed from national datafor all hospitals in the United States andPuerto Rico). In FY 1998, weimplemented a 17.78 percent reductionto the Puerto Rico rate as a result ofPublic Law 105–33.

For FY 2000, before application of theGAF, the special rate for Puerto Ricohospitals was $174.81. With the changeswe proposed to the factors used todetermine the rate, the proposed FY2001 special rate for Puerto Rico was$185.38. In this final rule, the FY 2001capital rate for Puerto Rico is $185.06.

B. Determination of Hospital-SpecificRate Update

Section 412.328(e) of the regulationsprovides that the hospital-specific ratefor FY 2001 be determined by adjustingthe FY 2000 hospital-specific rate by thefollowing factors:

1. Hospital-Specific Rate Update FactorThe hospital-specific rate is updated

in accordance with the update factor forthe standard capital Federal ratedetermined under § 412.308(c)(1). ForFY 2001, we are updating the hospital-specific rate by a factor of 1.0090.

2. Exceptions Payment AdjustmentFactor

For FYs 1992 through FY 2001, theupdated hospital-specific rate ismultiplied by an adjustment factor to

account for estimated exceptionspayments for capital-related costs under§ 412.348, determined as a proportion ofthe total amount of payments under thehospital-specific rate and the capitalFederal rate. For FY 2001, we estimatedin the proposed rule that exceptionspayments would be 2.04 percent ofaggregate payments based on the capitalFederal rate and the hospital-specificrate. Therefore, the proposed exceptionsadjustment factor was 0.9796. In thisfinal rule, we estimate that exceptionspayments will be 2.15 percent ofaggregate payments based on the capitalFederal rate and hospital-specific rate.Accordingly, for FY 2001, we areapplying an exceptions reduction factorof 0.9785 to the hospital-specific rate.The exceptions reduction factors are notbuilt permanently into the rates; that is,the factors are not applied cumulativelyin determining the hospital-specificrate. The net adjustment to the FY 2001hospital-specific rate is 0.9785/0.9730,or 1.0057.

3. Net Change to Hospital-Specific Rate

We are providing a chart to show thenet change to the hospital-specific rate.The chart shows the factors for FY 2000and FY 2001 and the net adjustment foreach factor. It also shows that thecumulative net adjustment from FY2000 to FY 2001 is 1.0147, whichrepresents an increase of 1.47 percent tothe hospital-specific rate. For eachhospital, the FY 2001 hospital-specificrate is determined by multiplying theFY 2000 hospital-specific rate by thecumulative net adjustment of 1.0147.



FY 2001 UPDATE AND ADJUSTMENTS TO HOSPITAL-SPECIFIC RATES

FY 2000 FY 2001 Net adjust-ment

Percentchange

Update Factor .................................................................................................................. 1.0030 1.0090 1.0090 0.90Exceptions Payment Adjustment Factor ......................................................................... 0.9730 0.9785 1.0057 0.57Cumulative Adjustments .................................................................................................. 0.9759 0.9903 1.0147 1.47

Note: The update factor for the hospital-specific rate is applied cumulatively in determining the rates. Thus, the incremental increase in the up-date factor from FY 2000 to FY 2001 is 1.0090. In contrast, the exceptions payment adjustment factor is not applied cumulatively. Thus, for ex-ample, the incremental increase in the exceptions reduction factor from FY 2000 to FY 2001 is 0.9785/0.9730, or 1.0057.

C. Calculation of Inpatient Capital-Related Prospective Payments for FY2001

During the capital prospectivepayment system transition period, ahospital is paid for the inpatient capital-related costs under one of two paymentmethodologies—the fully prospectivepayment methodology or the hold-harmless methodology. The paymentmethodology applicable to a particularhospital is determined when a hospitalcomes under the prospective paymentsystem for capital-related costs bycomparing its hospital-specific rate tothe capital Federal rate applicable to thehospital’s first cost reporting periodunder the prospective payment system.The applicable capital Federal rate wasdetermined by making adjustments asfollows:

• For outliers, by dividing thestandard capital Federal rate by theoutlier reduction factor for that fiscalyear; and

• For the payment adjustmentsapplicable to the hospital, bymultiplying the hospital’s GAF,disproportionate share adjustmentfactor, and IME adjustment factor, whenappropriate.

If the hospital-specific rate is abovethe applicable capital Federal rate, thehospital is paid under the hold-harmlessmethodology. If the hospital-specificrate is below the applicable capitalFederal rate, the hospital is paid underthe fully prospective methodology.

For purposes of calculating paymentsfor each discharge under both the hold-harmless payment methodology and thefully prospective payment methodology,the standard capital Federal rate isadjusted as follows: (Standard FederalRate) × (DRG weight) × (GAF) × (LargeUrban Add-on, if applicable) × (COLAadjustment for hospitals located inAlaska and Hawaii) × (1 +Disproportionate Share AdjustmentFactor + IME Adjustment Factor, ifapplicable). The result is the adjustedcapital Federal rate.

Payments under the hold-harmlessmethodology are determined under oneof two formulas. A hold-harmless

hospital is paid the higher of thefollowing:

• 100 percent of the adjusted capitalFederal rate for each discharge; or

• An old capital payment equal to 85percent (100 percent for sole communityhospitals) of the hospital’s allowableMedicare inpatient old capital costs perdischarge for the cost reporting periodplus a new capital payment based on apercentage of the adjusted capitalFederal rate for each discharge. Thepercentage of the adjusted capitalFederal rate equals the ratio of thehospital’s allowable Medicare newcapital costs to its total Medicareinpatient capital-related costs in the costreporting period.

Once a hospital receives paymentbased on 100 percent of the adjustedcapital Federal rate in a cost reportingperiod beginning on or after October 1,1994 (or the first cost reporting periodafter obligated capital that is recognizedas old capital under § 412.302(c) is putin use for patient care, if later), thehospital continues to receive capitalprospective payment system paymentson that basis for the remainder of thetransition period.

Payment for each discharge under thefully prospective methodology is basedon the applicable transition blendpercentage of the hospital-specific rateand the adjusted capital Federal rate.Thus, for FY 2001 payments under thefully prospective methodology will bebased on 100 percent of the adjustedcapital Federal rate and zero percent ofthe hospital-specific rate.

Hospitals also may receive outlierpayments for those cases that qualifyunder the thresholds established foreach fiscal year. Section 412.312(c)provides for a single set of thresholds toidentify outlier cases for both inpatientoperating and inpatient capital-relatedpayments. Outlier payments are madeonly on that portion of the capitalFederal rate that is used to calculate thehospital’s inpatient capital-relatedpayments. For fully prospectivehospitals, that portion is 100 percent ofthe capital Federal rate for dischargesoccurring in cost reporting periodsbeginning during FY 2001. Thus, a fully

prospective hospital will receive 100percent of the capital-related outlierpayment calculated for the case fordischarges occurring in cost reportingperiods beginning in FY 2001. For hold-harmless hospitals that are paid 85percent of their reasonable costs for oldinpatient capital, the portion of thecapital Federal rate that is included inthe hospital’s outlier payments is basedon the hospital’s ratio of Medicareinpatient costs for new capital to totalMedicare inpatient capital costs. Forhold-harmless hospitals that are paid100 percent of the capital Federal rate,100 percent of the capital Federal rateis included in the hospital’s outlierpayments.

The outlier thresholds for FY 2001 arein section II.A.4.c. of this Addendum.For FY 2001, a case qualifies as a costoutlier if the cost for the case (afterstandardization for the indirect teachingadjustment and disproportionate shareadjustment) is greater than theprospective payment rate for the DRGplus $17,550.

During the capital prospectivepayment system transition period, ahospital also may receive an additionalpayment under an exceptions process ifits total inpatient capital-relatedpayments are less than a minimumpercentage of its allowable Medicareinpatient capital-related costs. Theminimum payment level is establishedby class of hospital under § 412.348.The minimum payment levels forportions of cost reporting periodsoccurring in FY 2001 are:

• Sole community hospitals (locatedin either an urban or rural area), 90percent;

• Urban hospitals with at least 100beds and a disproportionate sharepatient percentage of at least 20.2percent or that receive more than 30percent of their net inpatient carerevenues from State or localgovernments for indigent care, 80percent; and

• All other hospitals, 70 percent.Under § 412.348(d), the amount of the

exceptions payment is determined bycomparing the cumulative paymentsmade to the hospital under the capitalprospective payment system to the



cumulative minimum payment levelsapplicable to the hospital for each costreporting period subject to that system.Any amount by which the hospital’scumulative payments exceed itscumulative minimum payment isdeducted from the additional paymentthat would otherwise be payable for acost reporting period. New hospitals areexempted from the capital prospectivepayment system for their first 2 years ofoperation and are paid 85 percent oftheir reasonable costs during thatperiod. A new hospital’s old capitalcosts are its allowable costs for capitalassets that were put in use for patientcare on or before the later of December31, 1990, or the last day of the hospital’sbase year cost reporting period, and aresubject to the rules pertaining to oldcapital and obligated capital as of theapplicable date. Effective with the thirdyear of operation, we will pay thehospital under either the fullyprospective methodology, using theappropriate transition blend in thatFederal fiscal year, or the hold-harmlessmethodology. If the hold-harmlessmethodology is applicable, the hold-harmless payment for assets in useduring the base period would extend for8 years, even if the hold-harmlesspayments extend beyond the normaltransition period.

D. Capital Input Price Index

1. BackgroundLike the operating input price index,

the Capital Input Price Index (CIPI) is afixed-weight price index that measuresthe price changes associated with costsduring a given year. The CIPI differsfrom the operating input price index inone important aspect—the CIPI reflectsthe vintage nature of capital, which isthe acquisition and use of capital overtime. Capital expenses in any given yearare determined by the stock of capital inthat year (that is, capital that remains onhand from all current and prior capitalacquisitions). An index measuringcapital price changes needs to reflectthis vintage nature of capital. Therefore,the CIPI was developed to capture thevintage nature of capital by using aweighted-average of past capitalpurchase prices up to and including thecurrent year.

Using Medicare cost reports,American Hospital Association (AHA)data, and Securities Data Company data,a vintage-weighted price index wasdeveloped to measure price increasesassociated with capital expenses. Weperiodically update the base year for theoperating and capital input prices toreflect the changing composition ofinputs for operating and capital

expenses. Currently, the CIPI is based toFY 1992 and was last rebased in 1997.The most recent explanation of the CIPIwas discussed in the final rule withcomment period for FY 1998 publishedon August 29, 1997 (62 FR 46050).

2. Forecast of the CIPI for Federal FiscalYear 2001

We are forecasting the CIPI to increase0.9 percent for FY 2001. This reflects aprojected 1.5 percent increase invintage-weighted depreciation prices(building and fixed equipment, andmovable equipment) and a 3.6 percentincrease in other capital expense pricesin FY 2001, partially offset by a 1.2percent decline in vintage-weightedinterest rates in FY 2001. The weightedaverage of these three factors producesthe 0.9 percent increase for the CIPI asa whole.

V. Changes to Payment Rates forExcluded Hospitals and Hospital Units:Rate-of-Increase Percentages

The inpatient operating costs ofhospitals and hospital units excludedfrom the prospective payment systemare subject to rate-of-increase limitsestablished under the authority ofsection 1886(b) of the Act, which isimplemented in regulations at § 413.40.Under these limits, a hospital-specifictarget amount (expressed in terms of theinpatient operating cost per discharge)is set for each hospital, based on thehospital’s own historical costexperience trended forward by theapplicable rate-of-increase percentages(update factors). In the case of apsychiatric hospital or hospital unit, arehabilitation hospital or hospital unit,or a long-term care hospital, the targetamount may not exceed the updatedfigure for the 75th percentile of targetamounts adjusted to take into accountdifferences between average wage-related costs in the area of the hospitaland the national average of such costswithin the same class of hospital forhospitals and units in the same class(psychiatric, rehabilitation, and long-term care) for cost reporting periodsending during FY 1996. The targetamount is multiplied by the number ofMedicare discharges in a hospital’s costreporting period, yielding the ceiling onaggregate Medicare inpatient operatingcosts for the cost reporting period.

Each hospital-specific target amountis adjusted annually, at the beginning ofeach hospital’s cost reporting period, byan applicable update factor.

Section 1886(b)(3)(B) of the Act,which is implemented in regulations at§ 413.40(c)(3)(vii), provides that for costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 1998 and before October 1,

2002, the update factor for a hospital orunit depends on the hospital’s orhospital unit’s costs in relation to theceiling for the most recent cost reportingperiod for which information isavailable. For hospitals with costsexceeding the ceiling by 10 percent ormore, the update factor is the marketbasket increase. For hospitals with costsexceeding the ceiling by 10 percent ormore, the update factor is the marketbasket increase. For hospitals with costsexceeding the ceiling by less than 10percent, the update factor is the marketbasket minus .25 percent for eachpercentage point by which costs are lessthan 10 percent over the ceiling. Forhospitals with costs equal to or less thanthe ceiling but greater than 66.7 percentof the ceiling, the update factor is thegreater of 0 percent or the market basketminus 2.5 percent. For hospitals withcosts that do not exceed 66.7 percent ofthe ceiling, the update factor is 0.

The most recent forecast of the marketbasket increase for FY 2001 for hospitalsand hospital units excluded from theprospective payment system is 3.4percent. Therefore, the update to ahospital’s target amount for its costreporting period beginning in FY 2001would be between 0.9 and 3.4 percent,or 0 percent, depending on thehospital’s or unit’s costs in relation toits rate-of-increase limit.

In addition, § 413.40(c)(4)(iii) requiresthat for cost reporting periods beginningon or after October 1, 1998 and beforeOctober 1, 2002, the target amount foreach psychiatric hospital or hospitalunit, rehabilitation hospital or hospitalunit, and long-term care hospital cannotexceed a cap on the target amounts forhospitals in the same class.

Section 121 of Public Law 106–113amended section 1886(b)(3)(H) of theAct to direct the Secretary to provide foran appropriate wage adjustment to thecaps on the target amounts forpsychiatric hospitals and units,rehabilitation hospitals and units, andlong-term care hospitals, effective forcost reporting periods beginning on orafter October 1, 1999, throughSeptember 30, 2002. We are publishingan interim final rule with commentperiod elsewhere in this issue of theFederal Register that implements thisprovision for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 1999and before October 1, 2000. This finalrule addresses the wage adjustment tothe caps for cost reporting periodsbeginning on or after October 1, 2000.

As discussed in section VI. of thepreamble of this final rule, undersection 121 of Public Law 106–113, thecap on the target amount per dischargeis determined by adding the hospital’s



nonlabor-related portion of the national75th percentile cap to its wage-adjusted,labor-related portion of the national75th percentile cap (the labor-relatedportion of costs equals 0.71553 and thenonlabor-related portion of costs equals0.28447). A hospital’s wage-adjusted,labor-related portion of the targetamount is calculated by multiplying thelabor-related portion of the national75th percentile cap for the hospital’sclass by the wage index under thehospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem (see § 412.63), without takinginto account reclassifications undersections 1886(d)(10) and (d)(8)(B) of theAct.

For cost reporting periods beginningin FY 2001, in the May 5, 2000proposed rule, we included thefollowing proposed caps:


or unit




We have reconsidered themethodology that was originally used tocalculate the labor-related and nonlabor-related portions of the proposed FY2001 wage neutralized national 75thpercentile caps on the target amountsfor each class of provider. Using therevised methodology discussedpreviously in this final rule, we havecalculated revised labor-related andnonlabor-related portions of the wage-neutralized 75th percentile caps for FY2001 for each class of hospital, updatedby the market basket percentageincrease of 3.4 percent. These revisedcaps are as follows:


or unit



Psychiatric ........ $8,131 $3,233Rehabilitation .... 15,164 6,029


or unit



Long-Term Care 29,284 11,642

Regulations at § 413.40(d) specify theformulas for determining bonus andrelief payments for excluded hospitalsand specify established criteria for anadditional bonus payment forcontinuous improvement. Regulations at§ 413.40(f)(2)(ii) specify the paymentmethodology for new hospitals andhospital units (psychiatric,rehabilitation, and long-term care)effective October 1, 1997.

VI. Tables

This section contains the tablesreferred to throughout the preamble tothis final rule and in this Addendum.For purposes of this final rule, and toavoid confusion, we have retained thedesignations of Tables 1 through 5 thatwere first used in the September 1, 1983initial prospective payment final rule(48 FR 39844). Tables 1A, 1C, 1D, 1E (anew table, as described in section II ofthis Addendum), 3C, 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, 4E,4F, 5, 6A, 6B, 6C, 6D, 6E, 6F, 6G, 7A,7B, 8A, and 8B are presented below.The tables presented below are asfollows:

Table 1A—National Adjusted OperatingStandardized Amounts, Labor/Nonlabor

Table 1C—Adjusted OperatingStandardized Amounts for PuertoRico, Labor/Nonlabor

Table 1D—Capital Standard FederalPayment Rate

Table 1E—National Adjusted OperatingStandardized Amounts for SoleCommunity Hospitals (SCH), Labor/Nonlabor

Table 3C—Hospital Case Mix Indexesfor Discharges Occurring in FederalFiscal Year 1999 and HospitalAverage Hourly Wage for FederalFiscal Year 2001 Wage Index

Table 4A—Wage Index and CapitalGeographic Adjustment Factor(GAF) for Urban Areas

Table 4B—Wage Index and CapitalGeographic Adjustment Factor(GAF) for Rural Areas

Table 4C—Wage Index and CapitalGeographic Adjustment Factor(GAF) for Hospitals That AreReclassified

Table 4D—Average Hourly Wage forUrban Areas

Table 4E—Average Hourly Wage forRural Areas

Table 4F—Puerto Rico Wage Index andCapital Geographic AdjustmentFactor (GAF)

Table 5—List of Diagnosis RelatedGroups (DRGs), Relative WeightingFactors, Geometric Mean Length ofStay, and Arithmetic Mean Lengthof Stay Points Used in theProspective Payment System

Table 6A—New Diagnosis CodesTable 6B—New Procedure CodesTable 6C—Invalid Diagnosis CodesTable 6D—Revised Diagnosis Code

TitlesTable 6E—Revised Procedure CodesTable 6F—Additions to the CC

Exclusions ListTable 6G—Deletions to the CC

Exclusions ListTable 7A—Medicare Prospective

Payment System Selected PercentileLengths of Stay FY 99 MedPARUpdate March 2000 GROUPERV18.0

Table 7B—Medicare ProspectivePayment System Selected PercentileLengths of Stay FY 99 MedPARUpdate March 2000 GROUPERV18.0

Table 8A—Statewide Average OperatingCost-to-Charge Ratios for Urban andRural Hospitals (Case Weighted)March 2000

Table 8B—Statewide Average CapitalCost-to-Charge Ratios (CaseWeighted) March 2000

TABLE 1A.—NATIONAL ADJUSTED OPERATING STANDARDIZED AMOUNTS, LABOR/NONLABOR

Large urban areas Other areas

Labor-related Nonlabor-related Labor-related Nonlabor-related

$2,864.19 $1,164.21 $2,818.85 $1,145.78

TABLE 1C.—ADJUSTED OPERATING STANDARDIZED AMOUNTS FOR PUERTO RICO, LABOR/NONLABOR


Labor Nonlabor Labor Nonlabor

National ............................................................................................................ $2,839.54 $1,154.19 $2,839.54 $1,154.19Puerto Rico ...................................................................................................... $1,374.71 $553.36 $1,352.95 $544.60



TABLE 1D.—CAPITAL STANDARD FEDERAL PAYMENT RATE

Rate

National .................................................................................................................................................................................................... $382.03Puerto Rico .............................................................................................................................................................................................. $185.06

TABLE 1E.—NATIONAL ADJUSTED OPERATING STANDARDIZED AMOUNTS FOR SOLE COMMUNITY HOSPITALS, LABOR/NONLABOR


Labor-related Nonlabor-related Labor-related Nonlabor-related

$2,894.99 $1,176.73 $2,849.16 $1,158.10




TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITALGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS

Urban area(constituent counties)

Wageindex GAF

0040 Abilene, TX ....... 0.8240 0.8758Taylor, TX

0060 Aguadilla, PR .... 0.4391 0.5692Aguada, PRAguadilla, PRMoca, PR

0080 Akron, OH ......... 0.9736 0.9818Portage, OHSummit, OH

0120 Albany, GA ........ 0.9933 0.9954Dougherty, GALee, GA

0160 Albany-Schenec-tady-Troy, NY ............ 0.8549 0.8982Albany, NYMontgomery, NYRensselaer, NYSaratoga, NYSchenectady, NYSchoharie, NY

0200 Albuquerque,NM ............................. 0.9136 0.9400Bernalillo, NMSandoval, NMValencia, NM

0220 Alexandria, LA ... 0.8170 0.8707Rapides, LA

0240 Allentown-Beth-lehem-Easton, PA ..... 1.0040 1.0027Carbon, PALehigh, PANorthampton, PA

0280 Altoona, PA ....... 0.9346 0.9547Blair, PA

0320 Amarillo, TX ...... 0.8715 0.9101Potter, TXRandall, TX

0380 Anchorage, AK .. 1.2865 1.1883Anchorage, AK

0440 Ann Arbor, MI .... 1.1254 1.0843Lenawee, MILivingston, MIWashtenaw, MI

0450 Anniston, AL ...... 0.8284 0.8790Calhoun, AL

0460 Appleton-Osh-kosh-Neenah, WI ...... 0.9052 0.9341Calumet, WIOutagamie, WIWinnebago, WI

0470 Arecibo, PR ....... 0.4525 0.5810Arecibo, PRCamuy, PRHatillo, PR

0480 Asheville, NC .... 0.9516 0.9666Buncombe, NCMadison, NC

0500 Athens, GA ........ 0.9739 0.9821Clarke, GAMadison, GAOconee, GA

0520 1 Atlanta, GA ..... 1.0096 1.0066Barrow, GABartow, GACarroll, GACherokee, GAClayton, GACobb, GACoweta, GA

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITALGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin-ued


Wageindex GAF

DeKalb, GADouglas, GAFayette, GAForsyth, GAFulton, GAGwinnett, GAHenry, GANewton, GAPaulding, GAPickens, GARockdale, GASpalding, GAWalton, GA

0560 Atlantic-CapeMay, NJ ..................... 1.1182 1.0795Atlantic, NJCape May, NJ

0580 Auburn-Opelika,AL .............................. 0.8106 0.8661Lee, AL

0600 Augusta-Aiken,GA–SC ...................... 0.9160 0.9417Columbia, GAMcDuffie, GARichmond, GAAiken, SC Edgefield,

SC0640 1 Austin-San

Marcos, TX ................ 0.9577 0.9708Bastrop, TXCaldwell, TXHays, TXTravis, TXWilliamson, TX

0680 2 Bakersfield, CA 0.9861 0.9905Kern, CA

0720 1 Baltimore, MD 0.9365 0.9561Anne Arundel, MDBaltimore, MDBaltimore City, MDCarroll, MDHarford, MDHoward, MDQueen Anne’s, MD

0733 Bangor, ME ....... 0.9561 0.9697Penobscot, ME

0743 Barnstable-Yarmouth, MA ........... 1.3839 1.2492Barnstable, MA

0760 Baton Rouge, LA 0.8842 0.9192Ascension, LAEast Baton Rouge,

LALivingston, LAWest Baton Rouge,

LA0840 Beaumont-Port

Arthur, TX .................. 0.8744 0.9122Hardin, TXJefferson, TXOrange, TX

0860 Bellingham, WA 1.1439 1.0964Whatcom, WA

0870 2 Benton Harbor,MI .............................. 0.9021 0.9319Berrien, MI

0875 1 Bergen-Pas-saic, NJ ..................... 1.1605 1.1073



Wageindex GAF

Bergen, NJPassaic, NJ

0880 Billings, MT ....... 0.9591 0.9718Yellowstone, MT

0920 Biloxi-Gulfport-Pascagoula, MS ........ 0.8236 0.8756Hancock, MSHarrison, MSJackson, MS

0960 Binghamton, NY 0.8690 0.9083Broome, NYTioga, NY

1000 Birmingham, AL 0.8477 0.8930Blount, ALJefferson, ALSt. Clair, ALShelby, AL

1010 Bismarck, ND .... 0.7897 0.8507Burleigh, NDMorton, ND

1020 Bloomington, IN 0.8733 0.9114Monroe, IN

1040 Bloomington-Normal, IL ................. 0.9156 0.9414McLean, IL

1080 Boise City, ID .... 0.9042 0.9334Ada, IDCanyon, ID

1123 1 2 Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Lowell-Brockton, MA–NH (MA Hospitals) .... 1.1204 1.0810Bristol, MAEssex, MAMiddlesex, MANorfolk, MAPlymouth, MASuffolk, MAWorcester, MAHillsborough, NHMerrimack, NHRockingham, NHStrafford, NH

1123 1 Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Lowell-Brockton, MA–NH (NH Hospitals) .... 1.1160 1.0781Bristol, MAEssex, MAMiddlesex, MANorfolk, MAPlymouth, MASuffolk, MAWorcester, MAHillsborough, NHMerrimack, NHRockingham, NHStrafford, NH

1125 Boulder-Longmont, CO ........... 0.9731 0.9815Boulder, CO

1145 Brazoria, TX ...... 0.8658 0.9060Brazoria, TX

1150 Bremerton, WA 1.0975 1.0658Kitsap, WA

1240 Brownsville-Har-lingen-San Benito, TX 0.8722 0.9106





Wageindex GAF

Cameron, TX1260 Bryan-College

Station, TX ................ 0.8237 0.8756Brazos, TX

1280 1 Buffalo-NiagaraFalls, NY ................... 0.9580 0.9710Erie, NYNiagara, NY

1303 Burlington, VT ... 1.0735 1.0498Chittenden, VTFranklin, VTGrand Isle, VT

1310 Caguas, PR ....... 0.4562 0.5842Caguas, PRCayey, PRCidra, PRGurabo, PRSan Lorenzo, PR

1320 2 Canton-Massillon, OH ............ 0.8670 0.9069Carroll, OHStark, OH

1350 2 Casper, WY .... 0.8817 0.9174Natrona, WY

1360 Cedar Rapids, IA 0.8736 0.9116Linn, IA

1400 Champaign-Ur-bana, IL ..................... 0.9198 0.9444Champaign, IL

1440 Charleston-NorthCharleston, SC .......... 0.9067 0.9351Berkeley, SCCharleston, SCDorchester, SC

1480 Charleston, WV 0.9240 0.9473Kanawha, WVPutnam, WV

1520 1 Charlotte-Gas-tonia-Rock Hill, NC–SC ............................. 0.9391 0.9579Cabarrus, NCGaston, NCLincoln, NCMecklenburg, NCRowan, NCStanly, NCUnion, NCYork, SC

1540 Charlottesville,VA ............................. 1.0789 1.0534Albemarle, VACharlottesville City,

VAFluvanna, VAGreene, VA

1560 Chattanooga,TN–GA ...................... 0.9833 0.9885Catoosa, GADade, GAWalker, GAHamilton, TNMarion, TN

1580 2 Cheyenne, WY 0.8817 0.9174Laramie, WY

1600 1 Chicago, IL ...... 1.1146 1.0771Cook, ILDeKalb, IL



Wageindex GAF

DuPage, ILGrundy, ILKane, ILKendall, ILLake, ILMcHenry, ILWill, IL

1620 Chico-Paradise,CA ............................. 0.9918 0.9944Butte, CA

1640 1 1Cincinnati,OH–KY–IN ................ 0.9415 0.9596Dearborn, INOhio, INBoone, KYCampbell, KYGallatin, KYGrant, KYKenton, KYPendleton, KYBrown, OHClermont, OHHamilton, OHWarren, OH

1660 Clarksville-Hop-kinsville, TN–KY ........ 0.8277 0.8785Christian, KYMontgomery, TN

1680 1 Cleveland-Lo-rain-Elyria, OH .......... 0.9593 0.9719Ashtabula, OHCuyahoga, OHGeauga, OHLake, OHLorain, OHMedina, OH

1720 ColoradoSprings, CO .............. 0.9697 0.9792El Paso, CO

1740 Columbia, MO ... 0.8961 0.9276Boone, MO

1760 Columbia, SC .... 0.9554 0.9692Lexington, SCRichland, SC

1800 Columbus, GA–AL .............................. 0.8568 0.8996Russell, ALChattahoochee, GAHarris, GAMuscogee, GA

1840 1 Columbus, OH 0.9619 0.9737Delaware, OHFairfield, OHFranklin, OHLicking, OHMadison, OHPickaway, OH

1880 Corpus Christi,TX .............................. 0.8726 0.9109Nueces, TXSan Patricio, TX

1890 Corvallis, OR ..... 1.1326 1.0890Benton, OR

1900 2 Cumberland,MD–WV (MD Hos-pitals) ......................... 0.8651 0.9055Allegany, MD



Wageindex GAF

Mineral, WV1900 Cumberland,

MD–WV (WV Hos-pital) .......................... 0.8369 0.8852Allegany, MDMineral, WV

1920 1 Dallas, TX ....... 0.9913 0.9940Collin, TXDallas, TXDenton, TXEllis, TXHenderson, TXHunt, TXKaufman, TXRockwall, TX

1950 Danville, VA ...... 0.8589 0.9011Danville City, VAPittsylvania, VA

1960 Davenport-Mo-line-Rock Island, IA–IL ............................... 0.8898 0.9232Scott, IAHenry, ILRock Island, IL

.2000 Dayton-Spring-

field, OH .................... 0.9442 0.9614Clark, OHGreene, OHMiami, OHMontgomery, OH

.2020 Daytona Beach,

FL .............................. 0.9147 0.9408Flagler, FLVolusia, FL

2030 Decatur, AL ....... 0.8534 0.8971Lawrence, ALMorgan, AL

2040 2Decatur, IL ....... 0.8160 0.8700Macon, IL

2080 1 Denver, CO ..... 1.0181 1.0124Adams, COArapahoe, CODenver, CODouglas, COJefferson, CO

2120 Des Moines, IA 0.9118 0.9387Dallas, IAPolk, IAWarren, IA

2160 1 Detroit, MI ....... 1.0510 1.0347Lapeer, MIMacomb, MIMonroe, MIOakland, MISt. Clair, MIWayne, MI

2180 Dothan, AL ........ 0.8013 0.8592Dale, ALHouston, AL

2190 Dover, DE ......... 1.0078 1.0053Kent, DE

2200 Dubuque, IA ...... 0.8746 0.9123Dubuque, IA

2240 Duluth-Superior,MN–WI ...................... 1.0043 1.0029





Wageindex GAF

St. Louis, MNDouglas, WI

2281 Dutchess Coun-ty, NY ........................ 0.9491 0.9649Dutchess, NY

2290 2 Eau Claire, WI 0.8880 0.9219Chippewa, WIEau Claire, WI

2320 El Paso, TX ....... 0.9346 0.9547El Paso, TX

2330 Elkhart-Goshen,IN ............................... 0.9145 0.9406Elkhart, IN

2335 Elmira, NY ......... 0.8546 0.8980Chemung, NY

2340 Enid, OK ............ 0.8610 0.9026Garfield, OK

2360 Erie, PA ............. 0.8985 0.9293Erie, PA

2400 Eugene-Spring-field, OR .................... 1.0965 1.0651Lane, OR

2440 2 Evansville-Hen-derson, IN–KY (INHospitals) .................. 0.8602 0.9020Posey, INVanderburgh, INWarrick, INHenderson, KY

2440 Evansville-Hen-derson, IN–KY (KYHospitals) .................. 0.8173 0.8710Posey, INVanderburgh, INWarrick, INHenderson, KY

2520 Fargo-Moorhead,ND–MN ..................... 0.8749 0.9125Clay, MNCass, ND

2560 Fayetteville, NC 0.8655 0.9058Cumberland, NC

2580 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers,AR ............................. 0.7910 0.8517Benton, ARWashington, AR

2620 Flagstaff, AZ–UT 1.0686 1.0465Coconino, AZKane, UT

2640 Flint, MI ............. 1.1205 1.0810Genesee, MI

2650 Florence, AL ...... 0.7652 0.8325Colbert, ALLauderdale, AL

2655 Florence, SC ..... 0.8777 0.9145Florence, SC

2670 Fort Collins-Loveland, CO ............ 1.0647 1.0439Larimer, CO

2680 1 Ft. Lauderdale,FL .............................. 1.0152 1.0104Broward, FL

2700 Fort Myers-CapeCoral, FL ................... 0.9247 0.9478Lee, FL

2710 Fort Pierce-PortSt. Lucie, FL .............. 0.9622 0.9740



Wageindex GAF

Martin, FLSt. Lucie, FL

2720 Fort Smith, AR–OK ............................. 0.8052 0.8621Crawford, ARSebastian, ARSequoyah, OK

2750 Fort WaltonBeach, FL .................. 0.9607 0.9729Okaloosa, FL

2760 Fort Wayne, IN .. 0.8665 0.9065Adams, INAllen, INDe Kalb, INHuntington, INWells, INWhitley, IN

2800 1 Forth Worth-Ar-lington, TX ................. 0.9527 0.9674Hood, TXJohnson, TXParker, TXTarrant, TX

2840 Fresno, CA ........ 1.0104 1.0071Fresno, CAMadera, CA

2880 Gadsden, AL ..... 0.8423 0.8891Etowah, AL

2900 Gainesville, FL .. 1.0074 1.0051Alachua, FL

2920 Galveston-TexasCity, TX ..................... 0.9918 0.9944Galveston, TX

2960 Gary, IN ............. 0.9454 0.9623Lake, INPorter, IN

2975 2 Glens Falls, NY 0.8499 0.8946Warren, NYWashington, NY

2980 2 Goldsboro, NC 0.8441 0.8904Wayne, NC

2985 Grand Forks,ND–MN ..................... 0.8954 0.9271Polk, MNGrand Forks, ND

2995 Grand Junction,CO ............................. 0.9471 0.9635Mesa, CO

3000 1 Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland,MI .............................. 1.0248 1.0169Allegan, MIKent, MIMuskegon, MIOttawa, MI

3040 Great Falls, MT 0.9331 0.9537Cascade, MT

3060 Greeley, CO ...... 0.9814 0.9872Weld, CO

3080 Green Bay, WI .. 0.9308 0.9521Brown, WI

3120 1 Greensboro-Winston-Salem-HighPoint, NC ................... 0.9124 0.9391Alamance, NCDavidson, NCDavie, NC



Wageindex GAF

Forsyth, NCGuilford, NCRandolph, NCStokes, NCYadkin, NC

3150 Greenville, NC ... 0.9384 0.9574Pitt, NC

3160 Greenville-Spartanburg-Ander-son, SC ..................... 0.9003 0.9306Anderson, SCCherokee, SCGreenville, SCPickens, SCSpartanburg, SC

3180 Hagerstown, MD 0.9409 0.9591Washington, MD

3200 Hamilton-Middle-town, OH ................... 0.9061 0.9347Butler, OH

3240 Harrisburg-Leb-anon-Carlisle, PA ...... 0.9386 0.9575Cumberland, PADauphin, PALebanon, PAPerry, PA

3283 1 2 Hartford, CT .. 1.1715 1.1145Hartford, CTLitchfield, CTMiddlesex, CTTolland, CT

3285 2 Hattiesburg,MS ............................. 0.7491 0.8205Forrest, MSLamar, MS

3290 Hickory-Mor-ganton-Lenoir, NC ..... 0.8755 0.9130Alexander, NCBurke, NCCaldwell, NCCatawba, NC

3320 Honolulu, HI ...... 1.1866 1.1243Honolulu, HI

3350 Houma, LA ........ 0.8086 0.8646Lafourche, LATerrebonne, LA

3360 1 Houston, TX .... 0.9732 0.9816Chambers, TXFort Bend, TXHarris, TXLiberty, TXMontgomery, TXWaller, TX

3400 Huntington-Ash-land, WV–KY–OH ..... 0.9876 0.9915Boyd, KYCarter, KYGreenup, KYLawrence, OHCabell, WVWayne, WV

3440 Huntsville, AL .... 0.8932 0.9256Limestone, ALMadison, AL

3480 1 Indianapolis, IN 0.9787 0.9854Boone, INHamilton, IN





Wageindex GAF

Hancock, INHendricks, INJohnson, INMadison, INMarion, INMorgan, INShelby, IN

3500 Iowa City, IA ...... 0.9657 0.9764Johnson, IA

3520 Jackson, MI ....... 0.9134 0.9399Jackson, MI

3560 Jackson, MS ..... 0.8812 0.9170Hinds, MSMadison, MSRankin, MS

3580 Jackson, TN ...... 0.8796 0.9159Madison, TNChester, TN

3600 1 Jacksonville,FL .............................. 0.9208 0.9451Clay, FLDuval, FLNassau, FLSt. Johns, FL

3605 2 Jacksonville,NC ............................. 0.8441 0.8904Onslow, NC

3610 2 Jamestown, NY 0.8499 0.8946Chautauqua, NY

3620 Janesville-Beloit,WI .............................. 0.9585 0.9714Rock, WI

3640 Jersey City, NJ .. 1.1573 1.1052Hudson, NJ

3660 Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol, TN–VA ............................. 0.8328 0.8822Carter, TNHawkins, TNSullivan, TNUnicoi, TNWashington, TNBristol City, VAScott, VAWashington, VA

3680 Johnstown, PA .. 0.8578 0.9003Cambria, PASomerset, PA

3700 Jonesboro, AR .. 0.7832 0.8459Craighead, AR

3710 Joplin, MO ......... 0.8148 0.8691Jasper, MONewton, MO

3720 Kalamazoo-Battlecreek, MI .......... 1.0453 1.0308Calhoun, MIKalamazoo, MIVan Buren, MI

3740 Kankakee, IL ..... 0.9902 0.9933Kankakee, IL

3760 1 Kansas City,KS–MO ...................... 0.9498 0.9653Johnson, KSLeavenworth, KSMiami, KSWyandotte, KSCass, MO



Wageindex GAF

Clay, MOClinton, MOJackson, MOLafayette, MOPlatte, MORay, MO

3800 Kenosha, WI ..... 0.9611 0.9732Kenosha, WI

3810 Killeen-Temple,TX .............................. 1.0119 1.0081Bell, TXCoryell, TX

3840 Knoxville, TN ..... 0.8340 0.8831Anderson, TNBlount, TNKnox, TNLoudon, TNSevier, TNUnion, TN

3850 Kokomo, IN ....... 0.9525 0.9672Howard, INTipton, IN

3870 La Crosse, WI–MN ............................. 0.9211 0.9453Houston, MNLa Crosse, WI

3880 Lafayette, LA ..... 0.8490 0.8940Acadia, LALafayette, LASt. Landry, LASt. Martin, LA

3920 Lafayette, IN ...... 0.8834 0.9186Clinton, INTippecanoe, IN

3960 2 Lake Charles,LA .............................. 0.7713 0.8371Calcasieu, LA

3980 Lakeland-WinterHaven, FL ................. 0.8928 0.9253Polk, FL

4000 Lancaster, PA ... 0.9259 0.9486Lancaster, PA

4040 Lansing-EastLansing, MI ............... 0.9934 0.9955Clinton, MIEaton, MIIngham, MI

4080 Laredo, TX ........ 0.8168 0.8706Webb, TX

4100 Las Cruces, NM 0.8658 0.9060Dona Ana, NM

4120 1 Las Vegas,NV–AZ ....................... 1.0796 1.0538Mohave, AZClark, NVNye, NV

4150 Lawrence, KS .... 0.8190 0.8722Douglas, KS

4200 Lawton, OK ....... 0.8996 0.9301Comanche, OK

4243 Lewiston-Au-burn, ME ................... 0.9036 0.9329Androscoggin, ME

4280 Lexington, KY .... 0.8866 0.9209Bourbon, KYClark, KYFayette, KY



Wageindex GAF

Jessamine, KYMadison, KYScott, KYWoodford, KY

4320 Lima, OH ........... 0.9320 0.9529Allen, OHAuglaize, OH

4360 Lincoln, NE ........ 0.9666 0.9770Lancaster, NE

4400 Little Rock-NorthLittle Rock, AR .......... 0.8906 0.9237Faulkner, ARLonoke, ARPulaski, ARSaline, AR

4420 Longview-Mar-shall, TX .................... 0.8922 0.9249Gregg, TXHarrison, TXUpshur, TX

4480 1 Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA ........ 1.2033 1.1351Los Angeles, CA

4520 Louisville, KY–IN 0.9350 0.9550Clark, INFloyd, INHarrison, INScott, INBullitt, KYJefferson, KYOldham, KY

4600 Lubbock, TX ...... 0.8838 0.9189Lubbock, TX

4640 Lynchburg, VA .. 0.8867 0.9210Amherst, VABedford, VABedford City, VACampbell, VALynchburg City, VA

4680 Macon, GA ........ 0.8974 0.9285Bibb, GAHouston, GAJones, GAPeach, GATwiggs, GA

4720 Madison, WI ...... 1.0271 1.0185Dane, WI

4800 Mansfield, OH ... 0.8690 0.9083Crawford, OHRichland, OH

4840 Mayaguez, PR .. 0.4589 0.5866Anasco, PRCabo Rojo, PRHormigueros, PRMayaguez, PRSabana Grande, PRSan German, PR

4880 McAllen-Edin-burg-Mission, TX ....... 0.8566 0.8994Hidalgo, TX

4890 Medford-Ash-land, OR .................... 1.0344 1.0234Jackson, OR

4900 Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay,FL .............................. 0.9688 0.9785Brevard, Fl





Wageindex GAF

4920 1 Memphis, TN–AR–MS ...................... 0.8723 0.9107Crittenden, ARDeSoto, MSFayette, TNShelby, TNTipton, TN

4940 2 Merced, CA ..... 0.9861 0.9905Merced, CA

5000 1 Miami, FL ........ 1.0059 1.0040Dade, FL

5015 1 Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon,NJ .............................. 1.0333 1.0227Hunterdon, NJMiddlesex, NJSomerset, NJ

5080 1 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ........... 0.9767 0.9840Milwaukee, WIOzaukee, WIWashington, WIWaukesha, WI

5120 1 Minneapolis-St.Paul, MN–WI ............. 1.1017 1.0686Anoka, MNCarver, MNChisago, MNDakota, MNHennepin, MNIsanti, MNRamsey, MNScott, MNSherburne, MNWashington, MNWright, MNPierce, WISt. Croix, WI

5140 Missoula, MT ..... 0.9332 0.9538Missoula, MT

5160 Mobile, AL ......... 0.8163 0.8702Baldwin, ALMobile, AL

5170 Modesto, CA ..... 1.0396 1.0270Stanislaus, CA

5190 1 Monmouth-Ocean, NJ ................. 1.1283 1.0862Monmouth, NJOcean, NJ

5200 Monroe, LA ....... 0.8396 0.8872Ouachita, LA

5240 Montgomery, AL 0.7653 0.8326Autauga, ALElmore, ALMontgomery, AL

5280 Muncie, IN ......... 1.0969 1.0654Delaware, IN

5330 Myrtle Beach,SC ............................. 0.8440 0.8903Horry, SC

5345 Naples, FL ......... 0.9661 0.9767Collier, FL

5360 1 Nashville, TN .. 0.9490 0.9648Cheatham, TNDavidson, TNDickson, TNRobertson, TN



Wageindex GAF

Rutherford, TNSumner, TNWilliamson, TNWilson, TN

5380 1 Nassau-Suffolk,NY ............................. 1.3932 1.2549Nassau, NYSuffolk, NY

5483 1 New Haven-Bridgeport-Stamford-Waterbury-Danbury,CT ............................. 1.2034 1.1352Fairfield, CTNew Haven, CT

5523 New London-Norwich, CT .............. 1.2063 1.1371New London, CT

5560 1 New Orleans,LA .............................. 0.9295 0.9512Jefferson, LAOrleans, LAPlaquemines, LASt. Bernard, LASt. Charles, LASt. James, LASt. John The Baptist,

LASt. Tammany, LA

5600 1 New York, NY 1.4651 1.2989Bronx, NYKings, NYNew York, NYPutnam, NYQueens, NYRichmond, NYRockland, NYWestchester, NY

5640 1 Newark, NJ ..... 1.0757 1.0512Essex, NJMorris, NJSussex, NJUnion, NJWarren, NJ

5660 Newburgh, NY–PA ............................. 1.0847 1.0573Orange, NYPike, PA

5720 1 Norfolk-VirginiaBeach-NewportNews, VA–NC ........... 0.8422 0.8890Currituck, NCChesapeake City, VAGloucester, VAHampton City, VAIsle of Wight, VAJames City, VAMathews, VANewport News City,

VANorfolk City, VAPoquoson City, VAPortsmouth City, VASuffolk City, VAVirginia Beach City,

VAWilliamsburg City, VA



Wageindex GAF

York, VA5775 1 Oakland, CA ... 1.4983 1.3190

Alameda, CAContra Costa, CA

5790 Ocala, FL.Marion, FL 0.9243 0.9475

5800 Odessa-Midland,TX .............................. 0.9205 0.9449Ector, TXMidland, TX

5880 1 Oklahoma City,OK ............................. 0.8822 0.9177Canadian, OKCleveland, OKLogan, OKMcClain, OKOklahoma, OKPottawatomie, OK

5910 Olympia, WA ..... 1.0677 1.0459Thurston, WA

5920 Omaha, NE–IA .. 0.9572 0.9705Pottawattamie, IACass, NEDouglas, NESarpy, NEWashington, NE

5945 1 Orange County,CA ............................. 1.1411 1.0946Orange, CA

5960 1 Orlando, FL ..... 0.9610 0.9731Lake, FLOrange, FLOsceola, FLSeminole, FL

5990 Owensboro, KY 0.8159 0.8699Daviess, KY

6015 Panama City, FL 0.9010 0.9311Bay, FL

6020 Parkersburg-Marietta, WV–OH(WV Hospitals) .......... 0.8274 0.8783Washington, OHWood, WV

6020 2 Parkersburg-Marietta, WV–OH(OH Hospitals) .......... 0.8670 0.9069Washington, OHWood, WV

6080 2 Pensacola, FL 0.8928 0.9253Escambia, FLSanta Rosa, FL

6120 Peoria-Pekin, IL 0.8646 0.9052Peoria, ILTazewell, ILWoodford, IL

6160 1 Philadelphia,PA–NJ ....................... 1.0937 1.0633Burlington, NJCamden, NJGloucester, NJSalem, NJBucks, PAChester, PADelaware, PAMontgomery, PAPhiladelphia, PA

6200 1 Phoenix-Mesa,AZ .............................. 0.9669 0.9772





Wageindex GAF

Maricopa, AZPinal, AZ

6240 Pine Bluff, AR ... 0.7791 0.8429Jefferson, AR

6280 1 Pittsburgh, PA 0.9741 0.9822Allegheny, PABeaver, PAButler, PAFayette, PAWashington, PAWestmoreland, PA

6323 2 Pittsfield, MA ... 1.1204 1.0810Berkshire, MA

6340 Pocatello, ID ...... 0.9076 0.9358Bannock, ID

6360 Ponce, PR ......... 0.5006 0.6226Guayanilla, PRJuana Diaz, PRPenuelas, PRPonce, PRVillalba, PRYauco, PR

6403 Portland, ME ..... 0.9748 0.9827Cumberland, MESagadahoc, MEYork, ME

6440 1 Portland-Van-couver, OR–WA ........ 1.0910 1.0615Clackamas, ORColumbia, ORMultnomah, ORWashington, ORYamhill, ORClark, WA

6483 1 Providence-Warwick-Pawtucket,RI ............................... 1.0864 1.0584Bristol, RIKent, RINewport, RIProvidence, RIWashington, RI

6520 Provo-Orem, UT 1.0041 1.0028Utah, UT

6560 2 Pueblo, CO ..... 0.8968 0.9281Pueblo, CO

6580 Punta Gorda, FL 0.9613 0.9733Charlotte, FL

6600 Racine, WI ........ 0.9246 0.9477Racine, WI

6640 1 Raleigh-Dur-ham-Chapel Hill, NC 0.9646 0.9756Chatham, NCDurham, NCFranklin, NCJohnston, NCOrange, NCWake, NC

6660 Rapid City, SD .. 0.8865 0.9208Pennington, SD

6680 Reading, PA ...... 0.9152 0.9411Berks, PA

6690 Redding, CA ...... 1.1664 1.1112Shasta, CA

6720 Reno, NV .......... 1.0550 1.0373Washoe, NV



Wageindex GAF

6740 Richland-Kennewick-Pasco,WA ............................ 1.1460 1.0978Benton, WAFranklin, WA

6760 Richmond-Pe-tersburg, VA .............. 0.9617 0.9736Charles City County,

VAChesterfield, VAColonial Heights City,

VADinwiddie, VAGoochland, VAHanover, VAHenrico, VAHopewell City, VANew Kent, VAPetersburg City, VAPowhatan, VAPrince George, VARichmond City, VA

6780 1 Riverside-SanBernardino, CA ......... 1.1115 1.0751Riverside, CASan Bernardino, CA

6800 Roanoke, VA ..... 0.8782 0.9149Botetourt, VARoanoke, VARoanoke City, VASalem City, VA

6820 Rochester, MN .. 1.1315 1.0883Olmsted, MN

6840 1 Rochester, NY 0.9182 0.9432Genesee, NYLivingston, NYMonroe, NYOntario, NYOrleans, NYWayne, NY

6880 Rockford, IL ....... 0.8819 0.9175Boone, ILOgle, ILWinnebago, IL

6895 Rocky Mount,NC ............................. 0.8849 0.9197Edgecombe, NCNash, NC

6920 1 Sacramento,CA ............................. 1.1957 1.1302El Dorado, CAPlacer, CASacramento, CA

6960 Saginaw-BayCity-Midland, MI ........ 0.9575 0.9707Bay, MIMidland, MISaginaw, MI

6980 St. Cloud, MN ... 1.0016 1.0011Benton, MNStearns, MN

7000 St. Joseph, MO 0.9071 0.9354Andrew, MOBuchanan, MO

7040 1 1St. Louis,MO–IL ....................... 0.9049 0.9339Clinton, IL



Wageindex GAF

Jersey, ILMadison, ILMonroe, ILSt. Clair, ILFranklin, MOJefferson, MOLincoln, MOSt. Charles, MOSt. Louis, MOSt. Louis City, MOWarren, MO

7080 Salem, OR ........ 1.0132 1.0090Marion, ORPolk, OR

7120 Salinas, CA ....... 1.4502 1.2899Monterey, CA

7160 1 Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT ................ 0.9811 0.9870Davis, UTSalt Lake, UTWeber, UT

7200 San Angelo, TX 0.8083 0.8644Tom Green, TX

7240 1 San Antonio,TX .............................. 0.8580 0.9004Bexar, TXComal, TXGuadalupe, TXWilson, TX

7320 1 San Diego, CA 1.1784 1.1190San Diego, CA

7360 1 San Francisco,CA ............................. 1.4193 1.2710Marin, CASan Francisco, CASan Mateo, CA

7400 1 San Jose, CA .. 1.3564 1.2321Santa Clara, CA

7440 1 San Juan-Ba-yamon, PR ................ 0.4690 0.5954Aguas Buenas, PRBarceloneta, PRBayamon, PRCanovanas, PRCarolina, PRCatano, PRCeiba, PRComerio, PRCorozal, PRDorado, PRFajardo, PRFlorida, PRGuaynabo, PRHumacao, PRJuncos, PRLos Piedras, PRLoiza, PRLuguillo, PRManati, PRMorovis, PRNaguabo, PRNaranjito, PRRio Grande, PRSan Juan, PRToa Alta, PRToa Baja, PRTrujillo Alto, PR





Wageindex GAF

Vega Alta, PRVega Baja, PRYabucoa, PR

7460 San LuisObispo-Atascadero-Paso Robles, CA ...... 1.0673 1.0456San Luis Obispo, CA

7480 Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc,CA ............................. 1.0597 1.0405Santa Barbara, CA

7485 Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA ......... 1.4095 1.2650Santa Cruz, CA

7490 Santa Fe, NM .... 1.0537 1.0365Los Alamos, NMSanta Fe, NM

7500 Santa Rosa, CA 1.2646 1.1744Sonoma, CA

7510 Sarasota-Bra-denton, FL ................. 0.9809 0.9869Manatee, FLSarasota, FL

7520 Savannah, GA ... 0.9697 0.9792Bryan, GAChatham, GAEffingham, GA

7560 2 Scranton—Wilkes-Barre—Hazle-ton, PA ...................... 0.8578 0.9003Columbia, PALackawanna, PALuzerne, PAWyoming, PA

7600 1 Seattle-Belle-vue-Everett, WA ........ 1.1016 1.0685Island, WAKing, WASnohomish, WA

7610 2 Sharon, PA ..... 0.8578 0.9003Mercer, PA

7620 2 Sheboygan, WI 0.8880 0.9219Sheboygan, WI

7640 Sherman-Denison, TX .............. 0.8795 0.9158Grayson, TX

7680 Shreveport-Bos-sier City, LA .............. 0.8750 0.9126Bossier, LACaddo, LAWebster, LA

7720 Sioux City, IA–NE ............................. 0.8473 0.8927Woodbury, IADakota, NE

7760 Sioux Falls, SD 0.8790 0.9155Lincoln, SDMinnehaha, SD

7800 South Bend, IN 1.0029 1.0020St. Joseph, IN

7840 Spokane, WA .... 1.0513 1.0349Spokane, WA

7880 Springfield, IL .... 0.8685 0.9080Menard, ILSangamon, IL

7920 Springfield, MO 0.8488 0.8938Christian, MO



Wageindex GAF

Greene, MOWebster, MO

8003 2 Springfield, MA 1.1204 1.0810Hampden, MAHampshire, MA

8050 State College,PA ............................. 0.9038 0.9331Centre, PA

8080 2 Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV (OHHospitals) .................. 0.8670 0.9069Jefferson, OHBrooke, WVHancock, WV

8080 Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV(WV Hospitals) .......... 0.8548 0.8981Jefferson, OHBrooke, WVHancock, WV

8120 Stockton-Lodi,CA ............................. 1.0629 1.0427San Joaquin, CA

8140 2 Sumter, SC ..... 0.8370 0.8853Sumter, SC

8160 Syracuse, NY .... 0.9594 0.9720Cayuga, NYMadison, NYOnondaga, NYOswego, NY

8200 Tacoma, WA ..... 1.1564 1.1046Pierce, WA

8240 2 Tallahassee,FL .............................. 0.8928 0.9253Gadsden, FLLeon, FL

8280 1 Tampa-St. Pe-tersburg-Clearwater,FL .............................. 0.9099 0.9374Hernando, FLHillsborough, FLPasco, FLPinellas, FL

8320 2 Terre Haute, IN 0.8602 0.9020Clay, INVermillion, INVigo, IN

8360 Texarkana, AR-Texarkana, TX .......... 0.8427 0.8894Miller, ARBowie, TX

8400 Toledo, OH ........ 0.9664 0.9769Fulton, OHLucas, OHWood, OH

8440 Topeka, KS ....... 0.9117 0.9387Shawnee, KS

8480 Trenton, NJ ....... 1.0137 1.0094Mercer, NJ

8520 Tucson, AZ ........ 0.8821 0.9177Pima, AZ

8560 Tulsa, OK .......... 0.8454 0.8914Creek, OKOsage, OKRogers, OKTulsa, OKWagoner, OK



Wageindex GAF

8600 Tuscaloosa, AL 0.8064 0.8630Tuscaloosa, AL

8640 Tyler, TX ........... 0.9404 0.9588Smith, TX

8680 Utica-Rome, NY 0.8560 0.8990Herkimer, NYOneida, NY

8720 Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa, CA .................. 1.2266 1.1501Napa, CASolano, CA

8735 Ventura, CA ...... 1.0479 1.0326Ventura, CA

8750 Victoria, TX ....... 0.8154 0.8696Victoria, TX

8760 Vineland-Mill-ville-Bridgeton, NJ ..... 1.0501 1.0340Cumberland, NJ

8780 2 Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA ........... 0.9861 0.9905Tulare, CA

8800 Waco, TX .......... 0.8314 0.8812McLennan, TX

8840 1 Washington,DC–MD–VA–WV ....... 1.0755 1.0511District of Columbia,

DCCalvert, MDCharles, MDFrederick, MDMontgomery, MDPrince Georges, MDAlexandria City, VAArlington, VAClarke, VACulpeper, VAFairfax, VAFairfax City, VAFalls Church City, VAFauquier, VAFredericksburg City,

VAKing George, VALoudoun, VAManassas City, VAManassas Park City,

VAPrince William, VASpotsylvania, VAStafford, VAWarren, VA Berke-

ley, WVJefferson, WV

8920 Waterloo-CedarFalls, IA ..................... 0.8802 0.9163Black Hawk, IA

8940 Wausau, WI ...... 0.9426 0.9603Marathon, WI

8960 1 1West PalmBeach-Boca Raton,FL .............................. 0.9615 0.9735Palm Beach, FL

9000 2 Wheeling, WV–OH (WV Hospitals) ... 0.8231 0.8752Belmont, OHMarshall, WV





Wageindex GAF

Ohio, WV9000 2 Wheeling, WV–

OH (OH Hospitals) .... 0.8670 0.9069Belmont, OHMarshall, WVOhio, WV

9040 Wichita, KS ....... 0.9544 0.9685Butler, KSHarvey, KSSedgwick, KS

9080 Wichita Falls, TX 0.7668 0.8337Archer, TXWichita, TX

9140 2 Williamsport,PA ............................. 0.8578 0.9003Lycoming, PA

9160 Wilmington-New-ark, DE–MD .............. 1.1191 1.0801New Castle, DECecil, MD

9200 Wilmington, NC 0.9402 0.9587New Hanover, NCBrunswick, NC

9260 2 Yakima, WA .... 1.0434 1.0295Yakima, WA

9270 Yolo, CA ............ 1.0199 1.0136Yolo, CA

9280 York, PA ............ 0.9264 0.9490York, PA

9320 Youngstown-Warren, OH ............... 0.9543 0.9685Columbiana, OHMahoning, OH Trum-

bull, OH9340 Yuba City, CA ... 1.0706 1.0478

Sutter, CAYuba, CA

9360 Yuma, AZ .......... 0.9529 0.9675Yuma, AZ

1 Large Urban Area.2 Hospitals geographically located in the

area are assigned the statewide rural wageindex for FY 2001.

TABLE 4B.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITALGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(GAF) FOR RURAL AREAS

Nonurban area Wageindex GAF

Alabama ........................ 0.7528 0.8233Alaska ........................... 1.2392 1.1582Arizona .......................... 0.8317 0.8814Arkansas ....................... 0.7445 0.8171California ....................... 0.9861 0.9905Colorado ....................... 0.8968 0.9281Connecticut ................... 1.1715 1.1145Delaware ....................... 0.9074 0.9356Florida ........................... 0.8928 0.9253Georgia ......................... 0.8329 0.8823Hawaii ........................... 1.1059 1.0714Idaho ............................. 0.8678 0.9075Illinois ............................ 0.8160 0.8700Indiana .......................... 0.8602 0.9020Iowa .............................. 0.8030 0.8605

TABLE 4B.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITALGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(GAF) FOR RURAL AREAS—Contin-ued

Nonurban area Wageindex GAF

Kansas .......................... 0.7605 0.8290Kentucky ....................... 0.7931 0.8532Louisiana ...................... 0.7713 0.8371Maine ............................ 0.8766 0.9138Maryland ....................... 0.8651 0.9055Massachusetts .............. 1.1204 1.0810Michigan ....................... 0.9021 0.9319Minnesota ..................... 0.8881 0.9219Mississippi .................... 0.7491 0.8205Missouri ........................ 0.7707 0.8366Montana ........................ 0.8688 0.9082Nebraska ...................... 0.8109 0.8663Nevada ......................... 0.9232 0.9467New Hampshire ............ 0.9845 0.9894New Jersey 1 ................. .............. ..............New Mexico .................. 0.8497 0.8945New York ...................... 0.8499 0.8946North Carolina .............. 0.8441 0.8904North Dakota ................ 0.7716 0.8373Ohio .............................. 0.8670 0.9069Oklahoma ..................... 0.7491 0.8205Oregon .......................... 1.0132 1.0090Pennsylvania ................ 0.8578 0.9003Puerto Rico ................... 0.4264 0.5578Rhode Island 1 .............. .............. ..............South Carolina .............. 0.8370 0.8853South Dakota ................ 0.7570 0.8264Tennessee .................... 0.7838 0.8464Texas ............................ 0.7507 0.8217Utah .............................. 0.9037 0.9330Vermont ........................ 0.9427 0.9604Virginia .......................... 0.8189 0.8721Washington ................... 1.0434 1.0295West Virginia ................ 0.8231 0.8752Wisconsin ..................... 0.8880 0.9219Wyoming ....................... 0.8817 0.9174

1 All counties within the State are classifiedas urban.

TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITALGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(GAF) FOR HOSPITALS THAT ARERECLASSIFIED

Area Wageindex GAF

Abilene, TX ................... 0.8240 0.8758Akron, OH ..................... 0.9736 0.9818Alexandria, LA .............. 0.8170 0.8707Amarillo, TX .................. 0.8715 0.9101Anchorage, AK ............. 1.2865 1.1883Ann Arbor, MI ............... 1.1064 1.0717Atlanta, GA ................... 1.0096 1.0066Atlantic-Cape May, NJ .. 1.0822 1.0556Augusta-Aiken, GA–SC 0.9160 0.9417Baton Rouge, LA .......... 0.8734 0.9115Benton Harbor, MI ........ 0.9021 0.9319Bergen-Passaic, NJ ...... 1.1605 1.1073Billings, MT ................... 0.9591 0.9718Binghamton, NY ........... 0.8690 0.9083Birmingham, AL ............ 0.8477 0.8930Bismarck, ND ................ 0.7897 0.8507Bloomington-Normal, IL 0.9156 0.9414Boise City, ID ................ 0.9042 0.9334

TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITALGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR(GAF) FOR HOSPITALS THAT ARERECLASSIFIED—Continued

Area Wageindex GAF

Boston-Worcester-Law-rence-Lowell-Brock-ton, MA–NH (NH, RI,and VT Hospitals) ..... 1.1160 1.0781

Burlington, VT ............... 1.0550 1.0373Casper, WY .................. 0.8817 0.9174Champaign-Urbana, IL 0.9084 0.9363Charleston-North

Charleston, SC .......... 0.9067 0.9351Charleston, WV ............ 0.8904 0.9236Charlotte-Gastonia-

Rock Hill, NC–SC ..... 0.9391 0.9579Chattanooga, TN–GA ... 0.9624 0.9741Chicago, IL ................... 1.1015 1.0684Cincinnati, OH–KY–IN .. 0.9415 0.9596Clarksville-Hopkinsville,

TN–KY ....................... 0.8277 0.8785Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria,

OH ............................. 0.9593 0.9719Columbia, MO ............... 0.8756 0.9130Columbia, SC ............... 0.9433 0.9608Columbus, OH .............. 0.9619 0.9737Dallas, TX ..................... 0.9913 0.9940Danville, VA .................. 0.8212 0.8738Davenport-Moline-Rock

Island, IA–IL .............. 0.8898 0.9232Dayton-Springfield, OH 0.9442 0.9614Denver, CO ................... 1.0181 1.0124Des Moines, IA ............. 0.9011 0.9312Dothan, AL .................... 0.8013 0.8592Dover, DE ..................... 0.9769 0.9841Duluth-Superior, MN–WI 1.0043 1.0029Eau Claire, WI .............. 0.8880 0.9219Erie, PA ........................ 0.8985 0.9293Eugene-Springfield, OR 1.0965 1.0651Fargo-Moorhead, ND–

MN ............................. 0.8517 0.8959Fayetteville, NC ............ 0.8469 0.8924Flagstaff, AZ–UT .......... 1.0525 1.0357Flint, MI ......................... 1.1058 1.0713Florence, AL ................. 0.7652 0.8325Florence, SC ................. 0.8777 0.9145Fort Collins-Loveland,

CO ............................. 1.0647 1.0439Ft. Lauderdale, FL ........ 1.0152 1.0104Fort Pierce-Port St.

Lucie, FL ................... 0.9622 0.9740Fort Smith, AR–OK ....... 0.7947 0.8544Fort Walton Beach, FL 0.9358 0.9556Fort Wayne, IN ............. 0.8665 0.9065Forth Worth-Arlington,

TX .............................. 0.9527 0.9674Gadsden, AL ................. 0.8423 0.8891Grand Forks, ND–MN ... 0.8954 0.9271Grand Junction, CO ...... 0.9471 0.9635Grand Rapids-Mus-

kegon-Holland, MI ..... 1.0248 1.0169Great Falls, MT ............. 0.9331 0.9537Greeley, CO .................. 0.9573 0.9706Green Bay, WI .............. 0.9308 0.9521Greensboro-Winston-

Salem-High Point, NC 0.9124 0.9391Greenville, NC .............. 0.9172 0.9425Greenville-Spartanburg-

Anderson, SC ............ 0.9003 0.9306Harrisburg-Lebanon-

Carlisle, PA ............... 0.9386 0.9575




Area Wageindex GAF

Hartford, CT (MA Hos-pital) .......................... 1.1420 1.0952

Hattiesburg, MS ............ 0.7491 0.8205Hickory-Morganton-

Lenoir, NC ................. 0.8577 0.9002Honolulu, HI .................. 1.1866 1.1243Houston, TX .................. 0.9732 0.9816Huntington-Ashland,

WV–KY–OH .............. 0.9605 0.9728Huntsville, AL ................ 0.8779 0.9147Indianapolis, IN ............. 0.9787 0.9854Jackson, MS ................. 0.8698 0.9089Jackson, TN .................. 0.8796 0.9159Jacksonville, FL ............ 0.9208 0.9451Jersey City, NJ ............. 1.1573 1.1052Johnson City-Kingsport-

Bristol, TN–VA .......... 0.8328 0.8822Joplin, MO .................... 0.8148 0.8691Kalamazoo-Battlecreek,

MI .............................. 1.0311 1.0212Kansas City, KS–MO .... 0.9498 0.9653Knoxville, TN ................ 0.8340 0.8831Kokomo, IN ................... 0.9525 0.9672Lafayette, LA ................ 0.8490 0.8940Lansing-East Lansing,

MI .............................. 0.9934 0.9955Las Cruces, NM ............ 0.8510 0.8954Las Vegas, NV–AZ ....... 1.0796 1.0538Lexington, KY ............... 0.8712 0.9099Lima, OH ...................... 0.9320 0.9529Lincoln, NE ................... 0.9666 0.9770Little Rock-North Little

Rock, AR ................... 0.8791 0.9155Longview-Marshall, TX 0.8732 0.9113Los Angeles-Long

Beach, CA ................. 1.2033 1.1351Louisville, KY–IN .......... 0.9350 0.9550Lynchburg, VA .............. 0.8749 0.9125Macon, GA .................... 0.8974 0.9285Madison, WI .................. 1.0271 1.0185Mansfield, OH ............... 0.8690 0.9083Memphis, TN–AR–MS .. 0.8584 0.9007Milwaukee-Waukesha,

WI .............................. 0.9767 0.9840Minneapolis-St. Paul,

MN–WI ...................... 1.1017 1.0686Missoula, MT ................ 0.9332 0.9538Mobile, AL ..................... 0.8163 0.8702Monmouth-Ocean, NJ .. 1.1283 1.0862Montgomery, AL ........... 0.7653 0.8326Myrtle Beach, SC (NC

Hospital) .................... 0.8441 0.8904Nashville, TN ................ 0.9301 0.9516New Haven-Bridgeport-

Stamford-Waterbury-Danbury, CT .............. 1.2034 1.1352

New London-Norwich,CT ............................. 1.1926 1.1282

New Orleans, LA .......... 0.9295 0.9512New York, NY ............... 1.4463 1.2875Newburgh, NY–PA ....... 1.0666 1.0451Norfolk-Virginia Beach-

Newport News, VA–NC ............................. 0.8441 0.8904

Oakland, CA ................. 1.4983 1.3190Ocala, FL ...................... 0.9243 0.9475Odessa-Midland, TX ..... 0.9074 0.9356


Area Wageindex GAF

Oklahoma City, OK ....... 0.8822 0.9177Omaha, NE–IA ............. 0.9572 0.9705Orange County, CA ...... 1.1411 1.0946Orlando, FL ................... 0.9610 0.9731Peoria-Pekin, IL ............ 0.8646 0.9052Philadelphia, PA–NJ ..... 1.0937 1.0633Pine Bluff, AR ............... 0.7680 0.8346Pittsburgh, PA ............... 0.9575 0.9707Pittsfield, MA (VT Hos-

pital) .......................... 0.9914 0.9941Pocatello, ID ................. 0.8715 0.9101Portland, ME ................. 0.9629 0.9744Portland-Vancouver,

OR–WA ..................... 1.0910 1.0615Provo-Orem, UT ........... 1.0041 1.0028Raleigh-Durham-Chapel

Hill, NC ...................... 0.9646 0.9756Rapid City, SD .............. 0.8865 0.9208Redding, CA ................. 1.1664 1.1112Reno, NV ...................... 1.0438 1.0298Richland-Kennewick-

Pasco, WA ................ 1.1147 1.0772Roanoke, VA ................ 0.8782 0.9149Rochester, MN .............. 1.1315 1.0883Rockford, IL .................. 0.8819 0.9175Sacramento, CA ........... 1.1957 1.1302Saginaw-Bay City-Mid-

land, MI ..................... 0.9575 0.9707St. Cloud, MN ............... 1.0016 1.0011St. Joseph, MO ............. 0.8848 0.9196St. Louis, MO–IL ........... 0.9049 0.9339Salinas, CA ................... 1.4502 1.2899Salt Lake City-Ogden,

UT ............................. 0.9811 0.9870San Diego, CA .............. 1.1784 1.1190Santa Cruz-Watsonville,

CA ............................. 1.3897 1.2528Santa Fe, NM ............... 1.0000 1.0000Santa Rosa, CA ............ 1.2398 1.1586Seattle-Bellevue-Ever-

ett, WA ...................... 1.1016 1.0685Sherman-Denison, TX .. 0.8795 0.9158Sioux City, IA–NE ......... 0.8473 0.8927South Bend, IN ............. 1.0029 1.0020Spokane, WA ................ 1.0333 1.0227Springfield, IL ................ 0.8685 0.9080Springfield, MO ............. 0.8212 0.8738Syracuse, NY ................ 0.9594 0.9720Tampa-St. Petersburg-

Clearwater, FL .......... 0.9099 0.9374Texarkana, AR-Tex-

arkana, TX ................ 0.8427 0.8894Toledo, OH ................... 0.9664 0.9769Topeka, KS ................... 0.9117 0.9387Tucson, AZ ................... 0.8821 0.9177Tulsa, OK ...................... 0.8454 0.8914Tuscaloosa, AL ............. 0.8064 0.8630Tyler, TX ....................... 0.9141 0.9403Victoria, TX ................... 0.8154 0.8696Washington, DC–MD–

VA–WV ...................... 1.0755 1.0511Waterloo-Cedar Falls,

IA ............................... 0.8802 0.9163Wausau, WI .................. 0.9426 0.9603Wichita, KS ................... 0.9262 0.9489Rural Alabama .............. 0.7528 0.8233Rural Florida ................. 0.8928 0.9253


Area Wageindex GAF

Rural Illinois .................. 0.8160 0.8700Rural Louisiana ............. 0.7713 0.8371Rural Michigan .............. 0.9021 0.9319Rural Minnesota ........... 0.8881 0.9219Rural Missouri ............... 0.7707 0.8366Rural Montana .............. 0.8688 0.9082Rural Oregon ................ 1.0132 1.0090Rural Texas .................. 0.7507 0.8217Rural Washington ......... 1.0434 1.0295Rural West Virginia ....... 0.8231 0.8752Rural Wisconsin ............ 0.8880 0.9219Rural Wyoming (NE

Hospital) .................... 0.8671 0.9070

TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGEFOR URBAN AREAS

Urban areaAveragehourlywage

Abilene, TX ................................... 17.9387Aguadilla, PR ................................ 9.5583Akron, OH ..................................... 21.1962Albany, GA ................................... 21.6247Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY ..... 18.6106Albuquerque, NM .......................... 19.8899Alexandria, LA .............................. 17.7452Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA 21.8571Altoona, PA ................................... 20.3472Amarillo, TX .................................. 18.9724Anchorage, AK ............................. 27.8515Ann Arbor, MI ............................... 24.5003Anniston, AL ................................. 18.0347Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah, WI .... 19.7058Arecibo, PR .................................. 9.8505Asheville, NC ................................ 20.7157Athens, GA ................................... 21.2027Atlanta, GA ................................... 21.9792Atlantic-Cape May, NJ .................. 24.3440Auburn-Opelika, AL ...................... 17.6461Augusta-Aiken, GA–SC ................ 19.9424Austin-San Marcos, TX ................ 20.8502Bakersfield, CA ............................. 21.0688Baltimore, MD ............................... 20.3888Bangor, ME ................................... 20.8150Barnstable-Yarmouth, MA ............ 30.1277Baton Rouge, LA .......................... 19.2487Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX ............ 19.0352Bellingham, WA ............................ 24.9039Benton Harbor, MI ........................ 18.8768Bergen-Passaic, NJ ...................... 25.7937Billings, MT ................................... 20.8676Biloxi-Gulfport-Pascagoula, MS .... 17.9290Binghamton, NY ........................... 18.9175Birmingham, AL ............................ 18.4002Bismarck, ND ................................ 16.7742Bloomington,IN ............................. 19.0130Bloomington-Normal, IL ................ 19.8003Boise City, ID ................................ 19.6053Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Low-

ell-Brockton, MA–NH ................ 24.2959Boulder-Longmont, CO ................. 21.1843Brazoria, TX .................................. 18.8483Bremerton, WA ............................. 23.8918Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito,

TX .............................................. 18.9870



TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGEFOR URBAN AREAS—Continued


Bryan-College Station, TX ............ 17.9324Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY ............. 20.8552Burlington, VT ............................... 23.3707Caguas, PR .................................. 9.9325Canton-Massillon, OH .................. 18.6867Casper, WY .................................. 18.9923Cedar Rapids, IA .......................... 19.0186Champaign-Urbana, IL ................. 20.0245Charleston-North Charleston, SC 19.6765Charleston, WV ............................ 20.1160Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC–

SC ............................................. 20.4436Charlottesville, VA ........................ 23.4885Chattanooga, TN–GA ................... 21.4064Cheyenne, WY ............................. 18.0869Chicago, IL ................................... 24.2653Chico-Paradise, CA ...................... 21.5925Cincinnati, OH–KY–IN .................. 20.4967Clarksville-Hopkinsville, TN–KY ... 17.8606Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria, OH ......... 20.8921Colorado Springs, CO .................. 21.1114Columbia, MO ............................... 19.5074Columbia, SC ............................... 20.7995Columbus, GA–AL ........................ 18.6521Columbus, OH .............................. 20.9403Corpus Christi, TX ........................ 18.9962Corvallis, OR ................................ 24.6574Cumberland, MD–WV ................... 18.2190Dallas, TX ..................................... 21.5801Danville, VA .................................. 18.6983Davenport-Moline-Rock Island,

IA–IL .......................................... 19.3712Dayton-Springfield, OH ................. 20.5545Daytona Beach, FL ....................... 20.0282Decatur, AL ................................... 18.5791Decatur, IL .................................... 17.6894Denver, CO ................................... 22.1647Des Moines, IA ............................. 19.8508Detroit, MI ..................................... 22.8814Dothan, AL .................................... 17.2926Dover, DE ..................................... 21.9391Dubuque, IA .................................. 19.0397Duluth-Superior, MN–WI .............. 21.8388Dutchess County, NY ................... 22.3121Eau Claire, WI .............................. 19.1358El Paso, TX .................................. 20.3455Elkhart-Goshen, IN ....................... 19.9093Elmira, NY .................................... 18.6041Enid, OK ....................................... 18.7450Erie, PA ........................................ 19.5597Eugene-Springfield, OR ................ 23.8704Evansville, Henderson, IN–KY ..... 17.7939Fargo-Moorhead, ND–MN ............ 19.0467Fayetteville, NC ............................ 18.8418Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers,

AR ............................................. 17.2213Flagstaff, AZ–UT .......................... 23.2631Flint, MI ......................................... 24.3942Florence, AL ................................. 16.5808Florence, SC ................................. 19.1069Fort Collins-Loveland, CO ............ 23.1791Fort Lauderdale, FL ...................... 22.0334Fort Myers-Cape Coral, FL .......... 20.1312Fort Pierce-Port St. Lucie, FL ...... 20.7635Fort Smith, AR–OK ....................... 17.5292Fort Walton Beach, FL ................. 20.9154Fort Wayne, IN ............................. 18.8629Fort Worth-Arlington, TX .............. 20.7411Fresno, CA ................................... 21.9976



Gadsden, AL ................................. 18.3371Gainesville, FL .............................. 21.9311Galveston-Texas City, TX ............ 21.5917Gary, IN ........................................ 20.5814Glens Falls, NY ............................ 18.2029Goldsboro, NC .............................. 18.3380Grand Forks, ND–MN ................... 19.1930Grand Junction, CO ...................... 19.8299Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland,

MI .............................................. 22.3091Great Falls, MT ............................. 19.7346Greeley, CO .................................. 21.3659Green Bay, WI .............................. 20.0839Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High

Point, NC ................................... 19.8775Greenville, NC .............................. 20.4282Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson,

SC ............................................. 19.5991Hagerstown, MD ........................... 20.4841Hamilton-Middletown, OH ............. 19.7254Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA .. 20.4334Hartford, CT .................................. 24.7589Hattiesburg, MS ............................ 16.3068Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC ..... 19.6096Honolulu, HI .................................. 25.8269Houma, LA .................................... 17.6029Houston, TX .................................. 21.1868Huntington-Ashland, WV–KY–OH 21.4993Huntsville, AL ................................ 19.4455Indianapolis, IN ............................. 21.3060Iowa City, IA ................................. 21.0244Jackson, MI .................................. 19.8852Jackson, MS ................................. 19.1842Jackson, TN .................................. 19.1498Jacksonville, FL ............................ 20.0465Jacksonville, NC ........................... 16.9298Jamestown, NY ............................ 17.0195Janesville-Beloit, WI ..................... 20.8677Jersey City, NJ ............................. 25.0412Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol,

TN–VA ....................................... 18.0083Johnstown, PA .............................. 19.2587Jonesboro, AR .............................. 17.0500Joplin, MO .................................... 17.7376Kalamazoo-Battlecreek, MI .......... 22.7571Kankakee, IL ................................. 21.5573Kansas City, KS–MO .................... 20.6781Kenosha, WI ................................. 20.9242Killeen-Temple, TX ....................... 22.0298Knoxville, TN ................................ 18.1556Kokomo, IN ................................... 20.7207La Crosse, WI–MN ....................... 20.0533Lafayette, LA ................................ 18.4838Lafayette, IN ................................. 19.2317Lake Charles, LA .......................... 16.1070Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL .......... 20.1126Lancaster, PA ............................... 20.1576Lansing-East Lansing, MI ............. 21.6264Laredo, TX .................................... 17.7822Las Cruces, NM ............................ 18.8479Las Vegas, NV–AZ ....................... 23.5027Lawrence, KS ............................... 17.8290Lawton, OK ................................... 19.5850Lewiston-Auburn, ME ................... 19.6724Lexington, KY ............................... 19.3007Lima, OH ...................................... 20.2889Lincoln, NE ................................... 20.9569Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR 19.3875Longview-Marshall, TX ................. 19.4243



Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA ...... 26.1164Louisville, KY–IN .......................... 20.3544Lubbock, TX ................................. 19.2404Lynchburg, VA .............................. 19.3031Macon, GA .................................... 19.5357Madison, WI .................................. 22.3606Mansfield, OH ............................... 18.9191Mayaguez, PR .............................. 9.9900McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX ..... 18.6487Medford-Ashland, OR ................... 22.5185Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL 21.0904Memphis, TN–AR–MS .................. 18.9896Merced, CA ................................... 20.9989Miami, FL ...................................... 21.8997Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon,

NJ .............................................. 24.1094Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ............ 21.2638Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN–WI ...... 23.9833Missoula, MT ................................ 20.1896Mobile, AL ..................................... 17.7700Modesto, CA ................................. 22.6325Monmouth-Ocean, NJ .................. 24.5529Monroe, LA ................................... 18.2776Montgomery, AL ........................... 16.6605Muncie, IN .................................... 23.8791Myrtle Beach, SC ......................... 18.3751Naples, FL .................................... 21.0332Nashville, TN ................................ 20.6601Nassau-Suffolk, NY ...................... 30.3304New Haven-Bridgeport-Stamford-

Waterbury-Danbury, CT ............ 26.7711New London-Norwich, CT ............ 26.2605New Orleans, LA .......................... 20.2347New York, NY ............................... 31.8954Newark, NJ ................................... 25.7698Newburgh, NY–PA ....................... 23.6150Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport

News, VA–NC ........................... 18.3132Oakland, CA ................................. 32.6189Ocala, FL ...................................... 20.1230Odessa-Midland, TX ..................... 20.0403Oklahoma City, OK ....................... 19.2048Olympia, WA ................................. 23.2441Omaha, NE–IA ............................. 20.8374Orange County, CA ...................... 24.9648Orlando, FL ................................... 20.9206Owensboro, KY ............................ 17.7626Panama City, FL ........................... 19.6150Parkersburg-Marietta, WV–OH ..... 18.0122Pensacola, FL ............................... 17.7997Peoria-Pekin, IL ............................ 18.8206Philadelphia, PA–NJ ..................... 23.8095Phoenix-Mesa, AZ ........................ 21.0494Pine Bluff, AR ............................... 16.9610Pittsburgh, PA ............................... 21.2070Pittsfield, MA ................................. 22.3968Pocatello, ID ................................. 19.7591Ponce, PR .................................... 10.8985Portland, ME ................................. 21.2220Portland-Vancouver, OR–WA ....... 23.7513Providence-Warwick, RI ............... 23.6503Provo-Orem, UT ........................... 21.8338Pueblo, CO ................................... 19.1909Punta Gorda, FL ........................... 20.9268Racine, WI .................................... 20.1287Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC 21.0003Rapid City, SD .............................. 19.2995Reading, PA ................................. 19.9251Redding, CA ................................. 25.3926





Reno, NV ...................................... 22.9669Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA .. 24.9481Richmond-Petersburg, VA ............ 20.9366Riverside-San Bernardino, CA ..... 24.4685Roanoke, VA ................................ 19.0494Rochester, MN .............................. 24.6337Rochester, NY .............................. 19.9884Rockford, IL .................................. 19.1994Rocky Mount, NC ......................... 19.2653Sacramento, CA ........................... 26.0143Saginaw-Bay City-Midland, MI ..... 20.8446St. Cloud, MN ............................... 21.8042St. Joseph, MO ............................. 19.7467St. Louis, MO–IL ........................... 19.6997Salem, OR .................................... 22.1817Salinas, CA ................................... 31.5702Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT ............ 21.3500San Angelo, TX ............................ 17.5980San Antonio, TX ........................... 18.6797San Diego, CA .............................. 25.6544San Francisco, CA ....................... 30.8184San Jose, CA ............................... 29.7210San Juan-Bayamon, PR ............... 10.2110San Luis Obispo-Atascadero-

Paso Robles, CA ...................... 23.2360Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-

Lompoc, CA .............................. 23.0707Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA ......... 30.5664Santa Fe, NM ............................... 22.9400Santa Rosa, CA ............................ 27.5311Sarasota-Bradenton, FL ............... 21.3554Savannah, GA .............................. 21.1099Scranton-Wilkes Barre-Hazleton,

PA ............................................. 18.3332Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA ....... 23.9393Sharon, PA ................................... 17.2591Sheboygan, WI ............................. 18.2407Sherman-Denison, TX .................. 18.9273Shreveport-Bossier City, LA ......... 19.0499Sioux City, IA–NE ......................... 18.4457Sioux Falls, SD ............................. 19.1359South Bend, IN ............................. 21.7709Spokane, WA ................................ 22.8867Springfield, IL ................................ 18.9066Springfield, MO ............................. 18.4778Springfield, MA ............................. 23.1578State College, PA ......................... 19.6769Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV ..... 18.6092Stockton-Lodi, CA ......................... 23.1397Sumter, SC ................................... 18.0057



Syracuse, NY ................................ 20.7876Tacoma, WA ................................. 25.1749Tallahassee, FL ............................ 18.6017Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater,

FL .............................................. 19.5532Terre Haute, IN ............................. 18.0773Texarkana, AR-Texarkana, TX ..... 18.2062Toledo, OH ................................... 21.4050Topeka, KS ................................... 19.8476Trenton, NJ ................................... 22.0690Tucson, AZ ................................... 19.1447Tulsa, OK ...................................... 18.4038Tuscaloosa, AL ............................. 17.5550Tyler, TX ....................................... 20.4737Utica-Rome, NY ............................ 18.6360Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa, CA ............ 27.9688Ventura, CA .................................. 24.0125Victoria, TX ................................... 17.7514Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ .... 22.8607Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA ....... 20.7921Waco, TX ...................................... 18.1006Washington, DC–MD–VA–WV ..... 23.4147Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA .............. 18.2949Wausau, WI .................................. 20.5039West Palm Beach-Boca Raton,

FL .............................................. 21.0777Wheeling, OH–WV ....................... 16.8341Wichita, KS ................................... 20.7776Wichita Falls, TX .......................... 16.6925Williamsport, PA ........................... 18.2688Wilmington-Newark, DE–MD ........ 24.3629Wilmington, NC ............................. 20.4690Yakima, WA .................................. 21.5675Yolo, CA ....................................... 22.2042York, PA ....................................... 20.1674Youngstown-Warren, OH ............. 20.7757Yuba City, CA ............................... 23.3065Yuma, AZ ...................................... 20.7458

TABLE 4E.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGEFOR RURAL AREAS

Nonurban areaAveragehourlywage

Alabama ........................................ 16.3047Alaska ........................................... 26.9769Arizona .......................................... 18.1056Arkansas ....................................... 16.2080

TABLE 4E.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGEFOR RURAL AREAS—Continued

Nonurban areaAveragehourlywage

California ....................................... 21.4673Colorado ....................................... 19.5235Connecticut ................................... 25.5035Delaware ....................................... 19.7543Florida ........................................... 19.4165Georgia ......................................... 18.1321Hawaii ........................................... 24.0749Idaho ............................................. 18.8912Illinois ............................................ 17.7653Indiana .......................................... 18.7277Iowa .............................................. 17.4823Kansas .......................................... 16.5568Kentucky ....................................... 17.2663Louisiana ...................................... 16.6925Maine ............................................ 19.0838Maryland ....................................... 18.8330Massachusetts .............................. 24.3924Michigan ....................................... 19.5659Minnesota ..................................... 19.3332Mississippi .................................... 16.3073Missouri ........................................ 16.7596Montana ........................................ 18.9143Nebraska ...................................... 17.6541Nevada ......................................... 20.0985New Hampshire ............................ 21.4334New Jersey 1 ................................. ................New Mexico .................................. 18.4985New York ...................................... 18.5034North Carolina .............................. 18.3772North Dakota ................................ 16.7982Ohio .............................................. 18.8756Oklahoma ..................................... 16.3084Oregon .......................................... 22.0574Pennsylvania ................................ 18.6739Puerto Rico ................................... 9.2817Rhode Island 1 .............................. ................South Carolina .............................. 18.2215South Dakota ................................ 16.4806Tennessee .................................... 17.0628Texas ............................................ 16.3317Utah .............................................. 19.6740Vermont ........................................ 20.1891Virginia .......................................... 17.8284Washington ................................... 22.7144West Virginia ................................ 17.9182Wisconsin ..................................... 19.3321Wyoming ....................................... 19.1944

1 All counties within the State are classifiedas urban.

TABLE 4F.—PUERTO RICO WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR (GAF)

Area Wageindex GAF

Wageindex—reclass.hospitals

GAF—reclass.hospitals

Aguadilla, PR ................................................................................................... 0.9380 0.9571 ........................ ........................Arecibo, PR ...................................................................................................... 0.9667 0.9771 ........................ ........................Caguas, PR ..................................................................................................... 0.9747 0.9826 ........................ ........................Mayaguez, PR ................................................................................................. 0.9803 0.9865 ........................ ........................Ponce, PR ........................................................................................................ 1.0695 1.0471 ........................ ........................San Juan-Bayamon, PR .................................................................................. 1.0020 1.0014 ........................ ........................Rural Puerto Rico ............................................................................................ 0.9108 0.9380 ........................ ........................



TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETICMEAN LENGTH OF STAY

DRG MDC Type DRG title Relativeweights

GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

1 ....... 01 SURG CRANIOTOMY AGE >17 EXCEPT FOR TRAUMA ............................. 3.0970 6.3 9.12 ....... 01 SURG CRANIOTOMY FOR TRAUMA AGE >17 ............................................ 3.1142 7.3 9.73 ....... 01 SURG *CRANIOTOMY AGE 0–17 .................................................................. 1.9629 12.7 12.74 ....... 01 SURG SPINAL PROCEDURES ....................................................................... 2.2918 4.8 7.45 ....... 01 SURG EXTRACRANIAL VASCULAR PROCEDURES ................................... 1.4321 2.3 3.36 ....... 01 SURG CARPAL TUNNEL RELEASE .............................................................. .8246 2.2 3.27 ....... 01 SURG PERIPH & CRANIAL NERVE & OTHER NERV SYST PROC W CC 2.5919 6.9 10.38 ....... 01 SURG PERIPH & CRANIAL NERVE & OTHER NERV SYST PROC W/O

CC.1.3948 2.1 3.0

9 ....... 01 MED SPINAL DISORDERS & INJURIES ..................................................... 1.3134 4.7 6.610 ..... 01 MED NERVOUS SYSTEM NEOPLASMS W CC .......................................... 1.2273 4.9 6.711 ..... 01 MED NERVOUS SYSTEM NEOPLASMS W/O CC ...................................... .8345 3.1 4.212 ..... 01 MED DEGENERATIVE NERVOUS SYSTEM DISORDERS ........................ .8925 4.5 6.113 ..... 01 MED MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS & CEREBELLAR ATAXIA ............................ .7644 4.1 5.114 ..... 01 MED SPECIFIC CEREBROVASCULAR DISORDERS EXCEPT TIA .......... 1.2070 4.7 6.115 ..... 01 MED TRANSIENT ISCHEMIC ATTACK & PRECEREBRAL OCCLUSIONS .7480 2.9 3.616 ..... 01 MED NONSPECIFIC CEREBROVASCULAR DISORDERS W CC ............. 1.1652 4.7 6.217 ..... 01 MED NONSPECIFIC CEREBROVASCULAR DISORDERS W/O CC .......... .6539 2.6 3.418 ..... 01 MED CRANIAL & PERIPHERAL NERVE DISORDERS W CC .................... .9600 4.3 5.619 ..... 01 MED CRANIAL & PERIPHERAL NERVE DISORDERS W/O CC ................ .6963 2.9 3.720 ..... 01 MED NERVOUS SYSTEM INFECTION EXCEPT VIRAL MENINGITIS ...... 2.7744 7.9 10.621 ..... 01 MED VIRAL MENINGITIS ............................................................................. 1.4966 5.2 6.922 ..... 01 MED HYPERTENSIVE ENCEPHALOPATHY ............................................... 1.0082 3.8 5.023 ..... 01 MED NONTRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA ................................................. .8027 3.2 4.224 ..... 01 MED SEIZURE & HEADACHE AGE >17 W CC ........................................... .9914 3.7 5.025 ..... 01 MED SEIZURE & HEADACHE AGE >17 W/O CC ....................................... .6043 2.6 3.326 ..... 01 MED SEIZURE & HEADACHE AGE 0–17 .................................................... .6441 2.4 3.227 ..... 01 MED TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA <1 HR ................................. 1.2912 3.2 5.128 ..... 01 MED TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA <1 HR AGE >17 W CC ...... 1.3102 4.5 6.329 ..... 01 MED TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA <1 HR AGE ≤17 W/O CC .. .7015 2.8 3.730 ..... 01 MED *TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA <1 HR AGE 0–17 ............. .3320 2.0 2.031 ..... 01 MED CONCUSSION AGE >17 W CC ........................................................... .8715 3.1 4.232 ..... 01 MED CONCUSSION AGE >17 W/O CC ....................................................... .5422 2.1 2.733 ..... 01 MED *CONCUSSION AGE 0–17 .................................................................. .2086 1.6 1.634 ..... 01 MED OTHER DISORDERS OF NERVOUS SYSTEM W CC ....................... 1.0099 3.8 5.235 ..... 01 MED OTHER DISORDERS OF NERVOUS SYSTEM W/O CC ................... .6027 2.7 3.436 ..... 02 SURG RETINAL PROCEDURES .................................................................... .6639 1.2 1.437 ..... 02 SURG ORBITAL PROCEDURES .................................................................... 1.0016 2.6 3.738 ..... 02 SURG PRIMARY IRIS PROCEDURES ........................................................... .4833 1.8 2.539 ..... 02 SURG LENS PROCEDURES WITH OR WITHOUT VITRECTOMY .............. .5778 1.5 1.940 ..... 02 SURG EXTRAOCULAR PROCEDURES EXCEPT ORBIT AGE >17 ............. .8635 2.3 3.641 ..... 02 SURG *EXTRAOCULAR PROCEDURES EXCEPT ORBIT AGE 0–17 ......... .3380 1.6 1.642 ..... 02 SURG INTRAOCULAR PROCEDURES EXCEPT RETINA, IRIS & LENS .... .6478 1.6 2.243 ..... 02 MED HYPHEMA ............................................................................................ .4977 2.6 3.444 ..... 02 MED ACUTE MAJOR EYE INFECTIONS ..................................................... .6337 4.1 5.045 ..... 02 MED NEUROLOGICAL EYE DISORDERS .................................................. .7022 2.7 3.346 ..... 02 MED OTHER DISORDERS OF THE EYE AGE >17 W CC ......................... .7749 3.5 4.647 ..... 02 MED OTHER DISORDERS OF THE EYE AGE >17 W/O CC ..................... .5085 2.5 3.348 ..... 02 MED *OTHER DISORDERS OF THE EYE AGE 0–17 ................................ .2977 2.9 2.949 ..... 03 SURG MAJOR HEAD & NECK PROCEDURES ............................................. 1.8301 3.5 5.050 ..... 03 SURG SIALOADENECTOMY .......................................................................... .8537 1.6 2.051 ..... 03 SURG SALIVARY GLAND PROCEDURES EXCEPT SIALOADENECTOMY .7934 1.8 2.552 ..... 03 SURG CLEFT LIP & PALATE REPAIR ........................................................... .8410 1.6 2.153 ..... 03 SURG SINUS & MASTOID PROCEDURES AGE >17 ................................... 1.2118 2.3 3.754 ..... 03 SURG *SINUS & MASTOID PROCEDURES AGE 0–17 ................................ .4826 3.2 3.255 ..... 03 SURG MISCELLANEOUS EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT PROCE-

DURES..9039 1.9 2.9

56 ..... 03 SURG RHINOPLASTY ..................................................................................... .9451 2.1 3.157 ..... 03 SURG T&A PROC, EXCEPT TONSILLECTOMY &/OR ADENOIDECTOMY

ONLY, AGE >17.1.0704 2.5 4.0

58 ..... 03 SURG *T&A PROC, EXCEPT TONSILLECTOMY &/OR ADENOIDECTOMYONLY, AGE 0–17.

.2740 1.5 1.5

59 ..... 03 SURG TONSILLECTOMY &/OR ADENOIDECTOMY ONLY, AGE >17 ......... .6943 1.8 2.560 ..... 03 SURG *TONSILLECTOMY &/OR ADENOIDECTOMY ONLY, AGE 0–17 ..... .2087 1.5 1.561 ..... 03 SURG MYRINGOTOMY W TUBE INSERTION AGE >17 .............................. 1.2660 2.8 4.862 ..... 03 SURG *MYRINGOTOMY W TUBE INSERTION AGE 0–17 ........................... .2955 1.3 1.363 ..... 03 SURG OTHER EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT O.R. PROCEDURES ...... 1.3402 3.0 4.364 ..... 03 MED EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT MALIGNANCY .............................. 1.2288 4.3 6.565 ..... 03 MED DYSEQUILIBRIUM ............................................................................... .5385 2.3 2.9



TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETICMEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued


GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

66 ..... 03 MED EPISTAXIS ........................................................................................... .5590 2.5 3.267 ..... 03 MED EPIGLOTTITIS ...................................................................................... .8105 2.8 3.568 ..... 03 MED OTITIS MEDIA & URI AGE >17 W CC ................................................ .6750 3.4 4.269 ..... 03 MED OTITIS MEDIA & URI AGE >17 W/O CC ............................................ .5152 2.7 3.370 ..... 03 MED OTITIS MEDIA & URI AGE 0–17 ......................................................... .4628 2.4 2.971 ..... 03 MED LARYNGOTRACHEITIS ....................................................................... .7712 3.0 3.972 ..... 03 MED NASAL TRAUMA & DEFORMITY ........................................................ .6428 2.6 3.373 ..... 03 MED OTHER EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT DIAGNOSES AGE >17 ... .7777 3.3 4.474 ..... 03 MED *OTHER EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT DIAGNOSES AGE 0–17 .3358 2.1 2.175 ..... 04 SURG MAJOR CHEST PROCEDURES ......................................................... 3.1331 7.8 10.076 ..... 04 SURG OTHER RESP SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W CC ........................ 2.7908 8.4 11.377 ..... 04 SURG OTHER RESP SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W/O CC ..................... 1.1887 3.5 5.078 ..... 04 MED PULMONARY EMBOLISM ................................................................... 1.3698 6.0 7.079 ..... 04 MED RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS & INFLAMMATIONS AGE >17 W CC 1.6501 6.6 8.580 ..... 04 MED RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS & INFLAMMATIONS AGE >17 W/O

CC..9373 4.7 5.8

81 ..... 04 MED *RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS & INFLAMMATIONS AGE 0–17 ....... 1.5204 6.1 6.182 ..... 04 MED RESPIRATORY NEOPLASMS ............................................................. 1.3799 5.2 7.083 ..... 04 MED MAJOR CHEST TRAUMA W CC ......................................................... .9808 4.4 5.684 ..... 04 MED MAJOR CHEST TRAUMA W/O CC ..................................................... .5539 2.8 3.485 ..... 04 MED PLEURAL EFFUSION W CC ............................................................... 1.2198 4.9 6.486 ..... 04 MED PLEURAL EFFUSION W/O CC ........................................................... .6984 2.9 3.887 ..... 04 MED PULMONARY EDEMA & RESPIRATORY FAILURE .......................... 1.3781 4.8 6.388 ..... 04 MED CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE .......................... .9317 4.2 5.289 ..... 04 MED SIMPLE PNEUMONIA & PLEURISY AGE >17 W CC ........................ 1.0647 5.0 6.090 ..... 04 MED SIMPLE PNEUMONIA & PLEURISY AGE >17 W/O CC .................... .6590 3.6 4.291 ..... 04 MED SIMPLE PNEUMONIA & PLEURISY AGE 0–17 ................................. .6890 2.8 3.492 ..... 04 MED INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE W CC ............................................... 1.1863 5.0 6.393 ..... 04 MED INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE W/O CC ........................................... .7309 3.3 4.194 ..... 04 MED PNEUMOTHORAX W CC .................................................................... 1.1704 4.8 6.395 ..... 04 MED PNEUMOTHORAX W/O CC ................................................................ .6098 3.0 3.796 ..... 04 MED BRONCHITIS & ASTHMA AGE >17 W CC ......................................... .7871 3.9 4.797 ..... 04 MED BRONCHITIS & ASTHMA AGE >17 W/O CC ..................................... .5873 3.1 3.798 ..... 04 MED BRONCHITIS & ASTHMA AGE 0–17 .................................................. .8768 3.2 4.799 ..... 04 MED RESPIRATORY SIGNS & SYMPTOMS W CC ................................... .7117 2.5 3.2100 ... 04 MED RESPIRATORY SIGNS & SYMPTOMS W/O CC ................................ .5437 1.8 2.2101 ... 04 MED OTHER RESPIRATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W CC ..................... .8563 3.3 4.4102 ... 04 MED OTHER RESPIRATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W/O CC ................. .5550 2.1 2.7103 ... PRE SURG HEART TRANSPLANT ......................................................................... 19.0098 30.7 51.8104 ... 05 SURG CARDIAC VALVE & OTHER MAJOR CARDIOTHORACIC PROC W

CARDIAC CATH.7.1843 8.9 11.7

105 ... 05 SURG CARDIAC VALVE & OTHER MAJOR CARDIOTHORACIC PROC W/O CARDIAC CATH.

5.6567 7.4 9.3

106 ... 05 SURG CORONARY BYPASS W PTCA .......................................................... 7.5203 9.3 11.2107 ... 05 SURG CORONARY BYPASS W CARDIAC CATH ......................................... 5.3762 9.2 10.3108 ... 05 SURG OTHER CARDIOTHORACIC PROCEDURES ..................................... 5.6525 8.0 10.6109 ... 05 SURG CORONARY BYPASS W/O PTCA OR CARDIAC CATH ................... 4.0198 6.8 7.7110 ... 05 SURG MAJOR CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES W CC ......................... 4.1358 7.1 9.5111 ... 05 SURG MAJOR CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES W/O CC ..................... 2.2410 4.7 5.5112 ... 05 SURG PERCUTANEOUS CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES ................... 1.8677 2.6 3.8113 ... 05 SURG AMPUTATION FOR CIRC SYSTEM DISORDERS EXCEPT UPPER

LIMB & TOE.2.7806 9.8 12.8

114 ... 05 SURG UPPER LIMB & TOE AMPUTATION FOR CIRC SYSTEM DIS-ORDERS.

1.5656 6.0 8.3

115 ... 05 SURG PRM CARD PACEM IMPL W AMI,HRT FAIL OR SHK,OR AICDLEAD OR GNRTR PR.

3.4711 6.0 8.4

116 ... 05 SURG OTH PERM CARD PACEMAK IMPL OR PTCA W CORONARY AR-TERY STENT IMPLNT.

2.4190 2.6 3.7

117 ... 05 SURG CARDIAC PACEMAKER REVISION EXCEPT DEVICE REPLACE-MENT.

1.2966 2.6 4.0

118 ... 05 SURG CARDIAC PACEMAKER DEVICE REPLACEMENT ........................... 1.4939 1.9 2.8119 ... 05 SURG VEIN LIGATION & STRIPPING ........................................................... 1.2600 2.9 4.9120 ... 05 SURG OTHER CIRCULATORY SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES ................... 2.0352 4.9 8.1121 ... 05 MED CIRCULATORY DISORDERS W AMI & MAJOR COMP, DIS-

CHARGED ALIVE.1.6194 5.5 6.7

122 ... 05 MED CIRCULATORY DISORDERS W AMI W/O MAJOR COMP, DIS-CHARGED ALIVE.

1.0884 3.3 4.0

123 ... 05 MED CIRCULATORY DISORDERS W AMI, EXPIRED ............................... 1.5528 2.8 4.6





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

124 ... 05 MED CIRCULATORY DISORDERS EXCEPT AMI, W CARD CATH &COMPLEX DIAG.

1.4134 3.3 4.4

125 ... 05 MED CIRCULATORY DISORDERS EXCEPT AMI, W CARD CATH W/OCOMPLEX DIAG.

1.0606 2.2 2.8

126 ... 05 MED ACUTE & SUBACUTE ENDOCARDITIS ............................................. 2.5379 9.3 12.0127 ... 05 MED HEART FAILURE & SHOCK ................................................................ 1.0130 4.2 5.4128 ... 05 MED DEEP VEIN THROMBOPHLEBITIS ..................................................... .7651 5.0 5.8129 ... 05 MED CARDIAC ARREST, UNEXPLAINED .................................................. 1.0968 1.8 2.9130 ... 05 MED PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISORDERS W CC ................................. .9471 4.7 5.9131 ... 05 MED PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISORDERS W/O CC ............................. .5898 3.6 4.4132 ... 05 MED ATHEROSCLEROSIS W CC ............................................................... .6707 2.4 3.1133 ... 05 MED ATHEROSCLEROSIS W/O CC ............................................................ .5663 1.9 2.4134 ... 05 MED HYPERTENSION .................................................................................. .5917 2.6 3.3135 ... 05 MED CARDIAC CONGENITAL & VALVULAR DISORDERS AGE >17 W

CC..9083 3.3 4.5

136 ... 05 MED CARDIAC CONGENITAL & VALVULAR DISORDERS AGE >17 W/OCC.

.6065 2.2 2.9

137 ... 05 MED *CARDIAC CONGENITAL & VALVULAR DISORDERS AGE 0–17 .... .8192 3.3 3.3138 ... 05 MED CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIA & CONDUCTION DISORDERS W CC ...... .8291 3.1 4.0139 ... 05 MED CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIA & CONDUCTION DISORDERS W/O CC .. .5141 2.0 2.5140 ... 05 MED ANGINA PECTORIS ............................................................................. .5740 2.2 2.7141 ... 05 MED SYNCOPE & COLLAPSE W CC .......................................................... .7219 2.9 3.7142 ... 05 MED SYNCOPE & COLLAPSE W/O CC ...................................................... .5552 2.2 2.7143 ... 05 MED CHEST PAIN ........................................................................................ .5402 1.8 2.2144 ... 05 MED OTHER CIRCULATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W CC ..................... 1.1668 3.8 5.4145 ... 05 MED OTHER CIRCULATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W/O CC ................. .6322 2.2 2.8146 ... 06 SURG RECTAL RESECTION W CC ............................................................... 2.7430 8.9 10.2147 ... 06 SURG RECTAL RESECTION W/O CC ........................................................... 1.6221 6.0 6.6148 ... 06 SURG MAJOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W CC ................ 3.4347 10.1 12.1149 ... 06 SURG MAJOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W/O CC ............ 1.5667 6.1 6.7150 ... 06 SURG PERITONEAL ADHESIOLYSIS W CC ................................................. 2.8523 9.1 11.2151 ... 06 SURG PERITONEAL ADHESIOLYSIS W/O CC ............................................. 1.3427 4.8 5.9152 ... 06 SURG MINOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W CC ................ 1.9462 6.8 8.2153 ... 06 SURG MINOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W/O CC ............ 1.2080 4.9 5.5154 ... 06 SURG STOMACH, ESOPHAGEAL & DUODENAL PROCEDURES AGE

>17 W CC.4.1475 10.1 13.3

155 ... 06 SURG STOMACH, ESOPHAGEAL & DUODENAL PROCEDURES AGE>17 W/O CC.

1.3751 3.3 4.4

156 ... 06 SURG *STOMACH, ESOPHAGEAL & DUODENAL PROCEDURES AGE 0–17.

.8436 6.0 6.0

157 ... 06 SURG ANAL & STOMAL PROCEDURES W CC ........................................... 1.2388 3.9 5.5158 ... 06 SURG ANAL & STOMAL PROCEDURES W/O CC ........................................ .6638 2.1 2.6159 ... 06 SURG HERNIA PROCEDURES EXCEPT INGUINAL & FEMORAL AGE

>17 W CC.1.3347 3.8 5.0

160 ... 06 SURG HERNIA PROCEDURES EXCEPT INGUINAL & FEMORAL AGE>17 W/O CC.

.7837 2.2 2.7

161 ... 06 SURG INGUINAL & FEMORAL HERNIA PROCEDURES AGE >17 W CC .. 1.1017 2.9 4.2162 ... 06 SURG INGUINAL & FEMORAL HERNIA PROCEDURES AGE >17 W/O CC .6229 1.6 2.0163 ... 06 SURG HERNIA PROCEDURES AGE 0–17 .................................................... .6921 2.4 2.9164 ... 06 SURG APPENDECTOMY W COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W CC ....... 2.3760 7.1 8.4165 ... 06 SURG APPENDECTOMY W COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W/O CC ... 1.2838 4.3 4.9166 ... 06 SURG APPENDECTOMY W/O COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W CC ... 1.4802 4.0 5.1167 ... 06 SURG APPENDECTOMY W/O COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W/O CC .8937 2.3 2.7168 ... 03 SURG MOUTH PROCEDURES W CC ........................................................... 1.2141 3.2 4.7169 ... 03 SURG MOUTH PROCEDURES W/O CC ....................................................... .7455 1.9 2.4170 ... 06 SURG OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W CC ............... 2.8686 7.7 11.2171 ... 06 SURG OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W/O CC ........... 1.1975 3.6 4.8172 ... 06 MED DIGESTIVE MALIGNANCY W CC ....................................................... 1.3485 5.1 7.0173 ... 06 MED DIGESTIVE MALIGNANCY W/O CC ................................................... .7700 2.8 3.9174 ... 06 MED G.I. HEMORRHAGE W CC .................................................................. .9985 3.9 4.8175 ... 06 MED G.I. HEMORRHAGE W/O CC .............................................................. .5501 2.5 2.9176 ... 06 MED COMPLICATED PEPTIC ULCER ........................................................ 1.1052 4.1 5.3177 ... 06 MED UNCOMPLICATED PEPTIC ULCER W CC ........................................ .8998 3.7 4.6178 ... 06 MED UNCOMPLICATED PEPTIC ULCER W/O CC .................................... .6604 2.6 3.1179 ... 06 MED INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE .................................................. 1.0576 4.7 6.0180 ... 06 MED G.I. OBSTRUCTION W CC .................................................................. .9423 4.2 5.4181 ... 06 MED G.I. OBSTRUCTION W/O CC .............................................................. .5304 2.8 3.4182 ... 06 MED ESOPHAGITIS, GASTROENT & MISC DIGEST DISORDERS AGE

>17 W CC..7922 3.4 4.4





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

183 ... 06 MED ESOPHAGITIS, GASTROENT & MISC DIGEST DISORDERS AGE>17 W/O CC.

.5717 2.4 3.0

184 ... 06 MED ESOPHAGITIS, GASTROENT & MISC DIGEST DISORDERS AGE0–17.

.5119 2.5 3.3

185 ... 03 MED DENTAL & ORAL DIS EXCEPT EXTRACTIONS & RESTORA-TIONS, AGE >17.

.8621 3.3 4.5

186 ... 03 MED *DENTAL & ORAL DIS EXCEPT EXTRACTIONS & RESTORA-TIONS, AGE 0–17.

.3216 2.9 2.9

187 ... 03 MED DENTAL EXTRACTIONS & RESTORATIONS .................................... .7649 2.9 3.8188 ... 06 MED OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W CC ........... 1.1005 4.1 5.6189 ... 06 MED OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W/O CC ........ .5796 2.4 3.1190 ... 06 MED OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES AGE 0–17 .................... .9884 4.1 6.0191 ... 07 SURG PANCREAS, LIVER & SHUNT PROCEDURES W CC ....................... 4.3914 10.5 14.2192 ... 07 SURG PANCREAS, LIVER & SHUNT PROCEDURES W/O CC ................... 1.7916 5.3 6.6193 ... 07 SURG BILIARY TRACT PROC EXCEPT ONLY CHOLECYST W OR W/O

C.D.E. W CC.3.3861 10.3 12.6

194 ... 07 SURG BILIARY TRACT PROC EXCEPT ONLY CHOLECYST W OR W/OC.D.E. W/O CC.

1.6191 5.6 6.8

195 ... 07 SURG CHOLECYSTECTOMY W C.D.E. W CC ............................................. 2.9062 8.3 9.9196 ... 07 SURG CHOLECYSTECTOMY W C.D.E. W/O CC ......................................... 1.6593 4.9 5.7197 ... 07 SURG CHOLECYSTECTOMY EXCEPT BY LAPAROSCOPE W/O C.D.E.

W CC.2.4544 7.2 8.7

198 ... 07 SURG CHOLECYSTECTOMY EXCEPT BY LAPAROSCOPE W/O C.D.E.W/O CC.

1.2339 3.9 4.5

199 ... 07 SURG HEPATOBILIARY DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE FOR MALIGNANCY 2.3584 7.2 9.7200 ... 07 SURG HEPATOBILIARY DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE FOR NON-MALIG-

NANCY.3.2262 7.0 10.8

201 ... 07 SURG OTHER HEPATOBILIARY OR PANCREAS O.R. PROCEDURES ..... 3.4035 10.2 13.9202 ... 07 MED CIRRHOSIS & ALCOHOLIC HEPATITIS ............................................. 1.3001 4.9 6.5203 ... 07 MED MALIGNANCY OF HEPATOBILIARY SYSTEM OR PANCREAS ....... 1.3250 5.0 6.7204 ... 07 MED DISORDERS OF PANCREAS EXCEPT MALIGNANCY ..................... 1.2018 4.5 5.9205 ... 07 MED DISORDERS OF LIVER EXCEPT MALIG,CIRR,ALC HEPA W CC ... 1.2048 4.7 6.3206 ... 07 MED DISORDERS OF LIVER EXCEPT MALIG,CIRR,ALC HEPA W/O CC .6751 3.0 3.9207 ... 07 MED DISORDERS OF THE BILIARY TRACT W CC ................................... 1.1032 4.0 5.2208 ... 07 MED DISORDERS OF THE BILIARY TRACT W/O CC ............................... .6538 2.3 2.9209 ... 08 SURG MAJOR JOINT & LIMB REATTACHMENT PROCEDURES OF

LOWER EXTREMITY.2.0912 4.6 5.2

210 ... 08 SURG HIP & FEMUR PROCEDURES EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT AGE >17W CC.

1.8152 6.0 6.9

211 ... 08 SURG HIP & FEMUR PROCEDURES EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT AGE >17W/O CC.

1.2647 4.5 4.9

212 ... 08 SURG *HIP & FEMUR PROCEDURES EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT AGE 0–17 .8472 11.1 11.1213 ... 08 SURG AMPUTATION FOR MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONN TIS-

SUE DISORDERS.1.7726 6.4 8.7

214 ... 08 SURG NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0215 ... 08 SURG NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0216 ... 08 SURG BIOPSIES OF MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONNECTIVE

TISSUE.2.2042 7.1 9.8

217 ... 08 SURG WND DEBRID & SKN GRFT EXCEPT HAND,FOR MUSCSKELET &CONN TISS DIS.

2.9230 8.9 13.2

218 ... 08 SURG LOWER EXTREM & HUMER PROC EXCEPT HIP, FOOT, FEMURAGE >17 W CC.

1.5337 4.2 5.4

219 ... 08 SURG LOWER EXTREM & HUMER PROC EXCEPT HIP, FOOT, FEMURAGE >17 W/O CC.

1.0255 2.7 3.3

220 ... 08 SURG *LOWER EXTREM & HUMER PROC EXCEPT HIP, FOOT, FEMURAGE 0–17.

.5844 5.3 5.3

221 ... 08 SURG NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0222 ... 08 SURG NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0223 ... 08 SURG MAJOR SHOULDER/ELBOW PROC, OR OTHER UPPER EXTREM-

ITY PROC W CC..9585 2.0 2.6

224 ... 08 SURG SHOULDER, ELBOW OR FOREARM PROC, EXC MAJOR JOINTPROC, W/O CC.

.7997 1.7 2.1

225 ... 08 SURG FOOT PROCEDURES ......................................................................... 1.0851 3.3 4.7226 ... 08 SURG SOFT TISSUE PROCEDURES W CC ................................................. 1.4770 4.3 6.3227 ... 08 SURG SOFT TISSUE PROCEDURES W/O CC ............................................. .8036 2.1 2.7228 ... 08 SURG MAJOR THUMB OR JOINT PROC,OR OTH HAND OR WRIST

PROC W CC.1.0664 2.4 3.6

229 ... 08 SURG HAND OR WRIST PROC, EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT PROC, W/O CC .7169 1.8 2.4





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

230 ... 08 SURG LOCAL EXCISION & REMOVAL OF INT FIX DEVICES OF HIP &FEMUR.

1.2490 3.4 5.1

231 ... 08 SURG LOCAL EXCISION & REMOVAL OF INT FIX DEVICES EXCEPTHIP & FEMUR.

1.3825 3.2 4.8

232 ... 08 SURG ARTHROSCOPY .................................................................................. 1.0828 2.3 3.6233 ... 08 SURG OTHER MUSCULOSKELET SYS & CONN TISS O.R. PROC W CC 2.0890 5.3 7.7234 ... 08 SURG OTHER MUSCULOSKELET SYS & CONN TISS O.R. PROC W/O

CC.1.2661 2.7 3.6

235 ... 08 MED FRACTURES OF FEMUR .................................................................... .7582 3.8 5.2236 ... 08 MED FRACTURES OF HIP & PELVIS ......................................................... .7218 4.0 5.0237 ... 08 MED SPRAINS, STRAINS, & DISLOCATIONS OF HIP, PELVIS & THIGH .5681 3.0 3.7238 ... 08 MED OSTEOMYELITIS ................................................................................. 1.3496 6.4 8.6239 ... 08 MED PATHOLOGICAL FRACTURES & MUSCULOSKELETAL & CONN

TISS MALIGNANCY..9745 4.9 6.2

240 ... 08 MED CONNECTIVE TISSUE DISORDERS W CC ....................................... 1.2712 4.9 6.6241 ... 08 MED CONNECTIVE TISSUE DISORDERS W/O CC ................................... .6177 3.1 3.9242 ... 08 MED SEPTIC ARTHRITIS ............................................................................. 1.0724 5.1 6.6243 ... 08 MED MEDICAL BACK PROBLEMS .............................................................. .7262 3.7 4.7244 ... 08 MED BONE DISEASES & SPECIFIC ARTHROPATHIES W CC ................ .7155 3.7 4.8245 ... 08 MED BONE DISEASES & SPECIFIC ARTHROPATHIES W/O CC ............. .4832 2.8 3.6246 ... 08 MED NON-SPECIFIC ARTHROPATHIES .................................................... .5570 2.9 3.6247 ... 08 MED SIGNS & SYMPTOMS OF MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONN

TISSUE..5696 2.6 3.5

248 ... 08 MED TENDONITIS, MYOSITIS & BURSITIS ............................................... .7864 3.7 4.8249 ... 08 MED AFTERCARE, MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONNECTIVE

TISSUE..6913 2.6 3.8

250 ... 08 MED FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF FOREARM, HAND, FOOT AGE >17W CC.

.6929 3.3 4.3

251 ... 08 MED FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF FOREARM, HAND, FOOT AGE >17W/O CC.

.4995 2.4 3.0

252 ... 08 MED *FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF FOREARM, HAND, FOOT AGE 0–17 .2538 1.8 1.8253 ... 08 MED FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF UPARM,LOWLEG EX FOOT AGE >17

W CC..7253 3.7 4.7

254 ... 08 MED FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF UPARM,LOWLEG EX FOOT AGE >17W/O CC.

.4413 2.6 3.2

255 ... 08 MED *FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF UPARM,LOWLEG EX FOOT AGE 0–17.

.2956 2.9 2.9

256 ... 08 MED OTHER MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONNECTIVE TISSUEDIAGNOSES.

.7959 3.8 5.2

257 ... 09 SURG TOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W CC ........................... .9107 2.3 2.8258 ... 09 SURG TOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W/O CC ....................... .7232 1.8 2.0259 ... 09 SURG SUBTOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W CC .................... .9068 1.8 2.8260 ... 09 SURG SUBTOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W/O CC ................ .6532 1.3 1.4261 ... 09 SURG BREAST PROC FOR NON-MALIGNANCY EXCEPT BIOPSY &

LOCAL EXCISION..9362 1.7 2.2

262 ... 09 SURG BREAST BIOPSY & LOCAL EXCISION FOR NON-MALIGNANCY ... .8754 2.7 3.8263 ... 09 SURG SKIN GRAFT &/OR DEBRID FOR SKN ULCER OR CELLULITIS W

CC.2.1219 8.9 12.2

264 ... 09 SURG SKIN GRAFT &/OR DEBRID FOR SKN ULCER OR CELLULITIS W/O CC.

1.1479 5.4 7.2

265 ... 09 SURG SKIN GRAFT &/OR DEBRID EXCEPT FOR SKIN ULCER ORCELLULITIS W CC.

1.5309 4.3 6.6

266 ... 09 SURG SKIN GRAFT &/OR DEBRID EXCEPT FOR SKIN ULCER ORCELLULITIS W/O CC.

.8707 2.4 3.3

267 ... 09 SURG PERIANAL & PILONIDAL PROCEDURES .......................................... 1.0792 3.1 5.2268 ... 09 SURG SKIN, SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE & BREAST PLASTIC PROCE-

DURES.1.1405 2.4 3.7

269 ... 09 SURG OTHER SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST PROC W CC .................... 1.7004 5.8 8.3270 ... 09 SURG OTHER SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST PROC W/O CC ................ .7670 2.3 3.3271 ... 09 MED SKIN ULCERS ...................................................................................... 1.0104 5.5 7.1272 ... 09 MED MAJOR SKIN DISORDERS W CC ...................................................... .9994 4.8 6.3273 ... 09 MED MAJOR SKIN DISORDERS W/O CC .................................................. .6179 3.2 4.2274 ... 09 MED MALIGNANT BREAST DISORDERS W CC ........................................ 1.2061 4.9 7.0275 ... 09 MED MALIGNANT BREAST DISORDERS W/O CC .................................... .5301 2.4 3.4276 ... 09 MED NON-MALIGANT BREAST DISORDERS ............................................ .6899 3.6 4.6277 ... 09 MED CELLULITIS AGE >17 W CC ............................................................... .8396 4.7 5.7278 ... 09 MED CELLULITIS AGE >17 W/O CC ........................................................... .5522 3.6 4.3279 ... 09 MED *CELLULITIS AGE 0–17 ...................................................................... .6644 4.2 4.2280 ... 09 MED TRAUMA TO THE SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST AGE >17 W CC .6788 3.2 4.2





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

281 ... 09 MED TRAUMA TO THE SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST AGE >17 W/OCC.

.4729 2.4 3.1

282 ... 09 MED *TRAUMA TO THE SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST AGE 0–17 ...... .2570 2.2 2.2283 ... 09 MED MINOR SKIN DISORDERS W CC ....................................................... .6917 3.5 4.6284 ... 09 MED MINOR SKIN DISORDERS W/O CC ................................................... .4336 2.5 3.2285 ... 10 SURG AMPUTAT OF LOWER LIMB FOR ENDOCRINE, NUTRIT, &

METABOL DISORDERS.1.9961 7.7 10.5

286 ... 10 SURG ADRENAL & PITUITARY PROCEDURES ........................................... 2.1299 4.9 6.2287 ... 10 SURG SKIN GRAFTS & WOUND DEBRID FOR ENDOC, NUTRIT &

METAB DISORDERS.1.8283 7.8 10.5

288 ... 10 SURG O.R. PROCEDURES FOR OBESITY .................................................. 2.1607 4.5 5.7289 ... 10 SURG PARATHYROID PROCEDURES ......................................................... .9914 2.0 3.1290 ... 10 SURG THYROID PROCEDURES ................................................................... .9193 1.8 2.4291 ... 10 SURG THYROGLOSSAL PROCEDURES ...................................................... .5487 1.4 1.6292 ... 10 SURG OTHER ENDOCRINE, NUTRIT & METAB O.R. PROC W CC ........... 2.4538 6.9 10.0293 ... 10 SURG OTHER ENDOCRINE, NUTRIT & METAB O.R. PROC W/O CC ....... 1.2289 3.6 5.1294 ... 10 MED DIABETES AGE >35 ............................................................................ .7589 3.6 4.7295 ... 10 MED DIABETES AGE 0–35 .......................................................................... .7587 2.9 3.9296 ... 10 MED NUTRITIONAL & MISC METABOLIC DISORDERS AGE >17 W CC .8594 4.0 5.2297 ... 10 MED NUTRITIONAL & MISC METABOLIC DISORDERS AGE >17 W/O

CC..5179 2.8 3.5

298 ... 10 MED NUTRITIONAL & MISC METABOLIC DISORDERS AGE 0–17 .......... .5269 2.5 3.1299 ... 10 MED INBORN ERRORS OF METABOLISM ................................................ .9632 4.0 5.6300 ... 10 MED ENDOCRINE DISORDERS W CC ....................................................... 1.0829 4.7 6.1301 ... 10 MED ENDOCRINE DISORDERS W/O CC ................................................... .6133 2.9 3.7302 ... 11 SURG KIDNEY TRANSPLANT ........................................................................ 3.4241 7.9 9.4303 ... 11 SURG KIDNEY, URETER & MAJOR BLADDER PROCEDURES FOR NEO-

PLASM.2.4602 7.0 8.5

304 ... 11 SURG KIDNEY, URETER & MAJOR BLADDER PROC FOR NON-NEOPLW CC.

2.3407 6.4 8.9

305 ... 11 SURG KIDNEY, URETER & MAJOR BLADDER PROC FOR NON-NEOPLW/O CC.

1.1825 3.1 3.8

306 ... 11 SURG PROSTATECTOMY W CC ................................................................... 1.2489 3.7 5.5307 ... 11 SURG PROSTATECTOMY W/O CC ............................................................... .6460 1.9 2.3308 ... 11 SURG MINOR BLADDER PROCEDURES W CC .......................................... 1.6449 4.2 6.4309 ... 11 SURG MINOR BLADDER PROCEDURES W/O CC ...................................... .9339 2.0 2.5310 ... 11 SURG TRANSURETHRAL PROCEDURES W CC ......................................... 1.1172 3.0 4.4311 ... 11 SURG TRANSURETHRAL PROCEDURES W/O CC ..................................... .6174 1.6 1.9312 ... 11 SURG URETHRAL PROCEDURES, AGE >17 W CC .................................... 1.0173 3.0 4.5313 ... 11 SURG URETHRAL PROCEDURES, AGE >17 W/O CC ................................ .6444 1.7 2.1314 ... 11 SURG *URETHRAL PROCEDURES, AGE 0–17 ............................................ .4953 2.3 2.3315 ... 11 SURG OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT O.R. PROCEDURES .............. 2.0474 4.2 7.5316 ... 11 MED RENAL FAILURE .................................................................................. 1.3424 4.9 6.7317 ... 11 MED ADMIT FOR RENAL DIALYSIS ........................................................... .7395 2.1 3.2318 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT NEOPLASMS W CC ............................ 1.1313 4.3 6.0319 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT NEOPLASMS W/O CC ........................ .6040 2.2 2.9320 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS AGE >17 W CC ............ .8621 4.3 5.4321 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS AGE >17 W/O CC ......... .5686 3.2 3.8322 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS AGE 0–17 ..................... .4939 3.3 4.1323 ... 11 MED URINARY STONES W CC, &/OR ESW LITHOTRIPSY ...................... .7996 2.4 3.2324 ... 11 MED URINARY STONES W/O CC ............................................................... .4509 1.6 1.9325 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT SIGNS & SYMPTOMS AGE >17 W

CC..6460 3.0 3.9

326 ... 11 MED KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT SIGNS & SYMPTOMS AGE >17 W/OCC.

.4297 2.1 2.7

327 ... 11 MED *KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT SIGNS & SYMPTOMS AGE 0–17 ..... .3543 3.1 3.1328 ... 11 MED URETHRAL STRICTURE AGE >17 W CC .......................................... .7455 2.8 3.9329 ... 11 MED URETHRAL STRICTURE AGE >17 W/O CC ...................................... .5253 1.7 2.0330 ... 11 MED *URETHRAL STRICTURE AGE 0–17 ................................................. .3191 1.6 1.6331 ... 11 MED OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W CC 1.0221 4.1 5.6332 ... 11 MED OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W/O

CC..5997 2.5 3.3

333 ... 11 MED OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT DIAGNOSES AGE 0–17 ........ .8247 3.5 5.0334 ... 12 SURG MAJOR MALE PELVIC PROCEDURES W CC ................................... 1.5591 4.2 4.9335 ... 12 SURG MAJOR MALE PELVIC PROCEDURES W/O CC ............................... 1.1697 3.2 3.4336 ... 12 SURG TRANSURETHRAL PROSTATECTOMY W CC .................................. .8880 2.7 3.5337 ... 12 SURG TRANSURETHRAL PROSTATECTOMY W/O CC .............................. .6152 1.9 2.2338 ... 12 SURG TESTES PROCEDURES, FOR MALIGNANCY ................................... 1.1900 3.5 5.3339 ... 12 SURG TESTES PROCEDURES, NON-MALIGNANCY AGE >17 .................. 1.0769 3.0 4.6





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

340 ... 12 SURG *TESTES PROCEDURES, NON-MALIGNANCY AGE 0–17 ............... .2835 2.4 2.4341 ... 12 SURG PENIS PROCEDURES ......................................................................... 1.1709 2.1 3.2342 ... 12 SURG CIRCUMCISION AGE >17 ................................................................... .8240 2.5 3.1343 ... 12 SURG *CIRCUMCISION AGE 0–17 ................................................................ .1541 1.7 1.7344 ... 12 SURG OTHER MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES

FOR MALIGNANCY.1.1519 1.6 2.3

345 ... 12 SURG OTHER MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROC EXCEPTFOR MALIGNANCY.

.8800 2.6 3.8

346 ... 12 MED MALIGNANCY, MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM, W CC ................ .9756 4.3 5.8347 ... 12 MED MALIGNANCY, MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM, W/O CC ............. .5922 2.4 3.4348 ... 12 MED BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERTROPHY W CC ................................... .7142 3.2 4.2349 ... 12 MED BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERTROPHY W/O CC ............................... .4380 2.0 2.6350 ... 12 MED INFLAMMATION OF THE MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM ........... .6992 3.6 4.4351 ... 12 MED *STERILIZATION, MALE ...................................................................... .2364 1.3 1.3352 ... 12 MED OTHER MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES .................. .6858 2.8 3.8353 ... 13 SURG PELVIC EVISCERATION, RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY & RADICAL

VULVECTOMY.1.9292 5.3 6.7

354 ... 13 SURG UTERINE, ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-OVARIAN/ADNEXAL MALIGW CC.

1.5284 4.9 5.9

355 ... 13 SURG UTERINE, ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-OVARIAN/ADNEXAL MALIGW/O CC.

.9278 3.1 3.3

356 ... 13 SURG FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM RECONSTRUCTIVE PROCE-DURES.

.7846 2.1 2.4

357 ... 13 SURG UTERINE & ADNEXA PROC FOR OVARIAN OR ADNEXAL MALIG-NANCY.

2.3628 6.9 8.5

358 ... 13 SURG UTERINE & ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-MALIGNANCY W CC ......... 1.2263 3.7 4.4359 ... 13 SURG UTERINE & ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-MALIGNANCY W/O CC ..... .8593 2.6 2.8360 ... 13 SURG VAGINA, CERVIX & VULVA PROCEDURES ...................................... .8860 2.4 3.0361 ... 13 SURG LAPAROSCOPY & INCISIONAL TUBAL INTERRUPTION ................. 1.2318 2.2 3.5362 ... 13 SURG *ENDOSCOPIC TUBAL INTERRUPTION ........................................... .3022 1.4 1.4363 ... 13 SURG D&C, CONIZATION & RADIO-IMPLANT, FOR MALIGNANCY .......... .8136 2.5 3.5364 ... 13 SURG D&C, CONIZATION EXCEPT FOR MALIGNANCY ............................. .7530 2.6 3.6365 ... 13 SURG OTHER FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES 1.8425 4.9 7.3366 ... 13 MED MALIGNANCY, FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM W CC ............. 1.2467 4.8 6.8367 ... 13 MED MALIGNANCY, FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM W/O CC ......... .5676 2.4 3.2368 ... 13 MED INFECTIONS, FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM .......................... 1.1205 5.0 6.7369 ... 13 MED MENSTRUAL & OTHER FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM DIS-

ORDERS..5704 2.4 3.2

370 ... 14 SURG CESAREAN SECTION W CC .............................................................. 1.0631 4.4 5.7371 ... 14 SURG CESAREAN SECTION W/O CC .......................................................... .7157 3.3 3.6372 ... 14 MED VAGINAL DELIVERY W COMPLICATING DIAGNOSES .................... .6077 2.7 3.5373 ... 14 MED VAGINAL DELIVERY W/O COMPLICATING DIAGNOSES ................ .4169 2.0 2.3374 ... 14 SURG VAGINAL DELIVERY W STERILIZATION &/OR D&C ........................ .7565 2.6 3.4375 ... 14 SURG *VAGINAL DELIVERY W O.R. PROC EXCEPT STERIL &/OR D&C .6860 4.4 4.4376 ... 14 MED POSTPARTUM & POST ABORTION DIAGNOSES W/O O.R. PRO-

CEDURE..5224 2.6 3.5

377 ... 14 SURG POSTPARTUM & POST ABORTION DIAGNOSES W O.R. PROCE-DURE.

.8899 2.6 3.8

378 ... 14 MED ECTOPIC PREGNANCY ...................................................................... .7664 2.0 2.3379 ... 14 MED THREATENED ABORTION .................................................................. .3959 2.0 3.1380 ... 14 MED ABORTION W/O D&C .......................................................................... .4843 1.8 2.2381 ... 14 SURG ABORTION W D&C, ASPIRATION CURETTAGE OR

HYSTEROTOMY..5331 1.5 1.9

382 ... 14 MED FALSE LABOR ..................................................................................... .2127 1.3 1.5383 ... 14 MED OTHER ANTEPARTUM DIAGNOSES W MEDICAL COMPLICA-

TIONS..5137 2.7 3.9

384 ... 14 MED OTHER ANTEPARTUM DIAGNOSES W/O MEDICAL COMPLICA-TIONS.

.3161 1.6 2.3

385 ... 15 MED *NEONATES, DIED OR TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER ACUTECARE FACILITY.

1.3767 1.8 1.8

386 ... 15 MED *EXTREME IMMATURITY OR RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYN-DROME, NEONATE.

4.5400 17.9 17.9

387 ... 15 MED *PREMATURITY W MAJOR PROBLEMS ........................................... 3.1007 13.3 13.3388 ... 15 MED *PREMATURITY W/O MAJOR PROBLEMS ....................................... 1.8709 8.6 8.6389 ... 15 MED *FULL TERM NEONATE W MAJOR PROBLEMS .............................. 1.8408 4.7 4.7390 ... 15 MED NEONATE W OTHER SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS ............................. .9471 3.0 4.0391 ... 15 MED *NORMAL NEWBORN ......................................................................... .1527 3.1 3.1392 ... 16 SURG SPLENECTOMY AGE >17 ................................................................... 3.1739 7.1 9.5393 ... 16 SURG *SPLENECTOMY AGE 0–17 ............................................................... 1.3486 9.1 9.1





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

394 ... 16 SURG OTHER O.R. PROCEDURES OF THE BLOOD AND BLOOD FORM-ING ORGANS.

1.5969 4.1 6.7

395 ... 16 MED RED BLOOD CELL DISORDERS AGE >17 ........................................ .8257 3.3 4.5396 ... 16 MED RED BLOOD CELL DISORDERS AGE 0–17 ...................................... 1.1573 2.5 3.8397 ... 16 MED COAGULATION DISORDERS ............................................................. 1.2278 3.8 5.2398 ... 16 MED RETICULOENDOTHELIAL & IMMUNITY DISORDERS W CC ........... 1.2750 4.7 6.0399 ... 16 MED RETICULOENDOTHELIAL & IMMUNITY DISORDERS W/O CC ....... .6881 2.8 3.6400 ... 17 SURG LYMPHOMA & LEUKEMIA W MAJOR O.R. PROCEDURE ............... 2.6309 5.8 9.1401 ... 17 SURG LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W OTHER O.R. PROC W

CC.2.7198 7.8 11.2

402 ... 17 SURG LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W OTHER O.R. PROC W/O CC.

1.0985 2.8 4.0

403 ... 17 MED LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W CC ................................. 1.7594 5.7 8.1404 ... 17 MED LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W/O CC ............................. .8480 3.1 4.2405 ... 17 MED *ACUTE LEUKEMIA W/O MAJOR O.R. PROCEDURE AGE 0–17 .... 1.9120 4.9 4.9406 ... 17 SURG MYELOPROLIF DISORD OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL W MAJ

O.R.PROC W CC.2.8275 7.6 10.3

407 ... 17 SURG MYELOPROLIF DISORD OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL W MAJO.R.PROC W/O CC.

1.3179 3.6 4.4

408 ... 17 SURG MYELOPROLIF DISORD OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL W OTHERO.R.PROC.

2.0008 4.8 7.7

409 ... 17 MED RADIOTHERAPY .................................................................................. 1.1215 4.4 5.9410 ... 17 MED CHEMOTHERAPY W/O ACUTE LEUKEMIA AS SECONDARY DI-

AGNOSIS..9468 2.9 3.7

411 ... 17 MED HISTORY OF MALIGNANCY W/O ENDOSCOPY .............................. .3305 2.0 2.3412 ... 17 MED HISTORY OF MALIGNANCY W ENDOSCOPY .................................. .4841 2.0 2.7413 ... 17 MED OTHER MYELOPROLIF DIS OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL DIAG W

CC.1.3645 5.3 7.3

414 ... 17 MED OTHER MYELOPROLIF DIS OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL DIAG W/OCC.

.7548 3.0 4.1

415 ... 18 SURG O.R. PROCEDURE FOR INFECTIOUS & PARASITIC DISEASES .... 3.5925 10.4 14.3416 ... 18 MED SEPTICEMIA AGE >17 ........................................................................ 1.5278 5.5 7.4417 ... 18 MED SEPTICEMIA AGE 0–17 ...................................................................... 1.1717 3.7 6.0418 ... 18 MED POSTOPERATIVE & POST-TRAUMATIC INFECTIONS .................... 1.0074 4.8 6.2419 ... 18 MED FEVER OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AGE >17 W CC ............................... .8709 3.7 4.8420 ... 18 MED FEVER OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AGE >17 W/O CC ........................... .6057 3.0 3.6421 ... 18 MED VIRAL ILLNESS AGE >17 .................................................................... .6796 3.1 3.9422 ... 18 MED VIRAL ILLNESS & FEVER OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AGE 0–17 ........ .7854 2.8 5.1423 ... 18 MED OTHER INFECTIOUS & PARASITIC DISEASES DIAGNOSES ......... 1.7250 5.9 8.2424 ... 19 SURG O.R. PROCEDURE W PRINCIPAL DIAGNOSES OF MENTAL ILL-

NESS.2.2810 8.7 13.5

425 ... 19 MED ACUTE ADJUSTMENT REACTION & PSYCHOLOGICAL DYS-FUNCTION.

.7031 3.0 4.1

426 ... 19 MED DEPRESSIVE NEUROSES .................................................................. .5301 3.3 4.6427 ... 19 MED NEUROSES EXCEPT DEPRESSIVE .................................................. .5637 3.3 5.0428 ... 19 MED DISORDERS OF PERSONALITY & IMPULSE CONTROL ................. .7342 4.4 7.1429 ... 19 MED ORGANIC DISTURBANCES & MENTAL RETARDATION ................. .8530 4.9 6.7430 ... 19 MED PSYCHOSES ........................................................................................ .7644 5.8 8.2431 ... 19 MED CHILDHOOD MENTAL DISORDERS .................................................. .6392 4.8 6.6432 ... 19 MED OTHER MENTAL DISORDER DIAGNOSES ....................................... .6546 3.2 4.8433 ... 20 MED ALCOHOL/DRUG ABUSE OR DEPENDENCE, LEFT AMA ............... .2824 2.2 3.0434 ... 20 MED ALC/DRUG ABUSE OR DEPEND, DETOX OR OTH SYMPT TREAT

W CC..7256 3.9 5.1

435 ... 20 MED ALC/DRUG ABUSE OR DEPEND, DETOX OR OTH SYMPT TREATW/O CC.

.4176 3.4 4.3

436 ... 20 MED ALC/DRUG DEPENDENCE W REHABILITATION THERAPY ............ .7433 10.3 12.9437 ... 20 MED ALC/DRUG DEPENDENCE, COMBINED REHAB & DETOX THER-

APY..6606 7.5 9.0

438 ... 20 NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0439 ... 21 SURG SKIN GRAFTS FOR INJURIES ........................................................... 1.7092 5.3 8.2440 ... 21 SURG WOUND DEBRIDEMENTS FOR INJURIES ........................................ 1.9096 5.8 8.9441 ... 21 SURG HAND PROCEDURES FOR INJURIES ............................................... .9463 2.2 3.3442 ... 21 SURG OTHER O.R. PROCEDURES FOR INJURIES W CC ......................... 2.3403 5.4 8.3443 ... 21 SURG OTHER O.R. PROCEDURES FOR INJURIES W/O CC ..................... .9978 2.5 3.4444 ... 21 MED TRAUMATIC INJURY AGE >17 W CC ................................................ .7243 3.2 4.2445 ... 21 MED TRAUMATIC INJURY AGE >17 W/O CC ............................................ .5076 2.4 3.0446 ... 21 MED *TRAUMATIC INJURY AGE 0–17 ....................................................... .2964 2.4 2.4447 ... 21 MED ALLERGIC REACTIONS AGE >17 ...................................................... .5166 1.9 2.5448 ... 21 MED *ALLERGIC REACTIONS AGE 0–17 ................................................... .0975 2.9 2.9





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

449 ... 21 MED POISONING & TOXIC EFFECTS OF DRUGS AGE >17 W CC ......... .8076 2.6 3.7450 ... 21 MED POISONING & TOXIC EFFECTS OF DRUGS AGE >17 W/O CC ..... .4406 1.6 2.0451 ... 21 MED *POISONING & TOXIC EFFECTS OF DRUGS AGE 0–17 ................ .2632 2.1 2.1452 ... 21 MED COMPLICATIONS OF TREATMENT W CC ........................................ 1.0152 3.5 5.0453 ... 21 MED COMPLICATIONS OF TREATMENT W/O CC .................................... .4987 2.2 2.8454 ... 21 MED OTHER INJURY, POISONING & TOXIC EFFECT DIAG W CC ......... .8593 3.2 4.6455 ... 21 MED OTHER INJURY, POISONING & TOXIC EFFECT DIAG W/O CC ..... .4672 2.0 2.6456 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0457 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0458 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0459 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0460 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0461 ... 23 SURG O.R. PROC W DIAGNOSES OF OTHER CONTACT W HEALTH

SERVICES.1.2101 2.4 4.6

462 ... 23 MED REHABILITATION ................................................................................ 1.2401 9.4 11.7463 ... 23 MED SIGNS & SYMPTOMS W CC .............................................................. .6936 3.3 4.3464 ... 23 MED SIGNS & SYMPTOMS W/O CC ........................................................... .4775 2.4 3.1465 ... 23 MED AFTERCARE W HISTORY OF MALIGNANCY AS SECONDARY DI-

AGNOSIS..5756 2.1 3.4

466 ... 23 MED AFTERCARE W/O HISTORY OF MALIGNANCY AS SECONDARYDIAGNOSIS.

.6840 2.3 3.9

467 ... 23 MED OTHER FACTORS INFLUENCING HEALTH STATUS ....................... .5112 2.3 4.1468 ... EXTENSIVE O.R. PROCEDURE UNRELATED TO PRINCIPAL DI-

AGNOSIS.3.6399 9.2 13.0

469 ... **PRINCIPAL DIAGNOSIS INVALID AS DISCHARGE DIAGNOSIS .. .0000 .0 .0470 ... **UNGROUPABLE ................................................................................ .0000 .0 .0471 ... 08 SURG BILATERAL OR MULTIPLE MAJOR JOINT PROCS OF LOWER

EXTREMITY.3.1957 5.0 5.7

472 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0473 ... 17 SURG ACUTE LEUKEMIA W/O MAJOR O.R. PROCEDURE AGE >17 ....... 3.5822 7.6 13.2474 ... NO LONGER VALID ............................................................................. .0000 .0 .0475 ... 04 MED RESPIRATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSIS WITH VENTILATOR SUP-

PORT.3.6936 8.1 11.3

476 ... SURG PROSTATIC O.R. PROCEDURE UNRELATED TO PRINCIPAL DI-AGNOSIS.

2.2547 8.4 11.7

477 ... SURG NON-EXTENSIVE O.R. PROCEDURE UNRELATED TO PRINCIPALDIAGNOSIS.

1.8204 5.4 8.1

478 ... 05 SURG OTHER VASCULAR PROCEDURES W CC ....................................... 2.3333 4.9 7.3479 ... 05 SURG OTHER VASCULAR PROCEDURES W/O CC ................................... 1.4326 2.8 3.6480 ... PRE SURG LIVER TRANSPLANT ........................................................................... 9.4744 14.7 19.5481 ... PRE SURG BONE MARROW TRANSPLANT ......................................................... 8.6120 23.8 26.6482 ... PRE SURG TRACHEOSTOMY FOR FACE, MOUTH & NECK DIAGNOSES ....... 3.5785 10.0 12.9483 ... PRE SURG TRACHEOSTOMY EXCEPT FOR FACE, MOUTH & NECK DIAG-

NOSES.15.9677 33.7 41.2

484 ... 24 SURG CRANIOTOMY FOR MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANT TRAUMA .................. 5.5606 8.8 13.1485 ... 24 SURG LIMB REATTACHMENT, HIP AND FEMUR PROC FOR MULTIPLE

SIGNIFICANT TRA.3.0998 7.7 9.5

486 ... 24 SURG OTHER O.R. PROCEDURES FOR MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANT TRAU-MA.

4.9048 8.1 12.2

487 ... 24 MED OTHER MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANT TRAUMA ...................................... 2.0604 5.6 7.8488 ... 25 SURG HIV W EXTENSIVE O.R. PROCEDURE ............................................. 4.5574 11.5 17.0489 ... 25 MED HIV W MAJOR RELATED CONDITION .............................................. 1.7414 6.0 8.6490 ... 25 MED HIV W OR W/O OTHER RELATED CONDITION ............................... .9680 3.7 5.1491 ... 08 SURG MAJOR JOINT & LIMB REATTACHMENT PROCEDURES OF

UPPER EXTREMITY.1.6685 2.9 3.5

492 ... 17 MED CHEMOTHERAPY W ACUTE LEUKEMIA AS SECONDARY DIAG-NOSIS.

4.2467 10.9 16.1

493 ... 07 SURG LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY W/O C.D.E. W CC ............ 1.8180 4.3 5.7494 ... 07 SURG LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY W/O C.D.E. W/O CC ........ 1.0388 2.0 2.5495 ... PRE SURG LUNG TRANSPLANT ........................................................................... 8.6087 13.4 20.5496 ... 08 SURG COMBINED ANTERIOR/POSTERIOR SPINAL FUSION .................... 5.5532 7.8 10.0497 ... 08 SURG SPINAL FUSION W CC ....................................................................... 2.9441 4.9 6.2498 ... 08 SURG SPINAL FUSION W/O CC .................................................................... 1.9057 2.8 3.4499 ... 08 SURG BACK & NECK PROCEDURES EXCEPT SPINAL FUSION W CC .... 1.4572 3.6 4.8500 ... 08 SURG BACK & NECK PROCEDURES EXCEPT SPINAL FUSION W/O CC .9805 2.2 2.7501 ... 08 SURG KNEE PROCEDURES W PDX OF INFECTION W CC ....................... 2.6283 8.4 10.6502 ... 08 SURG KNEE PROCEDURES W PDX OF INFECTION W/O CC ................... 1.4434 4.9 6.0503 ... 08 SURG KNEE PROCEDURES W/O PDX OF INFECTION .............................. 1.2156 3.1 4.0504 ... 22 SURG EXTENSIVE 3RD DEGREE BURNS W SKIN GRAFT ........................ 12.6064 24.1 30.5





GeometricmeanLOS

ArithmeticmeanLOS

505 ... 22 MED EXTENSIVE 3RD DEGREE BURNS W/O SKIN GRAFT .................... 2.0166 2.5 4.7506 ... 22 SURG FULL THICKNESS BURN W SKIN GRAFT OR INHAL INJ W CC

OR SIG TRAUMA.4.4825 12.9 17.6

507 ... 22 SURG FULL THICKNESS BURN W SKIN GRFT OR INHAL INJ W/O CCOR SIG TRAUMA.

1.8560 6.6 9.3

508 ... 22 MED FULL THICKNESS BURN W/O SKIN GRFT OR INHAL INJ W CCOR SIG TRAUMA.

1.3302 5.1 7.3

509 ... 22 MED FULL THICKNESS BURN W/O SKIN GRFT OR INH INJ W/O CCOR SIG TRAUMA.

.8071 4.1 6.2

510 ... 22 MED NON-EXTENSIVE BURNS W CC OR SIGNIFICANT TRAUMA ......... 1.4088 5.2 7.9511 ... 22 MED NON-EXTENSIVE BURNS W/O CC OR SIGNIFICANT TRAUMA ..... .6536 3.1 4.5

* MEDICARE DATA HAVE BEEN SUPPLEMENTED BY DATA FROM 19 STATES FOR LOW VOLUME DRGS.** DRGS 469 AND 470 CONTAIN CASES WHICH COULD NOT BE ASSIGNED TO VALID DRGS.NOTE: GEOMETRIC MEAN IS USED ONLY TO DETERMINE PAYMENT FOR TRANSFER CASES.NOTE: ARITHMETIC MEAN IS PRESENTED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.NOTE: RELATIVE WEIGHTS ARE BASED ON MEDICARE PATIENT DATA AND MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR OTHER PATIENTS.

TABLE 6A.—NEW DIAGNOSIS CODES

Diagnosiscode Description CC MDC DRG

007.5 Cyclosporiasis ..................................................................................................... N 6 182, 183,184082.40 Unspecified ehrlichiosis ....................................................................................... N 18 423082.41 Ehrlichiosis Chafiensis (E. Chafiensis) ............................................................... N 18 423082.49 Other ehrlichiosis ................................................................................................ N 18 423285.21 Anemia in end-stage renal disease .................................................................... N 16 395, 396285.22 Anemia in neoplastic disease ............................................................................. N 16 395, 396285.29 Anemia of other chronic illness ........................................................................... N 16 395, 396294.10 Dementia in conditions classified elsewhere without behavioral disturbance .... N 19 429294.11 Dementia in conditions classified elsewhere with behavioral disturbance ......... N 19 429372.81 Conjunctivochalasis ............................................................................................. N 2 46, 47, 48372.89 Other disorders of conjunctiva ............................................................................ N 2 46, 47, 48477.1 Allergic rhinitis, due to food ................................................................................ N 3 68, 69, 70493.02 Extrinsic asthma, with acute exacerbation ......................................................... Y 4 96, 97, 98493.12 Intrinsic asthma, with acute exacerbation ........................................................... Y 4 96, 97, 98493.22 Chronic obstructive asthma, with acute exacerbation ........................................ Y 4 88493.92 Unspecified asthma, with acute exacerbation .................................................... Y 4 96, 97, 98494.0 Bronchiectasis without acute exacerbation ......................................................... N 4 88494.1 Bronchiectasis with acute exacerbation .............................................................. Y 4 88558.3 Allergic gastroenteritis and colitis ....................................................................... N 6 182, 183, 184600.0 Hypertrophy (benign) of prostate ........................................................................ N 12 348, 349600.1 Nodular prostate .................................................................................................. N 12 348, 349600.2 Benign localized hyperplasia of prostate ............................................................ N 12 348, 349600.3 Cyst of prostate ................................................................................................... N 12 348, 349600.9 Unspecified hyperplasia of prostate .................................................................... N 12 348, 349645.10 Post term pregnancy, unspecified as to episode of care or not applicable ....... N 14 469645.11 Post term pregnancy, delivered, with or without mention of antepartum condi-

tion.N 14 370, 371, 372, 373,

374, 375645.13 Post term pregnancy, antepartum condition or complication ............................. N 14 383, 384645.20 Prolonged pregnancy, unspecified as to episode of care or not applicable ...... N 14 469645.21 Prolonged pregnancy, delivered, with or without mention of antepartum condi-

tion.N 14 370, 371, 372, 373,

374, 375645.23 Prolonged pregnancy, antepartum condition or complication ............................ N 14 383, 384692.75 Disseminated superficial actinic porokeratosis (DSAP) ...................................... N 9 283, 284707.10 Unspecified ulcer of lower limb ........................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271707.11 Ulcer of thigh ....................................................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271707.12 Ulcer of calf ......................................................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271707.13 Ulcer of ankle ...................................................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271707.14 Ulcer of heel and midfoot .................................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271707.15 Ulcer of other part of foot .................................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271707.19 Ulcer of other part of lower limb ......................................................................... Y 9 263, 264, 271727.83 Plica syndrome .................................................................................................... N 8 248781.91 Loss of height ...................................................................................................... N 1 34, 35781.92 Abnormal posture ................................................................................................ N 1 34, 35781.99 Other symptoms involving nervous and musculoskeletal systems .................... N 1 34, 35783.21 Loss of weight ..................................................................................................... N 10 296, 297, 298783.22 Underweight ........................................................................................................ N 10 296, 297, 298783.40 Unspecified lack of normal physiological development ...................................... N 10 296, 297, 298



TABLE 6A.—NEW DIAGNOSIS CODES—Continued


783.41 Failure to thrive ................................................................................................... N 10 296, 297, 298783.42 Delayed milestones ............................................................................................. N 10 296, 297, 298783.43 Short stature ........................................................................................................ N 10 296, 297, 298783.7 Adult failure to thrive ........................................................................................... N 10 296, 297, 298790.01 Precipitous drop in hematocrit ............................................................................ N 16 395, 396790.09 Other abnormality of red blood cells ................................................................... N 16 395, 396792.5 Cloudy (hemodialysis) (peritoneal) dialysis effluent ........................................... N 23 463, 464995.7 Other adverse food reactions, not elsewhere classified ..................................... N 21 454, 455996.87 Complications of transplanted organ, intestine ................................................... Y 21 452, 453V15.01 Allergy to peanuts ............................................................................................... N 23 467V15.02 Allergy to milk products ....................................................................................... N 23 467V15.03 Allergy to eggs .................................................................................................... N 23 467V15.04 Allergy to seafood ............................................................................................... N 23 467V15.05 Allergy to other foods .......................................................................................... N 23 467V15.06 Allergy to insects ................................................................................................. N 23 467V15.07 Allergy to latex .................................................................................................... N 23 467V15.08 Allergy to radiographic dye ................................................................................. N 23 467V15.09 Other allergy, other than to medicinal agents .................................................... N 23 467V21.30 Unspecified low birth weight status .................................................................... N 23 467V21.31 Low birth weight status, less than 500 grams .................................................... N 23 467V21.32 Low birth weight status, 500–999 grams ............................................................ N 23 467V21.33 Low birth weight status, 1000–1499 grams ........................................................ N 23 467V21.34 Low birth weight status, 1500–1999 grams ........................................................ N 23 467V21.35 Low birth weight status, 2000–2500 grams ........................................................ N 23 467V26.21 Fertility testing ..................................................................................................... N 23 467V26.22 Aftercare following sterilization reversal ............................................................. N 23 467V26.29 Other investigation and testing ........................................................................... N 23 467V42.84 Organ or tissue replaced by transplant, intestines ............................................. Y 23 467V45.74 Acquired absence of organ, other parts of urinary tract ..................................... N 11 331, 332, 333V45.75 Acquired absence of organ, stomach ................................................................. N 23 467V45.76 Acquired absence of organ, lung ........................................................................ N 4 101, 102V45.77 Acquired absence of organ, genital organs ........................................................ N 12

13352358, 359, 369

V45.78 Acquired absence of organ, eye ......................................................................... N 2 46, 47, 48V45.79 Other acquired absence of organ ....................................................................... N 23 467V49.81 Postmenopausal status (age-related) (natural) .................................................. N 23 467V49.89 Other specified conditions influencing health status .......................................... N 23 467V56.31 Encounter for adequacy testing for hemodialysis ............................................... N 11 317V56.32 Encounter for adequacy testing for peritoneal dialysis ....................................... N 11 317V58.83 Encounter for therapeutic drug monitoring ......................................................... N 23 465, 466V67.00 Follow-up examination, following unspecified surgery ....................................... N 23 465, 466V67.01 Following surgery, follow-up vaginal pap smear ................................................ N 23 465, 466V67.09 Follow-up examination, following other surgery ................................................. N 23 465, 466V71.81 Observation for suspected abuse and neglect ................................................... N 23 467V71.89 Observation for other specified suspected conditions ........................................ N 23 467V76.46 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, ovary ............................................ N 23 467V76.47 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, Vagina .......................................... N 23 467V76.50 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, unspecified intestine .................... N 23 467V76.51 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, colon ............................................ N 23 467V76.52 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, small intestine .............................. N 23 467V76.81 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, nervous system ........................... N 23 467V76.89 Special screening for other malignant neoplasm ............................................... N 23 467V77.91 Screening for lipoid disorders ............................................................................. N 23 467V77.99 Other and unspecified endocrine, nutritional, metabolic, and immunity dis-

orders.N 23 467

V82.81 Special screening for osteoporosis ..................................................................... N 23 467V82.89 Special screening for other specified conditions ................................................ N 23 467

TABLE 6B.—NEW PROCEDURE CODES

Procedurecode Description OR MDC DRG

39.71 Endovascular implantation of graft in abdominal aorta ...................................... Y 5112124

110, 111315442, 443486



TABLE 6B.—NEW PROCEDURE CODES—Continued


39.79 Other endovascular graft repair of aneurysm ..................................................... Y 15

112124

1, 2, 3110, 111315442, 443486

41.07 Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant with purging ............................. Y PRE 48141.08 Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant with purging ............................... Y PRE 48141.09 Autologous bone marrow transplant with purging .............................................. Y PRE 48146.97 Transplant of intestine ......................................................................................... Y 6

7172124

148, 149201400, 406, 407442, 443486

60.96 Transurethral destruction of prostate tissue by microwave thermotherapy ....... Y 1112

UNR

306, 3071336, 337476

60.97 Other transurethral destruction of prostate tissue by other thermotherapy ....... Y 1112

UNR

306, 307336, 337476

99.75 Administration of neuroprotective agent ............................................................. N

TABLE 6C.—INVALID DIAGNOSIS CODES


294.1 Dementia in conditions classified elsewhere ...................................................... N 19 429372.8 Other disorders of conjunctiva ............................................................................ N 2 46, 47, 48494 Bronchiectasis ..................................................................................................... Y 4 88600 Hyperplasia of prostate ....................................................................................... N 12 348, 349645.00 Prolonged pregnancy, unspecified as to episode of care or not applicable ...... N 14 469645.01 Prolonged pregnancy, delivered, with or without mention of antepartum condi-

tion.N 14 370, 371, 372, 373,

374, 375645.03 Prolonged pregnancy, antepartum condition or complication ............................ N 14 383, 384707.1 Ulcer of lower limb, except decubitus ................................................................. Y 9 263, 264, 271781.9 Other symptoms involving nervous and musculoskeletal systems .................... N 1 34, 35783.2 Abnormal loss of weight ...................................................................................... N 10 296, 297, 298783.4 Lack of expected normal physiological development ......................................... N 10 296, 297, 298790.0 Abnormality of red blood cells ............................................................................ N 16 395, 396V15.0 Allergy, other than to medicinal agents .............................................................. N 23 467V26.2 Investigation and testing ..................................................................................... N 23 467V49.8 Other specified problems influencing health status ............................................ N 23 467V67.0 Follow-up examination following surgery ............................................................ N 23 465, 466V71.8 Observation for other specified suspected conditions ........................................ N 23 467V76.8 Special screening for malignant neoplasms, other neoplasm ............................ N 23 467V77.9 Other and unspecified endocrine, nutritional, metabolic, and immunity dis-

orders.N 23 467

V82.8 Special screening for other specified conditions ................................................ N 23 467

TABLE 6D.—REVISED DIAGNOSIS CODE TITLES


564.1 Irritable bowel syndrome ..................................................................................... N 6 182183184

V26.3 Genetic counseling and testing ........................................................................... N 23 467V76.49 Special screening for malignant, other sites ....................................................... N 23 467

TABLE 6E.—REVISED PROCEDURE CODES


41.01 Autologous bone marrow transplant without purging ......................................... Y PRE 48141.04 Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant without purging ........................ Y PRE 48141.05 Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant without purging .......................... Y PRE 481



TABLE 6E.—REVISED PROCEDURE CODES—Continued


86.59 Closure of skin and subcutaneous tissue other sites ......................................... N

TABLE 6F.—ADDITIONS TO THE CC EXCLUSIONS LIST[CCs that are added to the list are in Table 6F—Additions to the CC Exclusions List. Each of the principal diagnoses is shown with an asterisk,

and the revisions to the CC Exclusions List are provided in an indented column immediately following the affected principal diagnosis.]

*0075 2818 70713 49312 01170 4870 01152 482900841 2824 70714 49322 01171 4950 01153 483000842 28260 70715 49392 01172 4951 01154 483100843 28261 70719 *49391 01173 4952 01155 483800844 28262 *4871 49302 01174 4953 01156 484100845 28263 4941 49312 01175 4954 01160 484300846 28269 *49300 49322 01176 4955 01161 484500847 2830 49302 49392 01180 4956 01162 484600849 28310 49312 *49392 01181 4957 01163 4847

*01790 28311 49322 49301 01182 4958 01164 48484941 28319 49392 49302 01183 4959 01165 485

*01791 2832 *49301 49311 01184 496 01166 4864941 2839 49302 49312 01185 5060 01170 4870

*01792 2840 49312 49320 01186 5061 01171 49414941 2848 49322 49321 01190 5070 01172 4950

*01793 2849 49392 49322 01191 5071 01173 49514941 2850 *49302 49391 01192 5078 01174 4952

*01794 2851 49301 49392 01193 5080 01175 49534941 *29410 49302 *4940 01194 5081 01176 4954

*01795 2910 49311 01100 01195 515 01180 49554941 2911 49312 01101 01196 5160 01181 4956

*01796 2912 49320 01102 01200 5161 01182 49574941 2913 49321 01103 01201 5162 01183 4958

*28521 2914 49322 01104 01202 5163 01184 49592800 29181 49391 01105 01203 5168 01185 4962814 29189 49392 01106 01204 5169 01186 50602818 2919 *49310 01110 01205 5171 01190 50612824 2920 49302 01111 01206 5172 01191 507028260 29211 49312 01112 01210 5178 01192 507128261 29212 49322 01113 01211 74861 01193 507828262 2922 49392 01114 01212 *4941 01194 508028263 29281 *49311 01115 01213 01100 01195 508128269 29282 49302 01116 01214 01101 01196 5152830 29283 49312 01120 01215 01102 01200 516028310 29284 49322 01121 01216 01103 01201 516128311 29289 49392 01122 0310 01104 01202 516228319 2929 *49312 01123 11505 01105 01203 51632832 29381 49301 01124 11515 01106 01204 51682839 29382 49302 01125 1304 01110 01205 51692840 29383 49311 01126 1363 01111 01206 51712848 29384 49312 01130 481 01112 01210 51722849 *29411 49320 01131 4820 01113 01211 51782850 2910 49321 01132 4821 01114 01212 748612851 2911 49322 01133 4822 01115 01213 *496

*28522 2912 49391 01134 48230 01116 01214 49412800 2913 49392 01135 48231 01120 01215 *50612814 2914 *49320 01136 48232 01121 01216 49412818 29181 49302 01140 48239 01122 0310 *50642824 29189 49312 01141 48240 01123 11505 494128260 2919 49322 01142 48241 01124 11515 *506928261 2920 49392 01143 48249 01125 1304 494128262 29211 *49321 01144 48281 01126 1363 *517828263 29212 49302 01145 48282 01130 481 4930228269 2922 49312 01146 48283 01131 4820 493122830 29281 49322 01150 48284 01132 4821 4932228310 29282 49392 01151 48289 01133 4822 4939228311 29283 *49322 01152 4829 01134 48230 *5188928319 29284 49301 01153 4830 01135 48231 493022832 29289 49302 01154 4831 01136 48232 493122839 2929 49311 01155 4838 01140 48239 493222840 29381 49312 01156 4841 01141 48240 493922848 29382 49320 01160 4843 01142 48241 *51982849 29383 49321 01161 4845 01143 48249 493022850 29384 49322 01162 4846 01144 48281 493122851 *44023 49391 01163 4847 01145 48282 49322

*28529 70710 49392 01164 4848 01146 48283 493922800 70711 *49390 01165 485 01150 48284 *51992814 70712 49302 01166 486 01151 48289 4930249312 *70712 V42149322 70710 V42649392 70711 V427

*5583 70712 V4281



TABLE 6F.—ADDITIONS TO THE CC EXCLUSIONS LIST—Continued[CCs that are added to the list are in Table 6F—Additions to the CC Exclusions List. Each of the principal diagnoses is shown with an asterisk,

and the revisions to the CC Exclusions List are provided in an indented column immediately following the affected principal diagnosis.]

00841 70713 V428200842 70714 V428300843 70715 V428900844 70719 V43200845 *70713 *9968900846 70710 V428400847 70711 *9979100849 70712 99687

*6000 70713 *997995960 70714 996875996 70715 *V42846010 70719 V42846012 *70714 *V42896013 70710 V42846021 70711 *V42978820 70712 V428478829 70713

*6001 707145960 707155996 707196010 *707156012 707106013 707116021 7071278820 7071378829 70714

*6002 707155960 707195996 *707196010 707106012 707116013 707126021 7071378820 7071478829 70715

*6003 707195960 *70785996 707106010 707116012 707126013 707136021 7071478820 7071578829 70719

*6009 *70795960 707105996 707116010 707126012 707136013 707146021 7071578820 7071978829 *7098

*70710 7071070710 7071170711 7071270712 7071370713 7071470714 7071570715 7071970719 *74861

*70711 494170710 *9968070711 9968770712 V428470713 *9968770714 9968070715 9968770719 V420



TABLE 6G.—DELETIONS TO THE CCEXCLUSIONS LIST

[CCs that are deleted from the list are in Table6G—Deletions to the CC Exclusions List.Each of the principal diagnoses is shownwith an asterisk, and the revisions to the CCExclusions List are provided in an indentedcolumn immediately following the affectedprincipal diagnosis.]

*01790 01135 48231 6021494 01136 48232 78820

*01791 01140 48239 78829494 01141 48240 *7071

*01792 01142 48241 7071494 01143 48249 *7078

*01793 01144 48281 7071494 01145 48282 *7079

*01794 01146 48283 7071494 01150 48284 *7098

*01795 01151 48289 7071494 01152 4829 *74861

*01796 01153 4830 494494 01154 4831

*2941 01155 48382910 01156 48412911 01160 48432912 01161 48452913 01162 48462914 01163 484729181 01164 484829189 01165 4852919 01166 486

TABLE 6G.—DELETIONS TO THE CCEXCLUSIONS LIST—Continued


2920 01170 487029211 01171 49429212 01172 49502922 01173 495129281 01174 495229282 01175 495329283 01176 495429284 01180 495529289 01181 49562929 01182 495729381 01183 495829382 01184 495929383 01185 49629384 01186 5060

*44023 01190 50617071 01191 5070

*4871 01192 5071494 01193 5078

*494 01194 508001100 01195 508101101 01196 51501102 01200 516001103 01201 5161

TABLE 6G.—DELETIONS TO THE CCEXCLUSIONS LIST—Continued


01104 01202 516201105 01203 516301106 01204 516801110 01205 516901111 01206 517101112 01210 517201113 01211 517801114 01212 7486101115 01213 *49601116 01214 49401120 01215 *506101121 01216 49401122 0310 *506401123 11505 49401124 11515 *506901125 1304 49401126 1363 *60001130 481 596001131 4820 599601132 4821 601001133 4822 601201134 48230 6013

TABLE 7A.—MEDICARE PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM, SELECTED PERCENTILE LENGTHS OF STAY

[FY99 MEDPAR update 03/00 Grouper V17.0]

DRG Numberdischarges

Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

1 ................................... 35352 9.1033 2 3 6 12 192 ................................... 7158 9.6855 3 5 7 12 194 ................................... 6095 7.3505 1 2 5 9 165 ................................... 95604 3.2875 1 1 2 4 76 ................................... 341 3.2405 1 1 2 4 77 ................................... 12148 10.2934 2 4 7 13 218 ................................... 3705 3.0103 1 1 2 4 79 ................................... 1657 6.4484 1 3 5 8 1210 ................................. 18437 6.5993 2 3 5 8 1311 ................................. 3331 4.1654 1 2 3 5 812 ................................. 45110 6.0509 2 3 4 7 1113 ................................. 6256 5.0973 2 3 4 6 914 ................................. 331649 5.9608 2 3 5 7 1115 ................................. 140366 3.6304 1 2 3 5 716 ................................. 11170 6.1346 2 3 5 7 1217 ................................. 3453 3.3687 1 2 3 4 618 ................................. 26134 5.5426 2 3 4 7 1019 ................................. 8011 3.7410 1 2 3 5 720 ................................. 5780 10.2894 3 5 8 13 2021 ................................. 1368 6.8575 2 3 5 9 1322 ................................. 2519 4.9389 2 2 4 6 923 ................................. 8375 4.2302 1 2 3 5 824 ................................. 52871 5.0135 1 2 4 6 1025 ................................. 24604 3.3081 1 2 3 4 626 ................................. 20 3.2000 1 1 2 3 727 ................................. 3645 5.1084 1 1 3 6 1228 ................................. 10833 6.2260 1 3 5 8 1329 ................................. 3985 3.7064 1 2 3 5 731 ................................. 3301 4.2293 1 2 3 5 832 ................................. 1585 2.7356 1 1 2 3 534 ................................. 19657 5.1974 1 2 4 6 1035 ................................. 5225 3.4195 1 2 3 4 636 ................................. 4249 1.3641 1 1 1 1 237 ................................. 1494 3.6921 1 1 3 5 838 ................................. 115 2.5304 1 1 1 3 539 ................................. 1160 1.9112 1 1 1 2 440 ................................. 1765 3.5955 1 1 2 4 841 ................................. 1 4.0000 4 4 4 4 442 ................................. 2723 2.2277 1 1 1 3 5



TABLE 7A.—MEDICARE PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM, SELECTED PERCENTILE LENGTHS OF STAY—Continued[FY99 MEDPAR update 03/00 Grouper V17.0]


Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

43 ................................. 86 3.3605 1 2 3 4 744 ................................. 1237 4.9871 2 3 4 6 945 ................................. 2509 3.2790 1 2 3 4 646 ................................. 2971 4.5796 1 2 4 6 947 ................................. 1180 3.3034 1 1 3 4 649 ................................. 2245 4.9675 1 2 4 6 950 ................................. 2587 1.9849 1 1 1 2 351 ................................. 264 2.5303 1 1 1 3 652 ................................. 198 2.1414 1 1 1 2 553 ................................. 2594 3.6727 1 1 2 4 854 ................................. 4 1.5000 1 1 1 1 355 ................................. 1573 2.8843 1 1 1 3 656 ................................. 533 3.0507 1 1 2 4 657 ................................. 587 3.9642 1 1 2 4 859 ................................. 115 2.5304 1 1 2 3 560 ................................. 2 1.0000 1 1 1 1 161 ................................. 212 4.8302 1 1 2 6 1362 ................................. 2 3.5000 2 2 5 5 563 ................................. 3207 4.2728 1 2 3 5 964 ................................. 3189 6.5124 1 2 4 8 1465 ................................. 31923 2.8964 1 1 2 4 566 ................................. 6984 3.1714 1 1 3 4 667 ................................. 482 3.5270 1 2 3 4 768 ................................. 13482 4.1567 1 2 3 5 869 ................................. 4254 3.2795 1 2 3 4 670 ................................. 33 2.9091 1 2 3 4 571 ................................. 105 3.8667 1 2 3 6 772 ................................. 824 3.2961 1 2 3 4 673 ................................. 6461 4.3439 1 2 3 5 875 ................................. 39513 10.0058 3 5 8 12 2076 ................................. 40171 11.2717 3 5 9 14 2177 ................................. 2385 4.8776 1 2 4 7 1078 ................................. 30651 6.9464 3 5 6 8 1179 ................................. 183896 8.4642 3 4 7 11 1680 ................................. 8331 5.6766 2 3 5 7 1081 ................................. 5 9.2000 2 2 10 10 1982 ................................. 64149 6.9422 2 3 5 9 1483 ................................. 6603 5.5326 2 3 4 7 1084 ................................. 1549 3.3719 1 2 3 4 685 ................................. 20158 6.3636 2 3 5 8 1286 ................................. 1940 3.7845 1 2 3 5 787 ................................. 63294 6.2499 1 3 5 8 1288 ................................. 405792 5.2217 2 3 4 7 989 ................................. 526310 6.0247 2 3 5 7 1190 ................................. 51516 4.2278 2 3 4 5 791 ................................. 49 3.3469 1 2 3 4 592 ................................. 13842 6.2457 2 3 5 8 1293 ................................. 1557 3.9878 1 2 3 5 794 ................................. 12470 6.3005 2 3 5 8 1295 ................................. 1589 3.6916 1 2 3 5 796 ................................. 65180 4.7269 2 3 4 6 897 ................................. 31758 3.6849 1 2 3 5 798 ................................. 20 4.7000 1 1 3 6 799 ................................. 18316 3.2260 1 1 2 4 6100 ............................... 7279 2.2124 1 1 2 3 4101 ............................... 19889 4.4315 1 2 3 6 8102 ............................... 5030 2.7356 1 1 2 3 5103 ............................... 461 49.5466 9 12 30 68 118104 ............................... 33364 11.6306 3 6 10 15 22105 ............................... 29546 9.2855 4 5 7 11 17106 ............................... 3820 11.2010 5 7 9 13 19107 ............................... 91043 10.3489 5 7 9 12 17108 ............................... 5267 10.5590 3 5 8 13 20109 ............................... 61942 7.7332 4 5 6 9 13110 ............................... 55263 9.4599 2 5 8 11 18111 ............................... 7172 5.4762 2 4 5 7 8112 ............................... 61239 3.7597 1 1 3 5 8113 ............................... 44445 12.0916 3 6 9 15 24114 ............................... 8543 8.2800 2 4 7 10 16115 ............................... 14129 8.4099 1 4 7 11 16





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

116 ............................... 309840 3.7279 1 1 3 5 8117 ............................... 3419 4.0433 1 1 2 5 9118 ............................... 6687 2.8065 1 1 1 3 6119 ............................... 1461 4.8542 1 1 3 6 12120 ............................... 36980 8.1173 1 2 5 10 18121 ............................... 164131 6.4386 2 3 5 8 12122 ............................... 81181 3.8293 1 2 3 5 7123 ............................... 41102 4.5805 1 1 3 6 11124 ............................... 135568 4.3735 1 2 3 6 8125 ............................... 75438 2.7854 1 1 2 4 5126 ............................... 5171 11.7343 3 6 9 14 23127 ............................... 683849 5.3364 2 3 4 7 10128 ............................... 11601 5.8042 3 4 5 7 9129 ............................... 4224 2.8570 1 1 1 3 7130 ............................... 89606 5.8064 2 3 5 7 10131 ............................... 27035 4.3769 1 3 4 6 7132 ............................... 153726 3.0483 1 1 2 4 6133 ............................... 7633 2.3958 1 1 2 3 4134 ............................... 33046 3.2976 1 2 3 4 6135 ............................... 7144 4.4709 1 2 3 5 9136 ............................... 1170 2.9103 1 1 2 4 6138 ............................... 192439 4.0078 1 2 3 5 8139 ............................... 77691 2.5071 1 1 2 3 5140 ............................... 76921 2.7133 1 1 2 3 5141 ............................... 86225 3.7087 1 2 3 5 7142 ............................... 42891 2.6783 1 1 2 3 5143 ............................... 186941 2.1669 1 1 2 3 4144 ............................... 79553 5.3212 1 2 4 7 11145 ............................... 6948 2.8094 1 1 2 4 5146 ............................... 11289 10.1758 5 7 9 12 17147 ............................... 2427 6.6135 3 5 6 8 10148 ............................... 135012 12.1210 5 7 10 14 22149 ............................... 17660 6.6535 4 5 6 8 10150 ............................... 20425 11.1526 4 7 9 14 20151 ............................... 4513 5.9280 2 3 5 8 10152 ............................... 4470 8.1953 3 5 7 10 14153 ............................... 1931 5.4604 3 4 5 7 8154 ............................... 29554 13.2574 4 7 10 16 25155 ............................... 6109 4.3495 1 2 3 6 8156 ............................... 2 28.0000 28 28 28 28 28157 ............................... 8234 5.4966 1 2 4 7 11158 ............................... 4427 2.6286 1 1 2 3 5159 ............................... 16536 5.0206 1 2 4 6 10160 ............................... 11065 2.7237 1 1 2 4 5161 ............................... 11551 4.1674 1 2 3 5 9162 ............................... 7067 1.9544 1 1 1 2 4163 ............................... 10 2.9000 1 1 3 3 6164 ............................... 4748 8.3981 4 5 7 10 14165 ............................... 1953 4.8561 2 3 5 6 8166 ............................... 3332 5.0789 2 3 4 6 9167 ............................... 2935 2.7097 1 2 2 3 5168 ............................... 1530 4.6556 1 2 3 6 9169 ............................... 810 2.4247 1 1 2 3 5170 ............................... 11351 11.1690 2 5 8 14 23171 ............................... 1132 4.8012 1 2 4 6 9172 ............................... 30708 6.9805 2 3 5 9 14173 ............................... 2516 3.8557 1 1 3 5 8174 ............................... 237582 4.8236 2 3 4 6 9175 ............................... 28223 2.9429 1 2 3 4 5176 ............................... 15708 5.2687 2 3 4 6 10177 ............................... 9539 4.5524 2 2 4 6 8178 ............................... 3601 3.1427 1 2 3 4 6179 ............................... 12290 6.0134 2 3 5 7 11180 ............................... 85528 5.3979 2 3 4 7 10181 ............................... 24458 3.4102 1 2 3 4 6182 ............................... 234044 4.3621 1 2 3 5 8183 ............................... 79010 2.9636 1 1 2 4 6184 ............................... 99 3.2525 1 2 3 4 5185 ............................... 4361 4.5015 1 2 3 6 9186 ............................... 2 4.5000 2 2 7 7 7





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

187 ............................... 747 3.8220 1 2 3 5 8188 ............................... 75016 5.5813 1 2 4 7 11189 ............................... 11186 3.1402 1 1 2 4 6190 ............................... 70 5.9857 2 3 4 6 11191 ............................... 9437 14.1379 4 7 10 18 28192 ............................... 984 6.5996 2 4 6 8 11193 ............................... 5705 12.5550 5 7 10 15 23194 ............................... 763 6.7720 2 4 6 8 12195 ............................... 4898 9.8944 4 6 8 12 17196 ............................... 1197 5.6942 2 4 5 7 9197 ............................... 20367 8.7332 3 5 7 11 16198 ............................... 6123 4.5065 2 3 4 6 8199 ............................... 1745 9.6682 3 4 8 13 19200 ............................... 1084 10.7694 2 4 8 14 22201 ............................... 1483 13.8206 3 6 11 18 27202 ............................... 25781 6.5065 2 3 5 8 13203 ............................... 29166 6.6874 2 3 5 9 13204 ............................... 55210 5.8583 2 3 4 7 11205 ............................... 22715 6.2907 2 3 5 8 12206 ............................... 1792 3.8337 1 2 3 5 7207 ............................... 30992 5.1140 1 2 4 6 10208 ............................... 9690 2.8994 1 1 2 4 6209 ............................... 343780 5.1256 3 3 4 6 8210 ............................... 127326 6.8134 3 4 6 8 11211 ............................... 31422 4.9172 3 4 4 6 7212 ............................... 7 3.0000 2 2 2 3 4213 ............................... 8933 8.7283 2 4 7 11 17216 ............................... 5871 9.7808 2 4 7 12 20217 ............................... 17768 13.1592 3 5 9 16 28218 ............................... 21587 5.3674 2 3 4 6 10219 ............................... 19362 3.2518 1 2 3 4 5220 ............................... 3 2.3333 1 1 2 4 4223 ............................... 17578 2.5862 1 1 2 3 5224 ............................... 8041 2.0520 1 1 2 3 4225 ............................... 5639 4.7074 1 2 3 6 10226 ............................... 5033 6.3012 1 2 4 8 13227 ............................... 4462 2.6627 1 1 2 3 5228 ............................... 2477 3.5620 1 1 2 4 8229 ............................... 1092 2.4011 1 1 2 3 5230 ............................... 2116 5.0865 1 2 3 6 10231 ............................... 10738 4.8361 1 2 3 6 10232 ............................... 571 3.5692 1 1 2 4 9233 ............................... 4608 7.7129 2 3 6 10 16234 ............................... 2701 3.5724 1 2 3 4 7235 ............................... 5378 5.1264 1 2 4 6 10236 ............................... 38845 4.8570 1 3 4 6 9237 ............................... 1587 3.7284 1 2 3 5 7238 ............................... 7674 8.4730 3 4 6 10 16239 ............................... 51992 6.2172 2 3 5 8 12240 ............................... 11950 6.5921 2 3 5 8 13241 ............................... 2981 3.9410 1 2 3 5 7242 ............................... 2498 6.5524 2 3 5 8 12243 ............................... 85571 4.7006 1 3 4 6 9244 ............................... 11962 4.7800 1 2 4 6 9245 ............................... 4967 3.7246 1 2 3 4 7246 ............................... 1344 3.6384 1 2 3 4 7247 ............................... 15158 3.4474 1 1 3 4 7248 ............................... 9412 4.7385 1 2 4 6 9249 ............................... 10792 3.7782 1 1 3 5 8250 ............................... 3543 4.2484 1 2 3 5 8251 ............................... 2382 2.9866 1 1 3 4 5252 ............................... 1 2.0000 2 2 2 2 2253 ............................... 19064 4.6962 1 3 4 6 9254 ............................... 10447 3.2049 1 2 3 4 6255 ............................... 1 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1256 ............................... 5875 5.1384 1 2 4 6 10257 ............................... 16895 2.8284 1 2 2 3 5258 ............................... 15820 2.0011 1 1 2 2 3259 ............................... 3743 2.7919 1 1 1 3 6260 ............................... 4815 1.4332 1 1 1 2 2





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

261 ............................... 1766 2.1682 1 1 1 2 4262 ............................... 686 3.7886 1 1 3 5 7263 ............................... 24706 11.6014 3 5 8 14 23264 ............................... 3910 6.9575 2 3 5 8 14265 ............................... 3905 6.6197 1 2 4 8 14266 ............................... 2557 3.3136 1 1 2 4 7267 ............................... 257 5.2140 1 1 3 6 12268 ............................... 915 3.6907 1 1 2 4 8269 ............................... 8941 8.2543 2 3 6 10 16270 ............................... 2767 3.2754 1 1 2 4 7271 ............................... 21233 7.1222 2 4 6 8 13272 ............................... 5503 6.3353 2 3 5 8 12273 ............................... 1346 4.2132 1 2 3 5 8274 ............................... 2381 6.9475 2 3 5 9 14275 ............................... 229 3.3886 1 1 2 4 7276 ............................... 1089 4.6272 1 2 4 6 9277 ............................... 84246 5.7203 2 3 5 7 10278 ............................... 28748 4.3341 2 3 4 5 7279 ............................... 5 5.4000 2 2 5 5 11280 ............................... 15232 4.1962 1 2 3 5 8281 ............................... 6791 3.0711 1 1 3 4 6283 ............................... 5370 4.5551 1 2 3 6 9284 ............................... 1858 3.1975 1 1 2 4 6285 ............................... 6174 10.4691 3 5 8 13 20286 ............................... 2009 6.2225 2 3 5 7 11287 ............................... 6029 10.5382 3 5 8 13 20288 ............................... 2316 5.6973 2 3 4 6 9289 ............................... 4349 3.1474 1 1 2 3 7290 ............................... 8262 2.4317 1 1 2 2 4291 ............................... 58 1.6379 1 1 1 2 2292 ............................... 4999 9.9930 2 4 7 13 21293 ............................... 326 5.0644 1 2 4 7 10294 ............................... 84584 4.7150 1 2 4 6 9295 ............................... 3506 3.8811 1 2 3 5 7296 ............................... 233633 5.2417 2 3 4 6 10297 ............................... 41115 3.4726 1 2 3 4 6298 ............................... 112 3.1429 1 2 2 4 6299 ............................... 1067 5.6148 1 2 4 6 11300 ............................... 15674 6.1301 2 3 5 8 12301 ............................... 3130 3.7089 1 2 3 5 7302 ............................... 7834 9.3957 4 5 7 11 16303 ............................... 19520 8.4840 4 5 7 10 15304 ............................... 12114 8.9145 2 4 7 11 18305 ............................... 2886 3.8486 1 2 3 5 7306 ............................... 7971 5.4874 1 2 3 7 12307 ............................... 2231 2.2761 1 1 2 3 4308 ............................... 7729 6.3946 1 2 4 8 14309 ............................... 3973 2.4896 1 1 2 3 5310 ............................... 23848 4.3651 1 2 3 5 9311 ............................... 8261 1.8895 1 1 1 2 3312 ............................... 1576 4.5184 1 1 3 6 10313 ............................... 633 2.1137 1 1 1 3 4314 ............................... 2 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1315 ............................... 28842 7.5038 1 1 5 10 17316 ............................... 97171 6.6773 2 3 5 8 13317 ............................... 1237 3.1997 1 1 2 3 6318 ............................... 5569 6.0084 1 3 4 7 12319 ............................... 468 2.8782 1 1 2 4 6320 ............................... 182681 5.3860 2 3 4 7 10321 ............................... 28362 3.8457 1 2 3 5 7322 ............................... 72 4.1111 1 2 3 5 7323 ............................... 16489 3.2195 1 1 2 4 7324 ............................... 7423 1.8792 1 1 1 2 3325 ............................... 7844 3.8986 1 2 3 5 7326 ............................... 2434 2.6619 1 1 2 3 5327 ............................... 8 8.2500 1 1 1 4 13328 ............................... 724 3.8909 1 1 3 5 8329 ............................... 106 2.0472 1 1 1 3 4331 ............................... 43627 5.5325 1 2 4 7 11332 ............................... 4854 3.2701 1 1 2 4 7





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

333 ............................... 306 5.0163 1 2 3 6 10334 ............................... 12207 4.8955 2 3 4 6 8335 ............................... 11491 3.4115 2 3 3 4 5336 ............................... 40724 3.5245 1 2 3 4 7337 ............................... 30688 2.1779 1 1 2 3 3338 ............................... 1647 5.3024 1 2 3 7 12339 ............................... 1514 4.5594 1 1 3 6 10340 ............................... 1 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1341 ............................... 3866 3.2219 1 1 2 3 7342 ............................... 778 3.1221 1 2 2 4 6344 ............................... 3962 2.2532 1 1 1 2 4345 ............................... 1285 3.7681 1 1 2 5 8346 ............................... 4659 5.8032 1 3 4 7 11347 ............................... 399 3.3734 1 1 2 4 7348 ............................... 3125 4.2074 1 2 3 5 8349 ............................... 595 2.6101 1 1 2 3 5350 ............................... 6202 4.3955 2 2 4 5 8352 ............................... 651 3.8218 1 2 3 5 8353 ............................... 2646 6.7154 3 3 5 8 13354 ............................... 8252 5.8838 3 3 4 7 10355 ............................... 5732 3.3217 2 3 3 4 5356 ............................... 26097 2.4163 1 1 2 3 4357 ............................... 5799 8.5049 3 4 7 10 16358 ............................... 21776 4.3958 2 3 3 5 8359 ............................... 29307 2.8120 2 2 3 3 4360 ............................... 16206 2.9646 1 2 2 3 5361 ............................... 427 3.4637 1 1 2 4 7362 ............................... 2 2.0000 1 1 3 3 3363 ............................... 3100 3.4668 1 2 2 3 7364 ............................... 1626 3.5689 1 1 2 5 7365 ............................... 1936 7.2758 1 3 5 9 16366 ............................... 4266 6.7203 1 3 5 8 14367 ............................... 478 3.1695 1 1 2 4 7368 ............................... 2889 6.7196 2 3 5 8 13369 ............................... 2858 3.1963 1 1 2 4 6370 ............................... 1175 5.7174 3 3 4 5 9371 ............................... 1232 3.6445 2 3 3 4 5372 ............................... 942 3.4809 1 2 2 3 5373 ............................... 3992 2.2856 1 2 2 2 3374 ............................... 138 3.3696 1 2 2 3 5375 ............................... 6 2.6667 2 2 2 3 3376 ............................... 260 3.4577 1 2 2 4 7377 ............................... 54 3.8333 1 1 2 5 8378 ............................... 156 2.3333 1 1 2 3 4379 ............................... 370 3.0676 1 1 2 3 6380 ............................... 77 2.1688 1 1 2 2 4381 ............................... 179 1.9441 1 1 1 2 3382 ............................... 43 1.4884 1 1 1 2 2383 ............................... 1582 3.8957 1 1 3 5 8384 ............................... 128 2.2969 1 1 1 2 4389 ............................... 8 5.8750 3 3 4 8 10390 ............................... 20 3.9500 1 1 3 6 8392 ............................... 2524 9.4624 3 4 7 12 19393 ............................... 2 7.5000 7 7 8 8 8394 ............................... 1742 6.6791 1 2 4 8 15395 ............................... 81014 4.5335 1 2 3 6 9396 ............................... 20 3.8000 1 1 2 5 7397 ............................... 18191 5.2238 1 2 4 7 10398 ............................... 18207 5.9565 2 3 5 7 11399 ............................... 1633 3.5536 1 2 3 4 7400 ............................... 6897 9.0738 1 3 6 12 20401 ............................... 5881 11.1770 2 5 8 14 23402 ............................... 1501 3.9480 1 1 3 5 8403 ............................... 33467 8.0557 2 3 6 10 17404 ............................... 4520 4.2199 1 2 3 6 9406 ............................... 2572 10.3476 3 4 7 13 21407 ............................... 701 4.4051 1 2 4 6 8408 ............................... 2260 7.7088 1 2 5 10 18409 ............................... 3308 5.9344 2 3 4 6 11410 ............................... 41166 3.7183 1 2 3 5 6





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

411 ............................... 13 2.3077 1 1 2 4 4412 ............................... 29 2.7241 1 1 2 3 6413 ............................... 6216 7.2497 2 3 6 9 14414 ............................... 721 4.0902 1 2 3 5 8415 ............................... 40206 14.2110 4 6 11 18 28416 ............................... 196848 7.3514 2 4 6 9 14417 ............................... 36 5.8889 1 1 4 6 13418 ............................... 22285 6.1233 2 3 5 7 11419 ............................... 15990 4.8206 2 2 4 6 9420 ............................... 3108 3.5618 1 2 3 4 6421 ............................... 12326 3.8695 1 2 3 5 7422 ............................... 98 5.2551 1 2 2 5 7423 ............................... 8137 8.1292 2 3 6 10 17424 ............................... 1368 13.4561 2 5 9 16 28425 ............................... 15108 4.0764 1 2 3 5 8426 ............................... 4357 4.5582 1 2 3 6 9427 ............................... 1679 4.9803 1 2 3 6 10428 ............................... 849 7.0813 1 2 4 8 15429 ............................... 27615 6.4861 2 3 5 8 12430 ............................... 58361 8.1902 2 3 6 10 16431 ............................... 297 6.5758 2 3 5 8 13432 ............................... 394 4.8020 1 2 3 5 9433 ............................... 5831 3.0045 1 1 2 4 6434 ............................... 22063 5.0861 1 2 4 6 9435 ............................... 14652 4.3057 1 2 4 5 8436 ............................... 3548 12.8503 4 7 11 17 25437 ............................... 9841 8.9511 3 5 8 11 15439 ............................... 1306 8.1646 1 3 5 10 17440 ............................... 5063 8.8766 2 3 6 10 19441 ............................... 585 3.2496 1 1 2 4 7442 ............................... 16061 8.2365 1 3 6 10 17443 ............................... 3586 3.3943 1 1 2 4 7444 ............................... 5210 4.2263 1 2 3 5 8445 ............................... 2276 2.9921 1 1 2 4 5447 ............................... 4891 2.5113 1 1 2 3 5448 ............................... 1 4.0000 4 4 4 4 4449 ............................... 26785 3.6730 1 1 3 4 7450 ............................... 6439 2.0449 1 1 1 2 4451 ............................... 1 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1452 ............................... 21849 4.9674 1 2 3 6 10453 ............................... 4499 2.8137 1 1 2 3 5454 ............................... 4999 4.5603 1 2 3 6 9455 ............................... 1083 2.6214 1 1 2 3 5461 ............................... 3396 4.6184 1 1 2 5 11462 ............................... 12718 11.5531 4 6 9 15 21463 ............................... 19068 4.2743 1 2 3 5 8464 ............................... 5509 3.0764 1 1 2 4 6465 ............................... 228 3.3509 1 1 2 3 7466 ............................... 1752 3.9258 1 1 2 4 8467 ............................... 1320 4.0485 1 1 2 4 7468 ............................... 58920 12.9558 3 6 10 17 26471 ............................... 11488 5.7349 3 4 5 6 9473 ............................... 7674 12.8610 2 3 7 19 32475 ............................... 109697 11.1882 2 5 9 15 22476 ............................... 4474 11.6623 2 5 10 15 22477 ............................... 25946 8.1242 1 3 6 10 17478 ............................... 111979 7.3211 1 3 5 9 15479 ............................... 22533 3.6234 1 2 3 5 7480 ............................... 500 19.4980 7 9 14 23 39481 ............................... 274 26.7372 16 19 23 31 43482 ............................... 6178 12.8124 4 7 10 15 24483 ............................... 43726 39.1790 14 21 32 49 71484 ............................... 340 13.0853 2 5 10 18 28485 ............................... 3002 9.4867 4 5 7 11 18486 ............................... 2127 12.1208 1 5 9 16 25487 ............................... 3666 7.6328 1 3 6 10 15488 ............................... 779 16.9718 4 7 12 21 34489 ............................... 14444 8.5516 2 3 6 10 18490 ............................... 5357 5.1286 1 2 4 6 10491 ............................... 11403 3.4912 2 2 3 4 6





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

492 ............................... 2695 16.1221 4 5 9 26 34493 ............................... 54404 5.7190 1 3 5 7 11494 ............................... 27453 2.4829 1 1 2 3 5495 ............................... 156 20.5000 6 8 12 19 33496 ............................... 1293 10.0093 4 5 7 12 18497 ............................... 22769 6.2233 2 3 5 7 11498 ............................... 19358 3.4145 1 2 3 4 6499 ............................... 30924 4.7726 1 2 4 6 9500 ............................... 42404 2.6896 1 1 2 3 5501 ............................... 1959 10.5630 4 5 8 13 20502 ............................... 621 5.9775 2 3 5 7 10503 ............................... 5625 3.9733 1 2 3 5 7504 ............................... 124 30.4677 10 15 25 40 63505 ............................... 155 4.7161 1 1 2 6 12506 ............................... 968 17.5651 4 8 14 24 37507 ............................... 285 9.2491 2 4 7 13 19508 ............................... 648 7.1605 2 3 5 9 15509 ............................... 167 6.0719 1 2 4 8 12510 ............................... 1673 7.8171 2 3 5 9 17511 ............................... 605 4.4413 1 1 3 6 10

11001029

TABLE 7B.—MEDICARE PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM, SELECTED PERCENTILE LENGTHS OF STAY

[FY99 MEDPAR update 03/00 Grouper V.18.0]


Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

1 ................................... 35352 9.1033 2 3 6 12 192 ................................... 7158 9.6855 3 5 7 12 194 ................................... 6095 7.3505 1 2 5 9 165 ................................... 95604 3.2875 1 1 2 4 76 ................................... 341 3.2405 1 1 2 4 77 ................................... 12147 10.2938 2 4 7 13 218 ................................... 3706 3.0108 1 1 2 4 79 ................................... 1657 6.4484 1 3 5 8 1210 ................................. 18433 6.5983 2 3 5 8 1311 ................................. 3335 4.1739 1 2 3 5 812 ................................. 45110 6.0509 2 3 4 7 1113 ................................. 6256 5.0973 2 3 4 6 914 ................................. 331649 5.9608 2 3 5 7 1115 ................................. 140366 3.6304 1 2 3 5 716 ................................. 11166 6.1358 2 3 5 7 1217 ................................. 3457 3.3679 1 2 3 4 618 ................................. 26127 5.5433 2 3 4 7 1019 ................................. 8018 3.7403 1 2 3 5 720 ................................. 5780 10.2894 3 5 8 13 2021 ................................. 1368 6.8575 2 3 5 9 1322 ................................. 2519 4.9389 2 2 4 6 923 ................................. 8375 4.2302 1 2 3 5 824 ................................. 52856 5.0134 1 2 4 6 1025 ................................. 24619 3.3092 1 2 3 4 626 ................................. 20 3.2000 1 1 2 3 727 ................................. 3645 5.1084 1 1 3 6 1228 ................................. 10832 6.2250 1 3 5 8 1329 ................................. 3985 3.7064 1 2 3 5 731 ................................. 3299 4.2301 1 2 3 5 832 ................................. 1587 2.7360 1 1 2 3 534 ................................. 19649 5.1979 1 2 4 6 1035 ................................. 5233 3.4204 1 2 3 4 636 ................................. 4249 1.3641 1 1 1 1 237 ................................. 1494 3.6921 1 1 3 5 838 ................................. 115 2.5304 1 1 1 3 539 ................................. 1160 1.9112 1 1 1 2 440 ................................. 1765 3.5955 1 1 2 4 841 ................................. 1 4.0000 4 4 4 4 442 ................................. 2723 2.2277 1 1 1 3 543 ................................. 86 3.3605 1 2 3 4 7



TABLE 7B.—MEDICARE PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM, SELECTED PERCENTILE LENGTHS OF STAY—Continued[FY99 MEDPAR update 03/00 Grouper V.18.0]


Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

44 ................................. 1237 4.9871 2 3 4 6 945 ................................. 2509 3.2790 1 2 3 4 646 ................................. 2970 4.5805 1 2 4 6 947 ................................. 1181 3.3023 1 1 3 4 649 ................................. 2245 4.9675 1 2 4 6 950 ................................. 2587 1.9849 1 1 1 2 351 ................................. 264 2.5303 1 1 1 3 652 ................................. 198 2.1414 1 1 1 2 553 ................................. 2594 3.6727 1 1 2 4 854 ................................. 4 1.5000 1 1 1 1 355 ................................. 1573 2.8843 1 1 1 3 656 ................................. 533 3.0507 1 1 2 4 657 ................................. 587 3.9642 1 1 2 4 859 ................................. 115 2.5304 1 1 2 3 560 ................................. 2 1.0000 1 1 1 1 161 ................................. 212 4.8302 1 1 2 6 1362 ................................. 2 3.5000 2 2 5 5 563 ................................. 3207 4.2728 1 2 3 5 964 ................................. 3189 6.5124 1 2 4 8 1465 ................................. 31923 2.8964 1 1 2 4 566 ................................. 6984 3.1714 1 1 3 4 667 ................................. 482 3.5270 1 2 3 4 768 ................................. 13468 4.1556 1 2 3 5 769 ................................. 4268 3.2856 1 2 3 4 670 ................................. 33 2.9091 1 2 3 4 571 ................................. 105 3.8667 1 2 3 6 772 ................................. 824 3.2961 1 2 3 4 673 ................................. 6461 4.3439 1 2 3 5 875 ................................. 39513 10.0058 3 5 8 12 2076 ................................. 40109 11.2755 3 5 9 14 2177 ................................. 2447 4.9775 1 2 4 7 1078 ................................. 30651 6.9464 3 5 6 8 1179 ................................. 183420 8.4683 3 4 7 11 1680 ................................. 8807 5.7434 2 3 5 7 1081 ................................. 5 9.2000 2 2 10 10 1982 ................................. 64149 6.9422 2 3 5 9 1483 ................................. 6599 5.5342 2 3 4 7 1084 ................................. 1553 3.3709 1 2 3 4 685 ................................. 20150 6.3637 2 3 5 8 1286 ................................. 1948 3.7936 1 2 3 5 787 ................................. 63294 6.2499 1 3 5 8 1288 ................................. 405792 5.2217 2 3 4 7 989 ................................. 525499 6.0257 2 3 5 7 1190 ................................. 52326 4.2457 2 3 4 5 791 ................................. 49 3.3469 1 2 3 4 592 ................................. 13772 6.2509 2 3 5 8 1293 ................................. 1627 4.0412 1 2 3 5 794 ................................. 12463 6.3016 2 3 5 8 1295 ................................. 1596 3.6942 1 2 3 5 796 ................................. 65045 4.7268 2 3 4 6 897 ................................. 31893 3.6895 1 2 3 5 798 ................................. 20 4.7000 1 1 3 6 799 ................................. 18262 3.2254 1 1 2 4 6100 ............................... 7333 2.2215 1 1 2 3 4101 ............................... 19863 4.4312 1 2 3 6 8102 ............................... 5056 2.7455 1 1 2 3 5103 ............................... 480 51.7875 9 13 31 70 121104 ............................... 33648 11.6443 3 6 10 15 22105 ............................... 29689 9.3034 4 5 7 11 17106 ............................... 3805 11.2100 5 7 9 13 19107 ............................... 90905 10.3450 5 7 9 12 17108 ............................... 5246 10.5442 3 5 8 13 20109 ............................... 61881 7.7309 4 5 6 9 13110 ............................... 55081 9.4414 2 5 8 11 18111 ............................... 7168 5.4788 2 4 5 7 8112 ............................... 61237 3.7595 1 1 3 5 8113 ............................... 44445 12.0916 3 6 9 15 24114 ............................... 8543 8.2800 2 4 7 10 16115 ............................... 14129 8.4099 1 4 7 11 16116 ............................... 309839 3.7278 1 1 3 5 8





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

117 ............................... 3419 4.0433 1 1 2 5 9118 ............................... 6687 2.8065 1 1 1 3 6119 ............................... 1461 4.8542 1 1 3 6 12120 ............................... 36979 8.1175 1 2 5 10 18121 ............................... 164131 6.4386 2 3 5 8 12122 ............................... 81181 3.8293 1 2 3 5 7123 ............................... 41101 4.5805 1 1 3 6 11124 ............................... 135568 4.3735 1 2 3 6 8125 ............................... 75438 2.7854 1 1 2 4 5126 ............................... 5171 11.7343 3 6 9 14 23127 ............................... 683849 5.3364 2 3 4 7 10128 ............................... 11601 5.8042 3 4 5 7 9129 ............................... 4224 2.8570 1 1 1 3 7130 ............................... 89585 5.8066 2 3 5 7 10131 ............................... 27056 4.3774 1 3 4 6 7132 ............................... 153720 3.0483 1 1 2 4 6133 ............................... 7639 2.3961 1 1 2 3 4134 ............................... 33046 3.2976 1 2 3 4 6135 ............................... 7143 4.4714 1 2 3 5 9136 ............................... 1171 2.9086 1 1 2 4 6138 ............................... 192312 4.0086 1 2 3 5 8139 ............................... 77818 2.5076 1 1 2 3 5140 ............................... 76921 2.7133 1 1 2 3 5141 ............................... 86200 3.7088 1 2 3 5 7142 ............................... 42916 2.6786 1 1 2 3 5143 ............................... 186941 2.1669 1 1 2 3 4144 ............................... 79537 5.3212 1 2 4 7 11145 ............................... 6964 2.8153 1 1 2 4 6146 ............................... 11289 10.1758 5 7 9 12 17147 ............................... 2427 6.6135 3 5 6 8 10148 ............................... 134992 12.1212 5 7 10 14 22149 ............................... 17679 6.6565 4 5 6 8 10150 ............................... 20422 11.1531 4 7 9 14 20151 ............................... 4516 5.9289 2 3 5 8 10152 ............................... 4469 8.1962 3 5 7 10 14153 ............................... 1932 5.4596 3 4 5 7 8154 ............................... 29550 13.2586 4 7 10 16 25155 ............................... 6113 4.3496 1 2 3 6 8156 ............................... 2 28.0000 28 28 28 28 28157 ............................... 8234 5.4966 1 2 4 7 11158 ............................... 4427 2.6286 1 1 2 3 5159 ............................... 16531 5.0216 1 2 4 6 10160 ............................... 11070 2.7232 1 1 2 4 5161 ............................... 11547 4.1684 1 2 3 5 9162 ............................... 7071 1.9542 1 1 1 2 4163 ............................... 10 2.9000 1 1 3 3 6164 ............................... 4747 8.3994 4 5 7 10 14165 ............................... 1954 4.8547 2 3 5 6 8166 ............................... 3331 5.0793 2 3 4 6 9167 ............................... 2936 2.7101 1 2 2 3 5168 ............................... 1530 4.6556 1 2 3 6 9169 ............................... 810 2.4247 1 1 2 3 5170 ............................... 11351 11.1690 2 5 8 14 23171 ............................... 1132 4.8012 1 2 4 6 9172 ............................... 30705 6.9802 2 3 5 9 14173 ............................... 2519 3.8626 1 1 3 5 8174 ............................... 237539 4.8239 2 3 4 6 9175 ............................... 28266 2.9435 1 2 3 4 5176 ............................... 15708 5.2687 2 3 4 6 10177 ............................... 9537 4.5531 2 2 4 6 8178 ............................... 3603 3.1415 1 2 3 4 6179 ............................... 12290 6.0134 2 3 5 7 11180 ............................... 85505 5.3984 2 3 4 7 10181 ............................... 24481 3.4105 1 2 3 4 6182 ............................... 233949 4.3625 1 2 3 5 8183 ............................... 79105 2.9644 1 1 2 4 6184 ............................... 99 3.2525 1 2 3 4 5185 ............................... 4361 4.5015 1 2 3 6 9186 ............................... 2 4.5000 2 2 7 7 7187 ............................... 747 3.8220 1 2 3 5 8





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

188 ............................... 75007 5.5817 1 2 4 7 11189 ............................... 11195 3.1401 1 1 2 4 6190 ............................... 70 5.9857 2 3 4 6 11191 ............................... 9434 14.1406 4 7 10 18 28192 ............................... 987 6.5968 2 4 6 8 11193 ............................... 5705 12.5550 5 7 10 15 23194 ............................... 763 6.7720 2 4 6 8 12195 ............................... 4898 9.8944 4 6 8 12 17196 ............................... 1197 5.6942 2 4 5 7 9197 ............................... 20365 8.7337 3 5 7 11 16198 ............................... 6125 4.5063 2 3 4 6 8199 ............................... 1745 9.6682 3 4 8 13 19200 ............................... 1084 10.7694 2 4 8 14 22201 ............................... 1483 13.8206 3 6 11 18 27202 ............................... 25781 6.5065 2 3 5 8 13203 ............................... 29166 6.6874 2 3 5 9 13204 ............................... 55210 5.8583 2 3 4 7 11205 ............................... 22715 6.2907 2 3 5 8 12206 ............................... 1792 3.8337 1 2 3 5 7207 ............................... 30984 5.1140 1 2 4 6 10208 ............................... 9698 2.9013 1 1 2 4 6209 ............................... 343780 5.1256 3 3 4 6 8210 ............................... 127278 6.8141 3 4 6 8 11211 ............................... 31470 4.9173 3 4 4 6 7212 ............................... 7 3.0000 2 2 2 3 4213 ............................... 8933 8.7283 2 4 7 11 17216 ............................... 5871 9.7808 2 4 7 12 20217 ............................... 17768 13.1592 3 5 9 16 28218 ............................... 21572 5.3690 2 3 4 6 10219 ............................... 19377 3.2517 1 2 3 4 5220 ............................... 3 2.3333 1 1 2 4 4223 ............................... 17575 2.5861 1 1 2 3 5224 ............................... 8044 2.0525 1 1 2 3 4225 ............................... 5639 4.7074 1 2 3 6 10226 ............................... 4927 6.3028 1 2 4 8 13227 ............................... 4410 2.6689 1 1 2 3 5228 ............................... 2477 3.5620 1 1 2 4 8229 ............................... 1092 2.4011 1 1 2 3 5230 ............................... 2274 5.0721 1 2 3 6 10231 ............................... 10738 4.8361 1 2 3 6 10232 ............................... 571 3.5692 1 1 2 4 9233 ............................... 4607 7.7141 2 3 6 10 16234 ............................... 2702 3.5718 1 2 3 4 7235 ............................... 5378 5.1264 1 2 4 6 10236 ............................... 38845 4.8570 1 3 4 6 9237 ............................... 1587 3.7284 1 2 3 5 7238 ............................... 7674 8.4730 3 4 6 10 16239 ............................... 51992 6.2172 2 3 5 8 12240 ............................... 11944 6.5936 2 3 5 8 13241 ............................... 2987 3.9404 1 2 3 5 7242 ............................... 2498 6.5524 2 3 5 8 12243 ............................... 85571 4.7006 1 3 4 6 9244 ............................... 11961 4.7800 1 2 4 6 9245 ............................... 4968 3.7246 1 2 3 4 7246 ............................... 1344 3.6384 1 2 3 4 7247 ............................... 15158 3.4474 1 1 3 4 7248 ............................... 9412 4.7385 1 2 4 6 9249 ............................... 10792 3.7782 1 1 3 5 8250 ............................... 3542 4.2490 1 2 3 5 8251 ............................... 2383 2.9862 1 1 3 4 5252 ............................... 1 2.0000 2 2 2 2 2253 ............................... 19051 4.6967 1 3 4 6 9254 ............................... 10460 3.2059 1 2 3 4 6255 ............................... 1 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1256 ............................... 5875 5.1384 1 2 4 6 10257 ............................... 16871 2.8291 1 2 2 3 5258 ............................... 15844 2.0016 1 1 2 2 3259 ............................... 3741 2.7928 1 1 1 3 6260 ............................... 4817 1.4330 1 1 1 2 2261 ............................... 1766 2.1682 1 1 1 2 4





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

262 ............................... 686 3.7886 1 1 3 5 7263 ............................... 24706 11.6014 3 5 8 14 23264 ............................... 3910 6.9575 2 3 5 8 14265 ............................... 3904 6.6201 1 2 4 8 14266 ............................... 2558 3.3143 1 1 2 4 7267 ............................... 257 5.2140 1 1 3 6 12268 ............................... 915 3.6907 1 1 2 4 8269 ............................... 8938 8.2558 2 3 6 10 16270 ............................... 2770 3.2762 1 1 2 4 7271 ............................... 21233 7.1222 2 4 6 8 13272 ............................... 5501 6.3356 2 3 5 8 12273 ............................... 1348 4.2151 1 2 3 5 8274 ............................... 2381 6.9475 2 3 5 9 14275 ............................... 229 3.3886 1 1 2 4 7276 ............................... 1089 4.6272 1 2 4 6 9277 ............................... 84223 5.7207 2 3 5 7 10278 ............................... 28771 4.3340 2 3 4 5 7279 ............................... 5 5.4000 2 2 5 5 11280 ............................... 15227 4.1968 1 2 3 5 8281 ............................... 6796 3.0705 1 1 3 4 6283 ............................... 5368 4.5561 1 2 3 6 9284 ............................... 1860 3.1962 1 1 2 4 6285 ............................... 6166 10.4710 3 5 8 13 20286 ............................... 2009 6.2225 2 3 5 7 11287 ............................... 6029 10.5382 3 5 8 13 20288 ............................... 2324 5.7087 2 3 4 6 9289 ............................... 4349 3.1474 1 1 2 3 7290 ............................... 8262 2.4317 1 1 2 2 4291 ............................... 58 1.6379 1 1 1 2 2292 ............................... 4999 9.9930 2 4 7 13 21293 ............................... 326 5.0644 1 2 4 7 10294 ............................... 84584 4.7150 1 2 4 6 9295 ............................... 3506 3.8811 1 2 3 5 7296 ............................... 233520 5.2416 2 3 4 6 10297 ............................... 41231 3.4777 1 2 3 4 6298 ............................... 112 3.1429 1 2 2 4 6299 ............................... 1067 5.6148 1 2 4 6 11300 ............................... 15669 6.1305 2 3 5 8 12301 ............................... 3135 3.7107 1 2 3 5 7302 ............................... 7834 9.3957 4 5 7 11 16303 ............................... 19520 8.4840 4 5 7 10 15304 ............................... 12114 8.9145 2 4 7 11 18305 ............................... 2886 3.8486 1 2 3 5 7306 ............................... 7970 5.4877 1 2 3 7 12307 ............................... 2232 2.2764 1 1 2 3 4308 ............................... 7725 6.3969 1 2 4 8 14309 ............................... 3977 2.4891 1 1 2 3 5310 ............................... 23844 4.3654 1 2 3 5 9311 ............................... 8265 1.8897 1 1 1 2 3312 ............................... 1576 4.5184 1 1 3 6 10313 ............................... 633 2.1137 1 1 1 3 4314 ............................... 2 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1315 ............................... 28842 7.5038 1 1 5 10 17316 ............................... 97170 6.6773 2 3 5 8 13317 ............................... 1237 3.1997 1 1 2 3 6318 ............................... 5569 6.0084 1 3 4 7 12319 ............................... 468 2.8782 1 1 2 4 6320 ............................... 182655 5.3861 2 3 4 7 10321 ............................... 28388 3.8467 1 2 3 5 7322 ............................... 72 4.1111 1 2 3 5 7323 ............................... 16486 3.2195 1 1 2 4 7324 ............................... 7426 1.8796 1 1 1 2 3325 ............................... 7844 3.8986 1 2 3 5 7326 ............................... 2434 2.6619 1 1 2 3 5327 ............................... 8 8.2500 1 1 1 4 13328 ............................... 724 3.8909 1 1 3 5 8329 ............................... 106 2.0472 1 1 1 3 4331 ............................... 43621 5.5330 1 2 4 7 11332 ............................... 4860 3.2687 1 1 2 4 7333 ............................... 306 5.0163 1 2 3 6 10





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

334 ............................... 12201 4.8961 2 3 4 6 8335 ............................... 11497 3.4117 2 3 3 4 5336 ............................... 40717 3.5248 1 2 3 4 7337 ............................... 30695 2.1778 1 1 2 3 3338 ............................... 1647 5.3024 1 2 3 7 12339 ............................... 1514 4.5594 1 1 3 6 10340 ............................... 1 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1341 ............................... 3866 3.2219 1 1 2 3 7342 ............................... 778 3.1221 1 2 2 4 6344 ............................... 3962 2.2532 1 1 1 2 4345 ............................... 1285 3.7681 1 1 2 5 8346 ............................... 4659 5.8032 1 3 4 7 11347 ............................... 399 3.3734 1 1 2 4 7348 ............................... 3125 4.2074 1 2 3 5 8349 ............................... 595 2.6101 1 1 2 3 5350 ............................... 6202 4.3955 2 2 4 5 8352 ............................... 651 3.8218 1 2 3 5 8353 ............................... 2646 6.7154 3 3 5 8 13354 ............................... 8251 5.8841 3 3 4 7 10355 ............................... 5733 3.3216 2 3 3 4 5356 ............................... 26097 2.4163 1 1 2 3 4357 ............................... 5799 8.5049 3 4 7 10 16358 ............................... 21754 4.3966 2 3 3 5 8359 ............................... 29329 2.8125 2 2 3 3 4360 ............................... 16206 2.9646 1 2 2 3 5361 ............................... 427 3.4637 1 1 2 4 7362 ............................... 2 2.0000 1 1 3 3 3363 ............................... 3100 3.4668 1 2 2 3 7364 ............................... 1626 3.5689 1 1 2 5 7365 ............................... 1936 7.2758 1 3 5 9 16366 ............................... 4266 6.7203 1 3 5 8 14367 ............................... 478 3.1695 1 1 2 4 7368 ............................... 2889 6.7196 2 3 5 8 13369 ............................... 2858 3.1963 1 1 2 4 6370 ............................... 1175 5.7174 3 3 4 5 9371 ............................... 1232 3.6445 2 3 3 4 5372 ............................... 952 3.4758 2 2 2 3 5373 ............................... 3982 2.2838 1 2 2 2 3374 ............................... 138 3.3696 1 2 2 3 5375 ............................... 6 2.6667 2 2 2 3 3376 ............................... 260 3.4577 1 2 2 4 7377 ............................... 54 3.8333 1 1 2 5 8378 ............................... 156 2.3333 1 1 2 3 4379 ............................... 370 3.0676 1 1 2 3 6380 ............................... 77 2.1688 1 1 2 2 4381 ............................... 179 1.9441 1 1 1 2 3382 ............................... 43 1.4884 1 1 1 2 2383 ............................... 1582 3.8957 1 1 3 5 8384 ............................... 128 2.2969 1 1 1 2 4389 ............................... 8 5.8750 3 3 4 8 10390 ............................... 20 3.9500 1 1 3 6 8392 ............................... 2524 9.4624 3 4 7 12 19393 ............................... 2 7.5000 7 7 8 8 8394 ............................... 1742 6.6791 1 2 4 8 15395 ............................... 81014 4.5335 1 2 3 6 9396 ............................... 20 3.8000 1 1 2 5 7397 ............................... 18191 5.2238 1 2 4 7 10398 ............................... 18199 5.9577 2 3 5 7 11399 ............................... 1641 3.5521 1 2 3 4 7400 ............................... 6893 9.0730 1 3 6 12 20401 ............................... 5865 11.1758 2 5 8 14 23402 ............................... 1503 3.9508 1 1 3 5 8403 ............................... 33074 8.0664 2 3 6 10 17404 ............................... 4484 4.2219 1 2 3 6 9406 ............................... 2574 10.3528 3 4 7 13 21407 ............................... 703 4.4040 1 2 4 6 8408 ............................... 2275 7.7354 1 2 5 10 18409 ............................... 3308 5.9344 2 3 4 6 11410 ............................... 41165 3.7184 1 2 3 5 6411 ............................... 13 2.3077 1 1 2 4 4





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

412 ............................... 29 2.7241 1 1 2 3 6413 ............................... 6605 7.2450 2 3 6 9 14414 ............................... 761 4.0933 1 2 3 5 8415 ............................... 40206 14.2110 4 6 11 18 28416 ............................... 196848 7.3514 2 4 6 9 14417 ............................... 36 5.8889 1 1 4 6 13418 ............................... 22285 6.1233 2 3 5 7 11419 ............................... 15984 4.8204 2 2 4 6 9420 ............................... 3114 3.5649 1 2 3 4 6421 ............................... 12326 3.8695 1 2 3 5 7422 ............................... 98 5.2551 1 2 2 5 7423 ............................... 8137 8.1292 2 3 6 10 17424 ............................... 1368 13.4561 2 5 9 16 28425 ............................... 15108 4.0764 1 2 3 5 8426 ............................... 4357 4.5582 1 2 3 6 9427 ............................... 1679 4.9803 1 2 3 6 10428 ............................... 849 7.0813 1 2 4 8 15429 ............................... 27615 6.4861 2 3 5 8 12430 ............................... 58361 8.1902 2 3 6 10 16431 ............................... 297 6.5758 2 3 5 8 13432 ............................... 394 4.8020 1 2 3 5 9433 ............................... 5831 3.0045 1 1 2 4 6434 ............................... 22061 5.0864 1 2 4 6 9435 ............................... 14654 4.3052 1 2 4 5 8436 ............................... 3548 12.8503 4 7 11 17 25437 ............................... 9841 8.9511 3 5 8 11 15439 ............................... 1306 8.1646 1 3 5 10 17440 ............................... 5063 8.8766 2 3 6 10 19441 ............................... 585 3.2496 1 1 2 4 7442 ............................... 16061 8.2365 1 3 6 10 17443 ............................... 3586 3.3943 1 1 2 4 7444 ............................... 5206 4.2274 1 2 3 5 8445 ............................... 2280 2.9917 1 1 2 4 5447 ............................... 4891 2.5113 1 1 2 3 5448 ............................... 1 4.0000 4 4 4 4 4449 ............................... 26781 3.6732 1 1 3 4 7450 ............................... 6443 2.0449 1 1 1 2 4451 ............................... 1 1.0000 1 1 1 1 1452 ............................... 21847 4.9676 1 2 3 6 10453 ............................... 4501 2.8136 1 1 2 3 5454 ............................... 4997 4.5603 1 2 3 6 9455 ............................... 1085 2.6249 1 1 2 3 5461 ............................... 3397 4.6194 1 1 2 5 11462 ............................... 12718 11.5531 4 6 9 15 21463 ............................... 19065 4.2742 1 2 3 5 8464 ............................... 5511 3.0766 1 1 2 4 6465 ............................... 228 3.3509 1 1 2 3 7466 ............................... 1752 3.9258 1 1 2 4 8467 ............................... 1320 4.0485 1 1 2 4 7468 ............................... 58922 12.9489 3 6 10 17 26471 ............................... 11488 5.7349 3 4 5 6 9473 ............................... 7674 12.8610 2 3 7 19 32475 ............................... 109695 11.1883 2 5 9 15 22476 ............................... 4474 11.6623 2 5 10 15 22477 ............................... 25946 8.1242 1 3 6 10 17478 ............................... 111969 7.3211 1 3 5 9 15479 ............................... 22542 3.6236 1 2 3 5 7480 ............................... 500 19.4980 7 9 14 23 39481 ............................... 273 26.5641 16 19 23 31 41482 ............................... 6195 12.8199 4 7 10 15 24483 ............................... 43695 39.1662 14 22 32 49 71484 ............................... 340 13.0853 2 5 10 18 28485 ............................... 3002 9.4867 4 5 7 11 18486 ............................... 2127 12.1208 1 5 9 16 25487 ............................... 3666 7.6328 1 3 6 10 15488 ............................... 779 16.9718 4 7 12 21 34489 ............................... 14444 8.5516 2 3 6 10 18490 ............................... 5354 5.1291 1 2 4 6 10491 ............................... 11403 3.4912 2 2 3 4 6492 ............................... 2695 16.1221 4 5 9 26 34





Arithmeticmean LOS

10thpercentile

25thpercentile

50thpercentile

75thpercentile

90thpercentile

493 ............................... 54388 5.7197 1 3 5 7 11494 ............................... 27469 2.4832 1 1 2 3 5495 ............................... 156 20.5000 6 8 12 19 33496 ............................... 1293 10.0093 4 5 7 12 18497 ............................... 22761 6.2244 2 3 5 7 11498 ............................... 19366 3.4143 1 2 3 4 6499 ............................... 30892 4.7750 1 2 4 6 9500 ............................... 42436 2.6894 1 1 2 3 5501 ............................... 1959 10.5630 4 5 8 13 20502 ............................... 621 5.9775 2 3 5 7 10503 ............................... 5625 3.9733 1 2 3 5 7504 ............................... 124 30.4677 10 15 25 40 63505 ............................... 155 4.7161 1 1 2 6 12506 ............................... 968 17.5651 4 8 14 24 37507 ............................... 285 9.2491 2 4 7 13 19508 ............................... 648 7.1605 2 3 5 9 15509 ............................... 167 6.0719 1 2 4 8 12510 ............................... 1673 7.8171 2 3 5 9 17511 ............................... 605 4.4413 1 1 3 6 10

11001029

TABLE 8A.—STATEWIDE AVERAGE OP-ERATING COST-TO-CHARGE RATIOSFOR URBAN AND RURAL HOSPITALS(CASE WEIGHTED) MARCH 2000

State Urban Rural

ALABAMA ..................... 0.401 0.355ALASKA ........................ 0.470 0.723ARIZONA ...................... 0.373 0.517ARKANSAS .................. 0.478 0.454CALIFORNIA ................ 0.342 0.441COLORADO ................. 0.436 0.559CONNECTICUT ............ 0.495 0.503DELAWARE .................. 0.507 0.449DISTRICT OF COLUM-

BIA ............................ 0.521 ..............FLORIDA ...................... 0.363 0.381GEORGIA ..................... 0.475 0.486HAWAII ......................... 0.409 0.554IDAHO .......................... 0.549 0.571ILLINOIS ....................... 0.425 0.509INDIANA ....................... 0.532 0.544IOWA ............................ 0.493 0.624KANSAS ....................... 0.444 0.652KENTUCKY .................. 0.478 0.493LOUISIANA ................... 0.410 0.496MAINE .......................... 0.597 0.550MARYLAND .................. 0.759 0.821MASSACHUSETTS ...... 0.526 0.538MICHIGAN .................... 0.466 0.572MINNESOTA ................ 0.509 0.591MISSISSIPPI ................ 0.456 0.454MISSOURI .................... 0.413 0.507MONTANA .................... 0.524 0.572NEBRASKA .................. 0.468 0.623NEVADA ....................... 0.292 0.486NEW HAMPSHIRE ....... 0.541 0.579NEW JERSEY .............. 0.401 ..............NEW MEXICO .............. 0.452 0.498NEW YORK .................. 0.529 0.611NORTH CAROLINA ..... 0.540 0.489NORTH DAKOTA ......... 0.622 0.661OHIO ............................. 0.511 0.578OKLAHOMA ................. 0.423 0.509OREGON ...................... 0.607 0.582

TABLE 8A.—STATEWIDE AVERAGE OP-ERATING COST-TO-CHARGE RATIOSFOR URBAN AND RURAL HOSPITALS(CASE WEIGHTED) MARCH 2000—Continued

State Urban Rural

PENNSYLVANIA .......... 0.396 0.517PUERTO RICO ............. 0.479 0.579RHODE ISLAND ........... 0.522 ..............SOUTH CAROLINA ...... 0.447 0.451SOUTH DAKOTA ......... 0.537 0.600TENNESSEE ................ 0.441 0.482TEXAS .......................... 0.404 0.503UTAH ............................ 0.504 0.619VERMONT .................... 0.623 0.595VIRGINIA ...................... 0.466 0.498WASHINGTON ............. 0.576 0.653WEST VIRGINIA .......... 0.575 0.532WISCONSIN ................. 0.551 0.621WYOMING .................... 0.475 0.682

TABLE 8B.—STATEWIDE AVERAGECAPITAL COST-TO-CHARGE RATIOS(CASE WEIGHTED) MARCH 2000

State Ratio

ALABAMA ....................................... 0.040ALASKA .......................................... 0.070ARIZONA ........................................ 0.041ARKANSAS .................................... 0.050CALIFORNIA .................................. 0.036COLORADO ................................... 0.046CONNECTICUT .............................. 0.036DELAWARE .................................... 0.051DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ............. 0.039FLORIDA ........................................ 0.045GEORGIA ....................................... 0.056HAWAII ........................................... 0.043IDAHO ............................................ 0.049ILLINOIS ......................................... 0.042INDIANA ......................................... 0.057IOWA .............................................. 0.056

TABLE 8B.—STATEWIDE AVERAGECAPITAL COST-TO-CHARGE RATIOS(CASE WEIGHTED) MARCH 2000—Continued

State Ratio

KANSAS ......................................... 0.054KENTUCKY .................................... 0.046LOUISIANA ..................................... 0.050MAINE ............................................ 0.039MARYLAND .................................... 0.013MASSACHUSETTS ........................ 0.055MICHIGAN ...................................... 0.045MINNESOTA .................................. 0.049MISSISSIPPI .................................. 0.045MISSOURI ...................................... 0.046MONTANA ...................................... 0.055NEBRASKA .................................... 0.054NEVADA ......................................... 0.030NEW HAMPSHIRE ......................... 0.061NEW JERSEY ................................ 0.036NEW MEXICO ................................ 0.044NEW YORK .................................... 0.051NORTH CAROLINA ....................... 0.050NORTH DAKOTA ........................... 0.074OHIO ............................................... 0.050OKLAHOMA ................................... 0.048OREGON ........................................ 0.049PENNSYLVANIA ............................ 0.040PUERTO RICO ............................... 0.043RHODE ISLAND ............................. 0.030SOUTH CAROLINA ........................ 0.047SOUTH DAKOTA ........................... 0.066TENNESSEE .................................. 0.051TEXAS ............................................ 0.048UTAH .............................................. 0.049VERMONT ...................................... 0.051VIRGINIA ........................................ 0.058WASHINGTON ............................... 0.064WEST VIRGINIA ............................ 0.047WISCONSIN ................................... 0.053WYOMING ...................................... 0.057



Appendix A—Regulatory ImpactAnalysis

I. IntroductionSection 804(2) of Title 5, United States

Code (as added by section 251 of Public Law104–121), specifies that a major rule is anyrule that the Office of Management andBudget finds is likely to result in—

• An annual effect on the economy of $100million or more;

• A major increase in costs or prices forconsumers individual industries, Federal,State or local government agencies orgeographic regions; or

• Significant adverse effects oncompetition, employment, investment,productivity, innovation or on the ability ofUnited States based enterprises to competewith foreign based enterprises in domesticand export markets.

We estimate that the impact of this finalrule relating to the annual update in paymentrates and policy changes for hospitalinpatient services and the implementation ofthe specified changes under Public Law 106–113 will be to increase payments to hospitalsby approximately $1.5 billion in FY 2001. Weestimate that the impact of the final changesrelating to the Medicare inpatient DSHadjustment calculation (a finalization of theJanuary 20, 2000 interim final rule) to be$350 million for FY 2001. Therefore, this ruleis a major rule as defined in Title 5, UnitedStates Code, section 804(2).

We generally prepare a regulatoryflexibility analysis that is consistent with theRegulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C.601 through 612), unless we certify that afinal rule would not have a significanteconomic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities. For purposes of the RFA, weconsider all hospitals to be small entities.

Also, section 1102(b) of the Act requires usto prepare a regulatory impact analysis forany rule that may have a significant impacton the operations of a substantial number ofsmall rural hospitals. Such an analysis mustconform to the provisions of section 603 ofthe RFA. With the exception of hospitalslocated in certain New England counties, forpurposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, wedefine a small rural hospital as a hospitalwith fewer than 100 beds that is locatedoutside of a Metropolitan Statistical Area(MSA) or New England County MetropolitanArea (NECMA). Section 601(g) of the SocialSecurity Amendments of 1983 (Pub. L. 98–21) designated hospitals in certain NewEngland counties as belonging to the adjacentNECMA. Thus, for purposes of the hospitalinpatient prospective payment system, weclassify these hospitals as urban hospitals.

It is clear that the changes in this final rulewill affect both a substantial number of smallrural hospitals as well as other classes ofhospitals, and the effects on some may besignificant. Therefore, the discussion below,in combination with the rest of this final rule,constitutes a combined regulatory impactanalysis and regulatory flexibility analysis.

We have reviewed this final rule under thethreshold criteria of Executive Order 13132,Federalism, and have determined that thefinal rule will not have any negative impacton the rights, roles, and responsibilities ofState, local, or tribal governments.

Section 202 of the Unfunded MandatesReform Act of 1995 also requires thatagencies assess anticipated costs and benefitsbefore issuing any rule that may result in anexpenditure in any one year by State, localor tribal governments, in the aggregate, or bythe private sector, of $100 million. This finalrule does not mandate any requirements forState, local, or tribal governments.

In accordance with the provisions ofExecutive Order 12866, this final rule wasreviewed by the Office of Management andBudget.

II. Changes in the Final Rule

Since we published the proposed rule, themarket basket estimates for hospitals subjectto the prospective payment system andhospitals and units excluded from the systemhave both risen by 0.3 percentage points.With the exception of these changes, we aregenerally implementing the policy andstatutory provisions discussed in theproposed rule.

III. Limitations of Our Analysis

As has been the case in our previouslypublished regulatory impact analyses, thefollowing quantitative analysis presents theprojected effects of our policy changes, aswell as statutory changes effective for FY2001, on various hospital groups. Weestimate the effects of individual policychanges by estimating payments per casewhile holding all other payment policiesconstant. We use the best data available, butwe do not attempt to predict behavioralresponses to our policy changes, and we donot make adjustments for future changes insuch variables as admissions, lengths of stay,or case-mix.

We received no comments on themethodology used for the impact analysis inthe proposed rule.

IV. Hospitals Included In and ExcludedFrom the Prospective Payment System

The prospective payment systems forhospital inpatient operating and capital-related costs encompass nearly all general,short-term, acute care hospitals thatparticipate in the Medicare program. Therewere 45 Indian Health Service hospitals inour database, which we excluded from theanalysis due to the special characteristics ofthe prospective payment method for thesehospitals. Among other short-term, acute carehospitals, only the 50 such hospitals inMaryland remain excluded from theprospective payment system under thewaiver at section 1814(b)(3) of the Act. Thus,as of July 2000, we have included 4,888hospitals in our analysis. This representsabout 80 percent of all Medicare-participating hospitals. The majority of thisimpact analysis focuses on this set ofhospitals.

The remaining 20 percent are specialtyhospitals that are excluded from theprospective payment system and continue tobe paid on the basis of their reasonable costs(subject to a rate-of-increase ceiling on theirinpatient operating costs per discharge).These hospitals include psychiatric,rehabilitation, long-term care, children’s, andcancer hospitals. The impacts of our final

policy changes on these hospitals arediscussed below.

V. Impact on Excluded Hospitals and Units

As of July 2000, there were 1,068 specialtyhospitals excluded from the prospectivepayment system and instead paid on areasonable cost basis subject to the rate-of-increase ceiling under § 413.40. Broken downby specialty, there were 529 psychiatric, 196rehabilitation, 242 long-term care, 74children’s, 17 Christian Science Sanatoria,and 10 cancer hospitals. In addition, therewere 1,468 psychiatric units and 918rehabilitation units in hospitals otherwisesubject to the prospective payment system.These excluded units are also paid inaccordance with § 413.40. Under§ 413.40(a)(2)(i)(A), the rate-of-increaseceiling is not applicable to the 36 specialtyhospitals and units in Maryland that are paidin accordance with the waiver at section1814(b)(3) of the Act.

As required by section 1886(b)(3)(B) of theAct, the update factor applicable to the rate-of-increase limit for excluded hospitals andunits for FY 2001 will be between 0 and 3.4percent, depending on the hospital’s or unit’scosts in relation to its limit for the mostrecent cost reporting period for whichinformation is available.

The impact on excluded hospitals andunits of the update in the rate-of-increaselimit depends on the cumulative costincreases experienced by each excludedhospital or unit since its applicable baseperiod. For excluded hospitals and units thathave maintained their cost increases at alevel below the percentage increases in therate-of-increase limits since their base period,the major effect will be on the level ofincentive payments these hospitals and unitsreceive. Conversely, for excluded hospitalsand units with per-case cost increases abovethe cumulative update in their rate-of-increase limits, the major effect will be theamount of excess costs that would not bereimbursed.

We note that, under § 413.40(d)(3), anexcluded hospital or unit whose costs exceed110 percent of its rate-of-increase limitreceives its rate-of-increase limit plus 50percent of the difference between itsreasonable costs and 110 percent of the limit,not to exceed 110 percent of its limit. Inaddition, under the various provisions setforth in § 413.40, certain excluded hospitalsand units can obtain payment adjustmentsfor justifiable increases in operating coststhat exceed the limit. At the same time,however, by generally limiting paymentincreases, we continue to provide anincentive for excluded hospitals and units torestrain the growth in their spending forpatient services.

VI. Graduate Medical Education Impact ofNational Average Per Resident Amount(PRA)

As discussed in section IV.G. of thepreamble, this final rule implementsstatutory provisions enacted by section 311of Public Law 106–113 that establish amethodology for the use of a national averagePRA in computing direct graduate medicaleducation (GME) payments for cost reporting



periods beginning on or after October 1, 2000and on or before September 30, 2005. Themethodology establishes a ‘‘floor’’ and‘‘ceiling’’ based on a locality-adjusted,updated national average PRA. Under section1886(h)(2)(D)(iii) of the Act, as added bysection 311(a) of Public Law 106–113, thePRA for a hospital for the cost reportingperiod beginning during FY 2001 cannot bebelow 70 percent of the locality-adjusted,updated national average PRA. Thus, if ahospital’s PRA for the cost reporting periodbeginning during FY 2001 would otherwisebe below the floor, the hospital’s PRA for thatcost reporting period is equal to 70 percentof the locality-adjusted, national averagePRA. Under section 1886(h)(2)(D)(iv) of theAct, as added by section 311(a) of Public Law106–113, if a hospital’s PRA exceeds 140percent of the locality-adjusted, updatednational average PRA, the hospital’s PRA isfrozen (for FYs 2001 and 2002) or subject toa 2-percent reduction to the otherwiseapplicable update (for FYs 2003 through2005). See section IV.G. of the preamble fora fuller explanation of this policy.

For purposes of the final rule, we havecalculated an estimated impact of this policyon teaching hospitals’ PRAs for FY 2001making assumptions about update factorsand geographic adjustment factors (GAF) foreach hospital. Generally, utilizing FY 1997data, we calculated a floor and a ceiling andestimated the impact on hospitals. Thisimpact was then inflated to FY 2001 toestimate the total impact on the Medicareprogram for FY 2001. The estimated numbersfor this impact should not be used byhospitals in calculating their own individualPRAs; hospitals must use the methodologystated in section IV.G. of this final rule torevise (if appropriate) their individual PRAs.

In calculating this impact, we utilizedMedicare cost report data for all cost reportsending in FY 1997. We excluded hospitalsthat file manual cost reports because we didnot have access to their Medicare utilizationdata. We also excluded all teaching hospitalsin Maryland because these hospitals are paidunder a Medicare waiver. For those hospitalsthat had two cost reporting periods ending inFY 1997, we used the later of the twoperiods. A total of 1,231 teaching hospitalswere included in this analysis.

The impact in this final rule differs slightlyfrom the impact in the proposed rule becausewe have determined a different weightedaverage PRA for this final rule, and we usedthe most recent CPI–U update factors todetermine the impact for FY 2001. Anexplanation of why the weighted averagePRA has changed for this final rule may befound in section IV.G.2 of this preamble.

Utilizing the FY 1997 weighted averagePRA of $68,464, we calculated a FY 1997 70-percent floor of $47,925 and a FY 1997 140-percent ceiling of $95,850. We then estimatedthat, for cost reporting periods ending in FY1997, 336 hospitals had PRAs that werebelow $47,925 (27.3 percent of 1,231hospitals), and 180 hospitals had PRAs above$95,850 (14.6 percent of 1,231 hospitals).Thus, for example, to illustrate the extremesin impact for a hospital with PRAs below thefloor, Hospital A had a FY 1997 primary carePRA of $22,000 and a non-primary care PRA

of $20,000. When these PRAs are replaced bya single PRA of $47,925, the hospital gainsapproximately 110 percent in payments perresident. For a hospital with PRAs above theceiling, Hospital B had a FY 1997 primarycare PRA of $150,000 and a non-primary carePRA of $148,000. When these PRAs arefrozen and not updated for inflation in FY2001, the percentage loss in payments perresident that year would be equal to the CPI–U percentage that would otherwise have beenused to update the PRA.

For the 336 hospitals that had PRAs belowthe FY 1997 $47,925 floor, we estimated thatthe total cost to the Medicare program for FY2001 of applying the floor would be $33.2million. For the 180 hospitals that had PRAsabove the FY 1997 $95,850 ceiling, weestimated that the total savings to theMedicare program for FY 2001 would be $16million. Subtracting the estimated savings of$16 million from the estimated costs of $33.2million yields an estimated total net cost tothe Medicare program for FY 2001 of $17.2million.

VII. Quantitative Impact Analysis of thePolicy Changes Under the ProspectivePayment System for Operating Costs

A. Basis and Methodology of Estimates

In this final rule, we are announcing policychanges and payment rate updates for theprospective payment systems for operatingand capital-related costs. We have preparedseparate impact analyses of the changes toeach system. This section deals with changesto the operating prospective payment system.

The data used in developing thequantitative analyses presented below aretaken from the FY 1999 MedPAR file and themost current provider-specific file that isused for payment purposes. Although theanalyses of the changes to the operatingprospective payment system do notincorporate cost data, the most recentlyavailable hospital cost report data were usedto categorize hospitals. Our analysis hasseveral qualifications. First, we do not makeadjustments for behavioral changes thathospitals may adopt in response to thesepolicy changes. Second, due to theinterdependent nature of the prospectivepayment system, it is very difficult toprecisely quantify the impact associated witheach change. Third, we draw upon varioussources for the data used to categorizehospitals in the tables. In some cases,particularly the number of beds, there is afair degree of variation in the data fromdifferent sources. We have attempted toconstruct these variables with the bestavailable source overall. For individualhospitals, however, some miscategorizationsare possible.

Using cases in the FY 1999 MedPAR file,we simulated payments under the operatingprospective payment system given variouscombinations of payment parameters. Anyshort-term, acute care hospitals not paidunder the general prospective paymentsystems (Indian Health Service hospitals andhospitals in Maryland) are excluded from thesimulations. Payments under the capitalprospective payment system, or payments forcosts other than inpatient operating costs, arenot analyzed here. Estimated payment

impacts of FY 2001 changes to the capitalprospective payment system are discussed insection IX of this Appendix.

The final changes discussed separatelybelow are the following:

• The effects of the annual reclassificationof diagnoses and procedures and therecalibration of the diagnosis-related group(DRG) relative weights required by section1886(d)(4)(C) of the Act.

• The effects of changes in hospitals’ wageindex values reflecting the wage indexupdate (FY 1997 data).

• The effects of removing from the wageindex the costs and hours associated withteaching physicians paid under MedicarePart A, residents, and certified registerednurse anesthetists (CRNAs) during thesecond year of a 5-year phase-out, bycalculating a wage index based on 40 percentof hospitals’ average hourly wages afterremoving these costs and hours, and 60percent of hospitals’ average hourly wageswith these costs included.

• The effects of geographicreclassifications by the Medicare GeographicClassification Review Board (MGCRB) thatwill be effective in FY 2001.

• The total change in payments based onFY 2001 policies relative to payments basedon FY 2000 policies.

To illustrate the impacts of the FY 2001final changes, our analysis begins with a FY2000 baseline simulation model using: theFY 2000 DRG GROUPER (version 17.0); theFY 2000 wage index; and no MGCRBreclassifications. Outlier payments are set at5.1 percent of total DRG plus outlierpayments.

Each final and statutory policy change isthen added incrementally to this baselinemodel, finally arriving at an FY 2001 modelincorporating all of the changes. This allowsus to isolate the effects of each change.

Our final comparison illustrates thepercent change in payments per case from FY2000 to FY 2001. Five factors have significantimpacts here. The first is the update to thestandardized amounts. In accordance withsection 1886(d)(3)(A)(iv) of the Act, we areupdating the large urban and the other areasaverage standardized amounts for FY 2001using the most recently forecasted hospitalmarket basket increase for FY 2001 of 3.4percent minus 1.1 percentage points (for anupdate of 2.3 percent).

Under section 1886(b)(3) of the Act, asamended by section 406 of Public Law 106–113, the updates to the average standardizedamounts and the hospital-specific amountsfor sole community hospitals (SCHs) will beequal to the full market basket increase forFY 2001. Consequently, the update factorused for SCHs in this impact analysis is 3.4percent. Under section 1886(b)(3)(D) of theAct, the update factor for the hospital-specific amounts for MDHs is equal to themarket basket increase of 3.4 percent minus1.1 percentage points (for an update of 2.3percent).

A second significant factor that impactschanges in hospitals’ payments per case fromFY 2000 to FY 2001 is a change in MGCRBreclassification status from one year to thenext. That is, hospitals reclassified in FY2000 that are no longer reclassified in FY



2001 may have a negative payment impactgoing from FY 2000 to FY 2001; conversely,hospitals not reclassified in FY 2000 that arereclassified in FY 2001 may have a positiveimpact. In some cases, these impacts can bequite substantial, so if a relatively smallnumber of hospitals in a particular categorylose their reclassification status, thepercentage change in payments for thecategory may be below the national mean.

A third significant factor is that wecurrently estimate that actual outlierpayments during FY 2000 will be 6.2 percentof actual total DRG payments. When the FY2000 final rule was published, we projectedFY 2000 outlier payments would be 5.1percent of total DRG payments; thestandardized amounts were offsetcorrespondingly. The effects of the higherthan expected outlier payments during FY2000 (as discussed in the Addendum to thisfinal rule) are reflected in the analyses belowcomparing our current estimates of FY 2000payments per case to estimated FY 2001payments per case.

Fourth, section 111 of Public Law 106–113revised section 1886(d)(5)(B)(ii) of the Act sothat the IME adjustment changes from FY2000 to FY 2001 from approximately a 6.5percent increase for every 10 percent increasein a hospital’s resident-to-bed ratio during FY2000 to approximately a 6.2 percent increasein FY 2001. Similarly, section 112 of PublicLaw 106–113 revised section1886(d)(5)(F)(ix) of the Act so that the DSHadjustment for FY 2001 is reduced by 3percent from what would otherwise havebeen paid (this is the same percentagereduction that was applied in FY 2000).Additionally, the January 20, 2000 interimfinal rule with comment revised policy,effective with discharges occurring on orafter January 20, 2000, to allow hospitals toinclude the patient days of all populationseligible for Title XIX matching payments ina State’s section 1115 waiver in calculatingthe hospital’s Medicare DSH adjustment.

Finally, section 405 of Public Law 106–113provided that certain SCHs may elect toreceive payment on the basis of their costsper case during their cost reporting periodthat began during FY 1996. To be eligible, aSCH must have received payment on thebasis of its hospital-specific rate for its cost

reporting period beginning during 1999. ForFY 2001, eligible SCHs that elect rebasingreceive a hospital-specific rate comprised of75-percent of the higher of their FY 1982 orFY 1987 hospital-specific rate, and 25-percent of their FY 1996 hospital-specificrate.

Table I demonstrates the results of ouranalysis. The table categorizes hospitals byvarious geographic and special paymentconsideration groups to illustrate the varyingimpacts on different types of hospitals. Thetop row of the table shows the overall impacton the 4,888 hospitals included in theanalysis. This number is 34 fewer hospitalsthan were included in the impact analysis inthe FY 2000 final rule (64 FR 41624).

The next four rows of Table I containhospitals categorized according to theirgeographic location (all urban, which isfurther divided into large urban and otherurban, or rural). There are 2,752 hospitalslocated in urban areas (MSAs or NECMAs)included in our analysis. Among these, thereare 1,571 hospitals located in large urbanareas (populations over 1 million), and 1,181hospitals in other urban areas (populations of1 million or fewer). In addition, there are2,136 hospitals in rural areas. The next twogroupings are by bed-size categories, shownseparately for urban and rural hospitals. Thefinal groupings by geographic location are bycensus divisions, also shown separately forurban and rural hospitals.

The second part of Table I shows hospitalgroups based on hospitals’ FY 2001 paymentclassifications, including anyreclassifications under section 1886(d)(10) ofthe Act. For example, the rows labeled urban,large urban, other urban, and rural show thatthe number of hospitals paid based on thesecategorizations (after consideration ofgeographic reclassifications) are 2,833, 1,665,1,168, and 2,055, respectively.

The next three groupings examine theimpacts of the final changes on hospitalsgrouped by whether or not they haveresidency programs (teaching hospitals thatreceive an IME adjustment) or receive DSHpayments, or some combination of these twoadjustments. There are 3,770 nonteachinghospitals in our analysis, 876 teachinghospitals with fewer than 100 residents, and242 teaching hospitals with 100 or moreresidents.

In the DSH categories, hospitals aregrouped according to their DSH paymentstatus, and whether they are consideredurban or rural after MGCRB reclassifications.Hospitals in the rural DSH categories,therefore, represent hospitals that were notreclassified for purposes of the standardizedamount or for purposes of the DSHadjustment. (They may, however, have beenreclassified for purposes of the wage index.)The next category groups hospitalsconsidered urban after geographicreclassification, in terms of whether theyreceive the IME adjustment, the DSHadjustment, both, or neither.

The next five rows examine the impacts ofthe final changes on rural hospitals byspecial payment groups (SCHs, rural referralcenters (RRCs), and MDHs), as well as ruralhospitals not receiving a special paymentdesignation. The RRCs (150), SCHs (661),MDHs (352), and SCH and RRCs (57) shownhere were not reclassified for purposes of thestandardized amount. There are 26 RRCs, 1MDH, 4 SCHs and 3 SCH and RRCs that willbe reclassified as urban for the standardizedamount in FY 2001 and, therefore, are notincluded in these rows.

The next two groupings are based on typeof ownership and the hospital’s Medicareutilization expressed as a percent of totalpatient days. These data are taken primarilyfrom the FY 1998 Medicare cost report files,if available (otherwise FY 1997 data areused). Data needed to determine ownershipstatus or Medicare utilization percentageswere unavailable for 2 and 85 hospitals,respectively. For the most part, these are newhospitals.

The next series of groupings concern thegeographic reclassification status ofhospitals. The first three groupings displayhospitals that were reclassified by theMGCRB for both FY 2000 and FY 2001, orfor only one of those 2 years, by urban andrural status. The next rows illustrate theoverall number of FY 2001 reclassifications,as well as the numbers of reclassifiedhospitals grouped by urban and rurallocation. The final row in Table I containshospitals located in rural counties butdeemed to be urban under section1886(d)(8)(B) of the Act.

TABLE I.—IMPACT ANALYSIS OF CHANGES FOR FY 2001 OPERATING PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM

[Percent changes in payments per case)

Number ofhosps.1

DRGrecalib.2

New wagedata 3

Phase outof GME

and CRNAcosts 4

DRG andWI

changes 5

MGCRBreclassi-fication 6

All FY2001

changes 7

(0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

(BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION):ALL HOSPITALS ............................................ 4,888 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5URBAN HOSPITALS ...................................... 2,752 0.0 0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.4 1.4LARGE URBAN AREAS ................................. 1,571 0.0 0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.5 1.3OTHER URBAN AREAS ................................ 1,181 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 ¥0.3 1.5RURAL HOSPITALS ...................................... 2,136 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 2.5 2.5

BED SIZE (URBAN):0–99 BEDS ..................................................... 716 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 ¥0.6 1.6100–199 BEDS ............................................... 944 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 ¥0.5 1.5200–299 BEDS ............................................... 548 0.1 0.1 0.1 ¥0.1 ¥0.4 1.3300–499 BEDS ............................................... 401 0.0 0.0 0.1 ¥0.2 ¥0.4 1.1



TABLE I.—IMPACT ANALYSIS OF CHANGES FOR FY 2001 OPERATING PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM—Continued[Percent changes in payments per case)

Number ofhosps.1

DRGrecalib.2

New wagedata 3

Phase outof GME

and CRNAcosts 4

DRG andWI

changes 5


All FY2001

changes 7

(0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

500 OR MORE BEDS .................................... 143 ¥0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 ¥0.4 1.6BED SIZE (RURAL):

0–49 BEDS ..................................................... 1,233 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.2 3.150–99 BEDS ................................................... 535 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.8 2.6100–149 BEDS ............................................... 219 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 3.4 2.1150–199 BEDS ............................................... 81 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.6 5.2 2.6200 OR MORE BEDS .................................... 68 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.5 4.5 2.2

URBAN BY CENSUS DIVISION:NEW ENGLAND ............................................. 146 0.0 ¥0.9 0.1 ¥0.3 ¥0.2 0.9MIDDLE ATLANTIC ........................................ 421 0.1 0.1 ¥0.1 ¥0.2 ¥0.3 1.2SOUTH ATLANTIC ......................................... 404 0.0 0.0 0.1 ¥0.2 ¥0.6 1.1EAST NORTH CENTRAL ............................... 463 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 ¥0.3 2.0EAST SOUTH CENTRAL ............................... 161 0.0 ¥0.1 0.0 ¥0.5 ¥0.6 0.8WEST NORTH CENTRAL .............................. 188 ¥0.1 0.3 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.6 1.4WEST SOUTH CENTRAL .............................. 351 0.0 1.3 0.1 1.0 ¥0.6 2.3MOUNTAIN ..................................................... 133 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 ¥0.5 1.6PACIFIC .......................................................... 440 0.0 ¥0.5 0.2 ¥0.6 ¥0.5 0.7PUERTO RICO ............................................... 45 0.1 ¥0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.6 1.7

RURAL BY CENSUS DIVISION:NEW ENGLAND ............................................. 52 0.1 ¥0.1 0.0 ¥0.3 2.8 2.2MIDDLE ATLANTIC ........................................ 80 0.2 ¥0.1 0.0 ¥0.2 2.5 2.2SOUTH ATLANTIC ......................................... 277 0.2 1.0 0.1 1.0 2.9 2.8EAST NORTH CENTRAL ............................... 283 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.5 2.2 2.6EAST SOUTH CENTRAL ............................... 266 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.5 2.8 2.6WEST NORTH CENTRAL .............................. 492 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.4 2.3 2.5WEST SOUTH CENTRAL .............................. 340 0.2 1.0 0.1 1.0 3.0 2.1MOUNTAIN ..................................................... 201 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 1.6 2.7PACIFIC .......................................................... 140 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3 1.9 2.3PUERTO RICO ............................................... 5 0.2 0.3 ¥0.2 0.1 ¥0.7 0.2

(BY PAYMENT CATEGORIES):URBAN HOSPITALS ...................................... 2,833 0.0 0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.4 1.4LARGE URBAN .............................................. 1,665 0.0 0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.3 1.4OTHER URBAN .............................................. 1,168 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 ¥0.4 1.3RURAL HOSPITALS ...................................... 2,055 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 2.2 2.6

TEACHING STATUS:NON-TEACHING ............................................ 3,770 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.6FEWER THAN 100 RESIDENTS ................... 876 0.0 0.2 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.3 1.4100 OR MORE RESIDENTS .......................... 242 ¥0.1 0.2 0.0 ¥0.2 ¥0.3 1.6

DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE HOSPITALS(DSH):

NON-DSH ....................................................... 3,070 0.1 0.1 0.1 ¥0.1 0.3 1.5URBAN DSH

100 BEDS OR MORE ............................. 1,390 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 ¥0.4 1.5FEWER THAN 100 BEDS ....................... 72 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.4 ¥0.5 1.9

RURAL DSHSOLE COMMUNITY (SCH) ............................ 149 0.3 0.9 0.1 0.9 0.2 3.6REFERRAL CENTERS (RRC) ....................... 56 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.8 5.2 2.4OTHER RURAL DSH HOSPITALS

100 BEDS OR MORE ............................. 48 0.3 1.1 0.1 1.1 1.4 2.9FEWER THAN 100 BEDS .............................. 103 0.3 0.9 0.1 1.0 0.3 2.3

URBAN TEACHING AND DSH:BOTH TEACHING AND DSH ......................... 726 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 ¥0.5 1.6TEACHING AND NO DSH ............................. 327 0.0 0.0 0.0 ¥0.4 ¥0.2 1.2NO TEACHING AND DSH ............................. 736 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 ¥0.3 1.3NO TEACHING AND NO DSH ....................... 1,044 0.1 0.0 0.1 ¥0.1 ¥0.3 1.0

RURAL HOSPITAL TYPES:NONSPECIAL STATUS HOSPITALS ............ 835 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 2.4RRC ................................................................ 150 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.7 6.1 2.4SCH ................................................................ 661 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 3.3MDH ................................................................ 352 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.3 2.7SCH AND RRC ............................................... 57 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1 1.6 2.2

TYPE OF OWNERSHIP:VOLUNTARY .................................................. 2,840 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 ¥0.1 1.5PROPRIETARY .............................................. 745 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 ¥0.1 1.3GOVERNMENT .............................................. 1,301 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 1.8UNKNOWN ..................................................... 2 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.3 ¥0.4 2.7



TABLE I.—IMPACT ANALYSIS OF CHANGES FOR FY 2001 OPERATING PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM—Continued[Percent changes in payments per case)

Number ofhosps.1

DRGrecalib.2

New wagedata 3

Phase outof GME

and CRNAcosts 4

DRG andWI

changes 5


All FY2001

changes 7

(0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

MEDICARE UTILIZATION AS A PERCENT OFINPATIENT DAYS:

0—25 .............................................................. 381 0.0 0.2 0.1 .................. ¥0.3 1.825—50 ............................................................ 1,830 0.0 0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.3 1.450—65 ............................................................ 1,893 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.6OVER 65 ......................................................... 699 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.4UNKNOWN ..................................................... 85 ¥0.1 0.5 ¥0.1 0.1 ¥0.6 1.2

HOSPITALS RECLASSIFIED BY THE MEDI-CARE GEOGRAPHIC REVIEW BOARD:

RECLASSIFICATION STATUS DURING FY 2000AND FY 2001

RECLASSIFIED DURING BOTH FY 2000AND FY 2001 .............................................. 377 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.4 6.0 1.8

URBAN ........................................................... 53 0.0 ¥0.1 0.1 0.1 5.8 1.7RURAL ............................................................ 324 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.5 6.2 1.9RECLASSIFIED DURING FY 2001 ONLY ..... 149 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 4.8 7.1URBAN ........................................................... 35 0.1 0.1 0.1 ¥0.1 4.7 6.6RURAL ............................................................ 114 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.7 4.9 7.6RECLASSIFIED DURING FY 2000 ONLY ..... 172 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.3 ¥0.9 ¥1.7URBAN ........................................................... 70 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.1 ¥1.1 ¥0.8RURAL ............................................................ 102 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.7 ¥0.5 ¥3.1

FY 2000 RECLASSIFICATIONS:ALL RECLASSIFIED HOSPITALS ................. 527 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.4 5.8 3.0STANDARDIZED AMOUNT ONLY ................ 66 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 4.1 4.1WAGE INDEX ONLY ...................................... 386 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.4 4.8 0.6BOTH .............................................................. 46 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 4.3 2.6NONRECLASSIFIED ...................................... 4,364 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 ¥0.5 1.6ALL URBAN RECLASSIFIED ......................... 88 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 5.4 3.2STANDARDIZED AMOUNT ONLY ................ 17 0.2 0.0 0.0 ¥0.1 0.7 0.9WAGE INDEX ONLY ...................................... 38 0.0 ¥0.1 0.1 0.2 5.8 2.5BOTH .............................................................. 33 0.0 0.1 0.1 ¥0.1 6.2 5.1NONRECLASSIFIED ...................................... 2,638 0.0 0.1 0.0 ¥0.1 ¥0.7 1.3ALL RURAL RECLASSIFIED ......................... 439 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.5 5.9 2.9STANDARDIZED AMOUNT ONLY ................ 54 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.5 4.2 ¥0.1WAGE INDEX ONLY ...................................... 358 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 5.8 3.2BOTH .............................................................. 27 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 9.4 2.9NONRECLASSIFIED ...................................... 1,697 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.6 ¥0.5 2.2OTHER RECLASSIFIED HOSPITALS (SEC-

TION 1886(d)(8)(B)) .................................... 26 0.2 ¥0.4 0.0 ¥0.4 1.0 1.3

1 Because data necessary to classify some hospitals by category were missing, the total number of hospitals in each category may not equalthe national total. Discharge data are from FY 1999, and hospital cost report data are from reporting periods beginning in FY 1997 and FY 1998.

2 This column displays the payment impact of the recalibration of the DRG weights based on FY 1999 MedPAR data and the DRG reclassifica-tion changes, in accordance with section 1886(d)(4)(C) of the Act.

3 This column shows the payment effects of updating the data used to calculate the wage index with data from the FY 1997 cost reports.4 This column displays the impact of removing 60 percent of the costs and hours associated with teaching physicians Part A, residents, and

CRNAs from the wage index calculation.5 This column displays the combined impact of the reclassification and recalibration of the DRGs, the updated and revised wage data used to

calculate the wage index, and the budget neutrality adjustment factor for these two changes, in accordance with sections 1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) and1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act. Thus, it represents the combined impacts shown in columns 1, 2 and 3, and the FY 2001 budget neutrality factor of.997225.

6 Shown here are the effects of geographic reclassifications by the Medicare Geographic Classification Review Board (MGCRB). The effectsdemonstrate the FY 2001 payment impact of going from no reclassifications to the reclassifications scheduled to be in effect for FY 2001. Re-classification for prior years has no bearing on the payment impacts shown here.

7 This column shows changes in payments from FY 2000 to FY 2001. It incorporates all of the changes displayed in columns 4 and 5 (thechanges displayed in columns 1, 2, and 3 are included in column 4). It also displays the impact of the FY 2001 update (including the higher up-date for SCHs), changes in hospitals’ reclassification status in FY 2001 compared to FY 2000, the difference in outlier payments from FY 2000 toFY 2001, and the reductions to payments through the IME adjustment taking effect during FY 2001. It also reflects section 405 of Public law106–113, which permitted certain SCHs to rebase for a 1996 hospital-specific rate. The sum of these columns may be different from the percent-age changes shown here due to rounding and interactive effects.

B. Impact of the Changes to the DRGReclassifications and Recalibration ofRelative Weights (Column 1)

In column 1 of Table I, we present thecombined effects of the DRG reclassifications

and recalibration, as discussed in section IIof the preamble to this final rule. Section1886(d)(4)(C)(i) of the Act requires us toannually make appropriate classificationchanges and to recalibrate the DRG weightsin order to reflect changes in treatment

patterns, technology, and any other factorsthat may change the relative use of hospitalresources.

We compared aggregate payments usingthe FY 2000 DRG relative weights (GROUPERversion 17) to aggregate payments using the



FY 2001 DRG relative weights (GROUPERversion 18). Overall payments are unaffectedby the DRG reclassification and recalibration.Consistent with the minor changes we madein the FY 2001 GROUPER, theredistributional impacts of DRGreclassifications and recalibration acrosshospital groups are very small (a 0.0 percentimpact for large and other urban hospitals; a0.2 percent increase for rural hospitals).Within hospital categories, the net effects forurban hospitals are small positive changes forsmall hospitals (a 0.2 percent increase forhospitals with fewer than 100 beds), andsmall decreases for larger hospitals (a 0.1percent decrease for hospitals with more than500 beds). Among rural hospitals, mosthospital categories experienced smallpositive changes, 0.2 percent increases forhospitals with fewer than 200 beds and 0.1percent increases for hospitals with morethan 200 beds.

The breakdown by urban census divisionshows that the small decrease among urbanhospitals is confined to the West NorthCentral region. Payments to urban hospitalsin most other regions are unchanged, whilepayments to urban hospitals in the MiddleAtlantic and Puerto Rico regions rise by 0.1percent. All rural hospital census divisionsexperience payment increases ranging from0.1 percent for hospitals in New England andWest North Central regions to 0.2 percent forhospitals in the South Atlantic, MiddleAtlantic, East North Central, East SouthCentral, West South Central, Pacific,Mountain, and Puerto Rico regions.

C. Impact of Updating the Wage Data(Column 2)

Section 1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act requiresthat, beginning October 1, 1993, we annuallyupdate the wage data used to calculate thewage index. In accordance with thisrequirement, the wage index for FY 2001 isbased on data submitted for hospital costreporting periods beginning on or afterOctober 1, 1996 and before October 1, 1997.As with the previous column, the impact ofthe new data on hospital payments is isolatedby holding the other payment parametersconstant in the two simulations. That is,column 2 shows the percentage changes inpayments when going from a model using theFY 2000 wage index (based on FY 1996 wagedata before geographic reclassifications to amodel using the FY 2001 prereclassificationwage index based on FY 1997 wage data).Section 152 of Public Law 106–113reclassified certain hospitals for purposes ofthe wage index and the standardizedamounts. For purposes of this column, thesehospitals are located in theirprereclassification geographic location. Theimpacts of these statutory reclassificationsare shown in column 5, when examining theimpacts of geographic reclassification.

The wage data collected on the FY 1997cost reports are similar to the data used inthe calculation of the FY 2000 wage index.For a thorough discussion of the data usedto calculate the wage index, see section III.B.of this final rule.

The results indicate that the new wage datahave an overall impact of a 0.2 percentincrease in hospital payments (prior to

applying the budget neutrality factor, seecolumn 5). Rural hospitals appear to benefitfrom the update as their payments increaseby 0.6 percent. These increases areattributable to positive increases in the wageindex values for the rural areas of severalStates; California, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio,Texas and Minnesota all had increases ofapproximately 3 percent in theirprereclassification wage index values.

Urban hospitals as a group are notsignificantly affected by the updated wagedata. Hospitals in both other urban areas andlarge urban areas experienced a smallpositive increase (0.1 percent). Urbanhospitals in New England experienced a 0.9percent decrease from the updated wage datadue to declines ranging from 5 to 1 percentin the wage index values for several MSAsin Connecticut and Massachusetts. Urbanhospitals in the Pacific census regionexperience a 0.5 percent decline due toseveral MSAs in California withprereclassified FY 2001 wage indexes thatfall by 5 percent or less.

The largest increases are seen in the ruralcensus divisions. Rural South Atlantic andWest South Central regions experience thegreatest positive impact, 1.0 percent.Hospitals in five other census divisionsreceive positive impacts of 0.5 or greater: EastNorth Central at 0.6, East South Central at0.6, and West North Central at 0.5. Thefollowing chart compares the shifts in wageindex values for labor market areas for FY2000 relative to FY 2001. This chartdemonstrates the impact of the changes forthe FY 2001 wage index relative to the FY2000 wage index. The majority of labormarket areas (339) experience less than a 5percent change. A total of 21 labor marketareas experience an increase of more than 5percent with only 1 having an increasegreater than 10 percent. A total of 15 areasexperience decreases of more than 5 percent.Of those, only 1 decline by 10 percent ormore.

Percentagechange in area

wage indexvalues

Number of labor marketareas

FY 2000 FY 2001

Increase morethan 10 per-cent ............... 8 1

Increase morethan 5 percentand less than10 percent ..... 22 20

Increase or de-crease lessthan 5 percent 318 339

Decrease morethan 5 percentand less than10 percent ..... 17 14

Decrease morethan 10 per-cent ............... 5 1

Among urban hospitals, 96 wouldexperience an increase of between 5 and 10percent and 2 more than 10 percent. No ruralhospitals have increases greater than 5percent. On the negative side, 106 urban

hospitals have decreases in their wage indexvalues of at least 5 percent but less than 10percent. One urban hospital has a decrease intheir wage index value that is greater than 10percent. Two rural hospitals have decreasesin their wage index values that are greaterthan 5 percent but less than 10 percent. Thefollowing chart shows the projected impactfor urban and rural hospitals.

Percentagechange in areawage index val-

ues

Number of hospitals

Urban Rural

Increase morethan 10 per-cent ............... 2 0

Increase morethan 5 percentand less than10 percent ..... 96 0

Increase or de-crease lessthan 5 percent 2547 2134

Decrease morethan 5 percentand less than10 percent ..... 106 2

Decrease morethan 10 per-cent ............... 1 0

D. Impact of 5-Year Phase-Out of TeachingPhysicians’, Residents’, and CRNAs’ Costs(Column 3)

As described in section III.C. of thispreamble, the FY 2001 wage index iscalculated by blending 60 percent ofhospitals’ average hourly wages calculatedwithout removing teaching physician (paidunder Medicare Part A), residents, or CRNAcosts (and hours) and 40 percent of averagehourly wages calculated after removing thesecosts (and hours). This constitutes the secondyear of a 5-year phase-out of these costs andhours, where the proportion of thecalculation based upon average hourly wagesafter removing these costs increases by 20percentage points per year.

In order to determine the impact of movingfrom the 80/20 blend percentage to the 60/40 blend percentage, we first estimated thepayments for FY 2001 using the FY 2001prereclassified wage index calculated usingthe 80/20 blend percentage (Column 2). Wethen estimated what the payments for FY2001 would have been if the 60/40 blendpercentage was applied to the FY 2001prereclassified wage index. Column 3compares the differences in these paymentestimates and shows that the 60/40 blendpercentage does not significantly impactoverall payments (0.0 percent change).Although there were 165 labor market areasthat experience a small percent decrease intheir wage index, most of the decreases wereless than 3 percent.

E. Combined Impact of DRG and Wage IndexChanges— Including Budget NeutralityAdjustment (Column 4)

The impact of DRG reclassifications andrecalibration on aggregate payments isrequired by section 1886(d)(4)(C)(iii) of theAct to be budget neutral. In addition, section



1886(d)(3)(E) of the Act specifies that anyupdates or adjustments to the wage index areto be budget neutral. As noted in theAddendum to this final rule, we comparedsimulated aggregate payments using the FY2000 DRG relative weights and wage index tosimulated aggregate payments using the FY2001 DRG relative weights and blended wageindex. Based on this comparison, wecomputed a wage and recalibration budgetneutrality factor of 0.997225. In Table I, thecombined overall impacts of the effects ofboth the DRG reclassifications andrecalibration and the updated wage index areshown in column 4. The 0.0 percent impactfor all hospitals demonstrates that thesechanges, in combination with the budgetneutrality factor, are budget neutral.

For the most part, the changes in thiscolumn are the sum of the changes incolumns 1, 2, and 3, minus approximately0.3 percent attributable to the budgetneutrality factor. There may be somevariation of plus or minus 0.1 percent due torounding.

F. Impact of MGCRB Reclassifications(Column 5)

Our impact analysis to this point hasassumed hospitals are paid on the basis oftheir actual geographic location (with theexception of ongoing policies that providethat certain hospitals receive payments onbases other than where they aregeographically located, such as hospitals inrural counties that are deemed urban undersection 1886(d)(8)(B) of the Act). The changesin column 5 reflect the per case paymentimpact of moving from this baseline to asimulation incorporating the MGCRBdecisions for FY 2001. As noted below, thesedecisions affect hospitals’ standardizedamount and wage index area assignments.

Beginning in 1998, by February 28 of eachyear, the MGCRB makes reclassificationdeterminations that will be effective for thenext fiscal year, which begins on October 1.The MGCRB may approve a hospital’sreclassification request for the purpose ofusing the other area’s standardized amount,wage index value, or both, or for FYs 1999through 2001, for purposes of qualifying fora DSH adjustment or to receive a higher DSHpayment.

The FY 2001 wage index valuesincorporate all of the MGCRB’sreclassification decisions for FY 2001. Thewage index values also reflect any decisionsmade by the HCFA Administrator throughthe appeals and review process. Additionalchanges that resulted from theAdministrator’s review of MGCRB decisionsor a request by a hospital to withdraw itsapplication are reflected in this final rule forFY 2001.

Section 152 of Public Law 106–113reclassified certain hospitals for purposes ofthe wage index and the standardizedamounts. The impacts of these statutoryreclassifications are included in this column.

The overall effect of geographicreclassification is required by section1886(d)(8)(D) of the Act to be budget neutral.Therefore, we applied an adjustment of0.993187 to ensure that the effects ofreclassification are budget neutral. (See

section II.A.4.b. of the Addendum to thisfinal rule.)

As a group, rural hospitals benefit fromgeographic reclassification. Their paymentsrise 2.5 percent, while payments to urbanhospitals decline 0.4 percent. Hospitals inother urban areas see a decrease in paymentsof 0.3 percent, while large urban hospitalslose 0.5 percent. Among urban hospitalgroups (that is, bed size, census division, andspecial payment status), payments generallydecline.

A positive impact is evident among mostof the rural hospital groups. The largestdecrease among the rural census divisions is0.7 percent for Puerto Rico. The largestincreases are in rural West South Central andSouth Atlantic. These regions receiveincreases of 3.0 and 2.9 percent, respectively.

Among rural hospitals designated as RRCs,179 hospitals are reclassified for purposes ofthe wage index only, leading to the 6.1percent increase in payments among RRCsoverall. This positive impact on RRCs is alsoreflected in the category of rural hospitalswith 150–199 beds, which has a 5.2 percentincrease in payments.

Rural hospitals reclassified for FY 2000and FY 2001 experience a 6.2 percentincrease in payments. This may be due to thefact that these hospitals have the most to gainfrom reclassification and have beenreclassified for a period of years. Ruralhospitals reclassified for FY 2001 onlyexperience a 4.9 percent increase inpayments, while rural hospitals reclassifiedfor FY 2000 only experience a 0.5 percentdecrease in payments. Urban hospitalsreclassified for FY 2001 but not FY 2000experience a 4.7 percent increase inpayments overall. Urban hospitalsreclassified for FY 2000 but not for FY 2001experience a 1.1 percent decline inpayments.

The FY 2001 Reclassification rows of TableI show the changes in payments per case forall FY 2001 reclassified and nonreclassifiedhospitals in urban and rural locations foreach of the three reclassification categories(standardized amount only, wage index only,or both). The table illustrates that the largestimpact for reclassified rural hospitals is forthose hospitals reclassified for both thestandardized amount and the wage index.These hospitals receive a 9.4 percent increasein payments. In addition, rural hospitalsreclassified just for the wage index receive a5.8 percent payment increase. The overallimpact on reclassified hospitals is to increasetheir payments per case by an average of 5.9percent for FY 2001.

The reclassification of hospitals primarilyaffects payment to nonreclassified hospitalsthrough changes in the wage index and thegeographic reclassification budget neutralityadjustment required by section 1886(d)(8)(D)of the Act. Among hospitals that are notreclassified, the overall impact of hospitalreclassifications is an average decrease inpayments per case of about 0.5 percent. Ruralnonreclassified hospitals decrease by 0.5percent, and urban nonreclassified hospitalslose 0.7 percent (the amount of the budgetneutrality offset).

G. All Changes (Column 6)

Column 6 compares our estimate ofpayments per case, incorporating all changesreflected in this final rule for FY 2001(including statutory changes), to our estimateof payments per case in FY 2000. It includesthe effects of the 2.3 percent update to thestandardized amounts and the hospital-specific rates for MDHs and the 3.4 percentupdate for SCHs. It also reflects the 1.1percentage point difference between theprojected outlier payments in FY 2000 (5.1percent of total DRG payments) and thecurrent estimate of the percentage of actualoutlier payments in FY 2000 (6.2 percent), asdescribed in the introduction to thisAppendix and the Addendum to this finalrule.

Another change affecting the differencebetween FY 2000 and FY 2001 paymentsarises from section 1886(d)(5)(B) of the Act,as amended by Public Law 106–113. Asnoted in the introduction to this impactanalysis, for FY 2001, the IME adjustment isdecreased from last year (6.5 percent in FY2000 and 6.2 percent in FY 2001).

We also note that column 6 includes theimpacts of FY 2001 MGCRB reclassificationscompared to the payment impacts of FY 2000reclassifications. Therefore, when comparingFY 2001 payments to FY 2000, the percentchanges due to FY 2001 reclassificationsshown in column 5 need to be offset by theeffects of reclassification on hospitals’ FY2000 payments(column 7 of Table 1, July 30,1999 final rule (64 FR 41625)). For example,the impact of MGCRB reclassifications onrural hospitals’ FY 2001 payments wasapproximately a 2.5 percent increase,offsetting most of the 2.6 percent increase incolumn 7 for FY 2000. Therefore, the netchange in FY 2001 payments due toreclassification for rural hospitals is actuallya decrease of 0.1 percent relative to FY 2000.However, last year’s analysis contained asomewhat different set of hospitals, so thismight affect the numbers slightly.

Finally, section 405 of Public Law 106–113provided that certain SCHs may elect toreceive payment on the basis of their costsper case during their cost reporting periodthat began during 1996. To be eligible, a SCHmust have received payment for costreporting periods beginning during 1999 onthe basis of its hospital-specific rate. For FY2001, eligible SCHs that elect rebasingreceive a hospital-specific rate comprised of75 percent of the higher of their FY 1982 orFY 1987 hospital-specific rate, and 25percent of their 1996 hospital-specific rate.The impact of this provision is modeled incolumn 6 as well.

There might also be interactive effectsamong the various factors comprising thepayment system that we are not able toisolate. For these reasons, the values incolumn 6 may not equal the sum of thechanges in columns 4 and 5, plus the otherimpacts that we are able to identify.

The overall payment change from FY 2000to FY 2001 for all hospitals is a 1.5 percentincrease. This reflects the 2.3 percent updatefor FY 2001 (3.4 percent for SCHs), the 1.0percent lower outlier payments in FY 2001compared to FY 2000 (5.1 percent comparedto 6.2 percent); the change in the IME



adjustment (6.5 in FY 2000 to 6.2 in FY2001); and the rebasing of certain SCHs totheir 1996 hospital-specific rate.

Hospitals in urban areas experience a 1.4percent increase in payments per casecompared to FY 2000. The 0.4 percentnegative impact due to reclassification isoffset by an identical negative impact for FY2000. Hospitals in rural areas, meanwhile,experience a 2.5 percent payment increase.As discussed previously, this is primarilydue to the positive effect of the wage indexand DRG changes and reclassifications.

Among urban census divisions, paymentsincreased between 0.7 and 2.3 percentbetween FY 2000 and FY 2001. The ruralcensus division experiencing the smallestincrease in payments was Puerto Rico (0.2

percent). The largest increases by ruralhospitals are in the South Atlantic andMountain regions, 2.8 and 2.7 percent,respectively. Among other rural censusdivisions, the largest increases are in the EastSouth Central and the East North Central,both with 2.6.

Among special categories of ruralhospitals, those hospitals receiving paymentunder the hospital-specific methodology(SCHs, MDHs, and SCH/RRCs) experiencepayment increases of 3.3 percent, 2.7 percent,and 2.2 percent, respectively. This outcomeis primarily related to the fact that, forhospitals receiving payments under thehospital-specific methodology, there are nooutlier payments. Therefore, these hospitalsdo not experience negative payment impacts

from the decline in the percentage of outlierpayments from FY 2000 to FY 2001 (from 6.2of total DRG payments to 5.1 percent) as dohospitals paid based on the nationalstandardized amounts.

The largest negative payment impacts fromFY 2000 to FY 2001 are among hospitals thatwere reclassified for FY 2000 and are notreclassified for FY 2001. Overall, thesehospitals lose 1.7 percent. The urbanhospitals in this category lose 0.8 percent,while the rural hospitals lose 3.1 percent. Onthe other hand, hospitals reclassified for FY2001 that were not reclassified for FY 2000would experience the greatest paymentincreases: 7.1 percent overall; 7.6 percent for114 rural hospitals in this category and 6.6percent for 35 urban hospitals.

TABLE II.—IMPACT ANALYSIS OF CHANGES FOR FY 2000; OPERATING PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM

[Payments per case]

Number ofhospitals

(1)

AverageFY 2000paymentper case

(2)1


(3)1

Allchanges

(4)

(BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION):ALL HOSPITALS .............................................................................................................. 4,888 6,783 6,885 1.5URBAN HOSPITALS ........................................................................................................ 2,752 7,354 7,454 1.4LARGE URBAN AREAS .................................................................................................. 1,571 7,895 7,996 1.3OTHER URBAN AREAS .................................................................................................. 1,181 6,650 6,747 1.5RURAL HOSPITALS ........................................................................................................ 2,136 4,544 4,658 2.5

BED SIZE (URBAN):0–99 BEDS ....................................................................................................................... 716 4,947 5,025 1.6100–199 BEDS ................................................................................................................. 944 6,202 6,294 1.5200–299 BEDS ................................................................................................................. 548 7,042 7,132 1.3300–499 BEDS ................................................................................................................. 401 7,885 7,974 1.1500 OR MORE BEDS ...................................................................................................... 143 9,547 9,703 1.6

BED SIZE (RURAL):0–49 BEDS ....................................................................................................................... 1,233 3,784 3,901 3.150–99 BEDS ..................................................................................................................... 535 4,248 4,358 2.6100–149 BEDS ................................................................................................................. 219 4,648 4,746 2.1150–199 BEDS ................................................................................................................. 81 5,090 5,220 2.6200 OR MORE BEDS ...................................................................................................... 68 5,710 5,838 2.2

URBAN BY CENSUS DIVISION:NEW ENGLAND ............................................................................................................... 146 7,815 7,888 0.9MIDDLE ATLANTIC .......................................................................................................... 421 8,296 8,396 1.2SOUTH ATLANTIC ........................................................................................................... 404 7,022 7,098 1.1EAST NORTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................ 463 7,006 7,144 2EAST SOUTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................. 161 6,627 6,683 0.8WEST NORTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................ 188 7,105 7,203 1.4WEST SOUTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................ 351 6,760 6,917 2.3MOUNTAIN ....................................................................................................................... 133 7,044 7,156 1.6PACIFIC ............................................................................................................................ 440 8,572 8,633 0.7PUERTO RICO ................................................................................................................. 45 3,156 3,209 1.7

RURAL BY CENSUS DIVISION:NEW ENGLAND ............................................................................................................... 52 5,468 5,586 2.2MIDDLE ATLANTIC .......................................................................................................... 80 4,910 5,016 2.2SOUTH ATLANTIC ........................................................................................................... 277 4,680 4,813 2.8EAST NORTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................ 283 4,591 4,710 2.6EAST SOUTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................. 266 4,209 4,317 2.6WEST NORTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................ 492 4,348 4,458 2.5WEST SOUTH CENTRAL ................................................................................................ 340 4,061 4,144 2.1MOUNTAIN ....................................................................................................................... 201 4,863 4,995 2.7PACIFIC ............................................................................................................................ 140 5,583 5,712 2.3PUERTO RICO ................................................................................................................. 5 2,447 2,453 0.2

(BY PAYMENT CATEGORIES):URBAN HOSPITALS ........................................................................................................ 2,833 7,312 7,411 1.4LARGE URBAN ................................................................................................................ 1,665 7,797 7,905 1.4OTHER URBAN ............................................................................................................... 1,168 6,637 6,724 1.3RURAL HOSPITALS ........................................................................................................ 2,055 4,509 4,627 2.6

TEACHING STATUS:NON-TEACHING .............................................................................................................. 3,770 5,464 5,550 1.6FEWER THAN 100 RESIDENTS ..................................................................................... 876 7,125 7,223 1.4



TABLE II.—IMPACT ANALYSIS OF CHANGES FOR FY 2000; OPERATING PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT SYSTEM—Continued[Payments per case]

Number ofhospitals

(1)


(2)1


(3)1

Allchanges

(4)

100 OR MORE RESIDENTS ........................................................................................... 242 10,828 11,001 1.6DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE HOSPITALS (DSH):

NON-DSH ......................................................................................................................... 3,070 5,810 5,895 1.5URBAN DSH:

100 BEDS OR MORE ............................................................................................... 1,390 7,919 8,037 1.5FEWER THAN 100 BEDS ......................................................................................... 72 4,927 5,019 1.9

RURAL DSH:SOLE COMMUNITY (SCH) ....................................................................................... 149 4,140 4,290 3.6REFERRAL CENTERS (RRC) .................................................................................. 56 5,415 5,543 2.4

OTHER RURAL DSH HOSPITALS:100 BEDS OR MORE ............................................................................................... 48 4,097 4,218 2.9FEWER THAN 100 BEDS ......................................................................................... 103 3,714 3,798 2.3

URBAN TEACHING AND DSH:BOTH TEACHING AND DSH ................................................................................... 726 8,826 8,962 1.6TEACHING AND NO DSH ........................................................................................ 327 7,322 7,409 1.2NO TEACHING AND DSH ........................................................................................ 736 6,311 6,395 1.3NO TEACHING AND NO DSH ................................................................................. 1,044 5,668 5,727 1

RURAL HOSPITAL TYPES:NONSPECIAL STATUS HOSPITALS .............................................................................. 835 3,922 4,017 2.4RRC .................................................................................................................................. 150 5,257 5,382 2.4SCH .................................................................................................................................. 661 4,502 4,650 3.3MDH .................................................................................................................................. 352 3,784 3,885 2.7SCH AND RRC ................................................................................................................ 57 5,500 5,620 2.2

TYPE OF OWNERSHIP:VOLUNTARY .................................................................................................................... 2,840 6,945 7,079 1.5PROPRIETARY ................................................................................................................ 745 6,300 6,384 1.3GOVERNMENT ................................................................................................................ 1,301 6,400 6,512 1.8UNKNOWN ....................................................................................................................... 2 3,406 3,499 2.7

MEDICARE UTILIZATION AS A PERCENT OF INPATIENT DAYS:0—25 ................................................................................................................................ 381 9,013 9,172 1.825—50 .............................................................................................................................. 1,830 7,858 7,968 1.450—65 .............................................................................................................................. 1,893 5,910 6,007 1.6OVER 65 .......................................................................................................................... 699 5,260 5,336 1.4UNKNOWN ....................................................................................................................... 85 9,997 10,116 1.2

HOSPITALS RECLASSIFIED BY THE MEDICARE GEOGRAPHIC REVIEW BOARD:RECLASSIFICATION STATUS DURING FY 2000 AND FY 2001:

RECLASSIFIED DURING BOTH FY 2000 AND FY 2001 ............................................... 377 5,851 5,958 1.8URBAN ............................................................................................................................. 53 8,027 8,161 1.7RURAL .............................................................................................................................. 324 5,249 5,348 1.9RECLASSIFIED DURING FY 2001 ONLY ....................................................................... 149 5,537 5,930 7.1URBAN ............................................................................................................................. 35 6,971 7,428 6.6RURAL .............................................................................................................................. 114 4,623 4,975 7.6RECLASSIFIED DURING FY 2000 ONLY ....................................................................... 172 6,011 5,909 ¥1.7URBAN ............................................................................................................................. 70 7,454 7,394 ¥0.8RURAL .............................................................................................................................. 102 4,620 4,476 ¥3.1

FY 2000 RECLASSIFICATIONS:ALL RECLASSIFIED HOSPITALS ................................................................................... 527 5,776 5,948 3STANDARDIZED AMOUNT ONLY .................................................................................. 66 4,697 4,888 4.1WAGE INDEX ONLY ........................................................................................................ 386 5,878 5,913 0.6BOTH ................................................................................................................................ 46 6,295 6,457 2.6NONRECLASSIFIED ........................................................................................................ 4,364 6,912 7,019 1.6ALL URBAN RECLASSIFIED ........................................................................................... 88 7,660 7,906 3.2STANDARDIZED AMOUNT ONLY .................................................................................. 17 5,333 5,379 0.9WAGE INDEX ONLY ........................................................................................................ 38 8,718 8,934 2.5BOTH ................................................................................................................................ 33 7,217 7,584 5.1NONRECLASSIFIED ........................................................................................................ 2,638 7,355 7,449 1.3ALL RURAL RECLASSIFIED ........................................................................................... 439 5,128 5,275 2.9STANDARDIZED AMOUNT ONLY .................................................................................. 54 4,785 4,779 ¥0.1WAGE INDEX ONLY ........................................................................................................ 358 5,153 5,316 3.2BOTH ................................................................................................................................ 27 5,258 5,410 2.9NONRECLASSIFIED ........................................................................................................ 1,697 4,114 4,204 2.2OTHER RECLASSIFIED HOSPITALS (SECTION 1886(d)(8)(B)) .................................. 26 4,713 4,775 1.3

1 These payment amounts per case do not reflect any estimates of annual case-mix increase.



Table II presents the projected impact ofthe changes for FY 2001 for urban and ruralhospitals and for the different categories ofhospitals shown in Table I. It compares theestimated payments per case for FY 2000with the average estimated per case paymentsfor FY 2001, as calculated under our models.Thus, this table presents, in terms of theaverage dollar amounts paid per discharge,the combined effects of the changespresented in Table I. The percentage changesshown in the last column of Table II equalthe percentage changes in average paymentsfrom column 6 of Table I.

VIII. Impact of Organ, Tissue and EyeProcurement Condition of Participation onCAHs

In this final rule, we are adding a CoP fororgan, tissue and eye procurement for CAHs.We estimate that the procurement costs fororgan, eyes, and tissue for CAHs is negligible.This estimate is based on the followingprojections. There are several provisions inthis condition that will impact CAHs to agreater or lesser degree. Specifically, CAHsare required to have written protocols; haveagreements with an OPO, a tissue bank, andan eye bank; refer all deaths that occur in theCAH to the OPO or a third party designatedby the OPO; ensure that CAH employees whoinitiate a request for donation to the familyof a potential donor have been trained as adesignated requestor; and work cooperativelywith the OPO, tissue bank, and eye bank ineducating CAH staff, reviewing deathrecords, and maintaining potential donors. Itis important to note that because of theinherent flexibility of this condition, theextent of its economic impact is dependentupon decisions that will be made either bythe CAH or by the CAH in conjunction withthe OPO or the tissue and eye banks. Thus,the impact on individual CAHs will vary andis subject in large part to their decisionmaking. The impact will also vary based onwhether a CAH currently has an organdonation protocol and its level of compliancewith existing law and regulations. Forexample, if a CAH was a Medicare hospitalin compliance with the hospital CoP fororgan, tissue, and eye procurement prior toconverting to a CAH, there will be noadditional impact.

The first requirement in the CoP is thatCAHs have and implement written protocolsthat reflect the various other requirements ofthe CoP. Currently, under section 1138 of theAct, CAHs must have written protocols fororgan donation. Most CAHs will need torewrite their existing protocols to conformwith this regulation; however, this is clearlynot a requirement that imposes a significanteconomic burden.

In addition, a CAH must have anagreement with its designated OPO and withat least one tissue bank and at least one eyebank. CAHs are required under section 1138of the Act to refer all potential donors to anOPO. Also, the OPO regulation at 42 CFR486.306 requires, as a qualification fordesignation as an OPO, that the OPO have aworking relationship with at least 75 percentof the hospitals in its service area thatparticipate in the Medicare and Medicaidprograms and that have an operating room

and the equipment and personnel forretrieving organs. Therefore, some CAHs mayalready have an agreement with theirdesignated OPO. Although CAHs may needto modify those existing agreements, the needto make modifications would not impose asignificant economic burden. Although thereis no statutory or regulatory requirement fora CAH to have agreements with tissue andeye banks, we must assume some CAHs haveagreements with tissue and eye banks, sincehospitals are the source for virtually alltissues and eyes.

The CoP requires CAHs to notify the OPOabout every death that occurs in the CAH.The average Medicare hospital hasapproximately 165 beds and 200 deaths peryear. However, by statute and regulation,CAHs may use no more than 15 beds foracute care services. Assuming that thenumber of deaths in a hospital is related tothe number of acute care beds, there shouldbe approximately 18 deaths per year in theaverage CAH. Thus, the economic impact fora CAH of referring all deaths would be small.

Under the CoP, a CAH may agree to havethe OPO determine medical suitability fortissue and eye donation or may havealternative arrangements with a tissue bankand an eye bank. These alternativearrangements could include the CAH’s directnotification of the tissue and eye bank ofpotential tissue and eye donors or directnotification of all deaths. Again, the impactis small, and the regulation permits the CAHto decide how this process will take place.We recognize that many communities alreadyhave a one-phone-call system in place. Inaddition, some OPOs are also tissue banks oreye banks or both. A CAH that chose to usethe OPO’s tissue and eye bank services inthese localities would need to make only onetelephone call on every death.

This CoP requires that the individual whoinitiates a request for donation to the familyof a potential donor must be an OPOrepresentative or a designated requestor. Adesignated requestor is an individual whohas taken a course offered or approved by theOPO in the methodology for approachingfamilies of potential donors and requestingdonation. The CAH would need to arrangefor designated requestor training. Most OPOshave trained designated requestors as part ofthe hospital CoP for organ, tissue, and eyeprocurement. Even if the CAH wants to havea sufficient number of designated requestorsto ensure that all shifts are covered, thisprovision of the regulation would not have asignificant economic impact on CAHs. Inaddition, the CAH may be able to choose tohave donation requests initiated by the OPO,the tissue bank, or the eye bank staff ratherthan CAH staff, in which case there is noeconomic impact.

The regulation requires a CAH to workcooperatively with the OPO, a tissue bank,and an eye bank in educating CAH staff. Wedo not believe education of CAH staff willdemand a significant amount of staff time. Inaddition, most OPOs already giveeducational presentations for the staff in theirhospitals.

The regulation requires a CAH to workcooperatively with the OPO, a tissue bank,and an eye bank in reviewing death records.

Most OPOs currently conduct extensive CAHdeath record reviews. The CAH’s assistanceis required only to provide lists of CAHdeaths and facilitate access to records.

Finally, the regulation requires a CAH towork cooperatively with the OPO, a tissuebank, and an eye bank in maintainingpotential donors while necessary testing andplacement of potential donated organs andtissues take place. It is possible that becauseof the CoP, some CAHs may have their firstorgan donors. Therefore, we considered theimpact on a CAH of maintaining a brain deadpotential donor on a ventilator until theorgans can be placed. CAHs with fullventilator capability should have no troublemaintaining a potential donor until theorgans are placed. However, some CAHs haveventilator capability only so that a patientcan be maintained until he or she istransferred to a larger facility for treatment.These CAHs would have the equipment andstaffing to maintain a potential donor untiltransfer to another facility occurs. SomeCAHs do not have ventilator capability andwould be unable to maintain a potentialdonor. However, CAHs without ventilatorcapability would still be obligated to notifythe OPO, or a third party designated by theOPO, of all individuals whose death isimminent or who have died in the CAHbecause there is a potential to obtain a tissueor an eye donation. We do not believe therewill be a significant impact on CAHs nomatter what their situation—full ventilatorcapability, ventilator capability only forpatients who are to be transferred to a largerfacility, or no ventilator capability.

Although, as stated previously, there areseveral requirements in this CoP that willimpact CAHs to a greater or lesser degree, weassert that the potential benefits tobeneficiaries exceed the associated costs ofrequiring CAHs to comply with this standard.As stated in the Hospital Conditions ofParticipation; Identification of PotentialOrgan, Tissue, and Eye Donors andTransplant Hospitals’ Provision ofTransplant-Related Data regulation publishedon June 22, 1998 in the Federal Register (63FR 33872), there were 3.11 organstransplanted for every donor recovered.Further, we do not believe there will be asignificant impact on CAHs no matter whattheir situation—full ventilator capability,ventilator capability only for patients whoare to be transferred to a larger facility, or noventilator capability. Based on a HCFAactuarial opinion, the cost for CAHs toimplement this requirement is negligible. Wereviewed the comprehensive analysis in theimpact section for the hospital CoP discussedin the above referenced regulation anddetermined that the analysis andassumptions made at that time are valid forthis CAH CoP.

We expect that this regulation will increasetissue and eye donations as well as organdonations. A study of the impact of thePennsylvania routine referral legislation ontissue and eye donations was presented at theFourth International Society for OrganSharing Congress and Transplant Congress inJuly 1997. (Nathan, HM, Abrams, J.Sparkman BA, et al. ‘‘Comprehensive StateLegislation Increases Organ and Tissue



Donations’’) This study used data from theDelaware Valley Transplant Program, theOPO for Southeastern Pennsylvania, andfound that although the maximum donor agewas lowered from <66 to <60, tissuedonations increased 14 percent from 1994through 1996. The study also showed thateye donations increased 28 percent duringthe same period, despite more restrictivedonor criteria. This virtually eliminated thewaiting list for suitable corneas. NorthCarolina’s routine referral legislation becameeffective in October 1997. The CarolinaOrgan Procurement Agency (one of threeNorth Carolina OPOs) has seen heart valvedonations increase by 109 percent and othertissue donations increase 114 percentthrough May 1998.

We did not receive any public commentson the impact of this provision.

IX. Impact of Medicare DisproportionateShare Hospital (DSH) AdjustmentCalculation Policy Change in the Treatmentof Certain Medicaid Patient Days in StatesWith 1115 Expansion Waivers

As discussed in the January 20, 2000interim final rule with comment period, werevised the policy for the Medicaredisproportionate share hospital adjustmentprovision set forth under section1886(d)(5)(F) of the Act to allow hospitalslocated in states with section 1115 expansionwaivers to include the patient days of allpopulations eligible for title XIX matchingpayments under a State’s section 1115 waiverin calculating the hospital’s Medicare DSHadjustment.

There are currently eight States withsection 1115 expansion waivers (Delaware,Hawaii, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York,Oregon, Tennessee, and Vermont). Under theprovisions of this final rule, hospitals inthese eight States will be allowed to includein the Medicaid percentage portion of theirMedicare DSH calculation the inpatienthospital days attributable to patients who areeligible under the State’s section 1115expansion waiver. Because our policy wasthat these days were not allowable prior toJanuary 20, 2000, by allowing hospitals tobegin to include these days in their MedicareDSH calculation, the impact will be toincrease the DSH payments these hospitalswill receive compared to what they wouldreceive absent this change.

We have estimated the impact of thischange to be $270 million in higher FY 2000prospective payments system payments (totalFY 2000 DSH payments are projected to be$4.6 billion), and $370 million in FY 2001payments. Thus the total impact of thischange for the period from FY 2001 throughFY 2005 is estimated to be $2.14 billion.

X. Impact of Changes in the CapitalProspective Payment System

A. General Considerations

We now have cost report data for the 7thyear of the capital prospective paymentsystem (cost reports beginning in FY 1998)available through the March 2000 update ofthe HCRIS. We also have updatedinformation on the projected aggregateamount of obligated capital approved by thefiscal intermediaries. However, our impact

analysis of payment changes for capital-related costs is still limited by the lack ofhospital-specific data on several items. Theseare the hospital’s projected new capital costsfor each year, its projected old capital costsfor each year, and the actual amounts ofobligated capital that will be put in use forpatient care and recognized as Medicare oldcapital costs in each year. The lack of thisinformation affects our impact analysis in thefollowing ways:

• Major investment in hospital capitalassets (for example, in building and majorfixed equipment) occurs at irregularintervals. As a result, there can be significantvariation in the growth rates of Medicarecapital-related costs per case amonghospitals. We do not have the necessaryhospital-specific budget data to project thehospital capital growth rate for individualhospitals.

• Our policy of recognizing certainobligated capital as old capital makes itdifficult to project future capital-related costsfor individual hospitals. Under § 412.302(c),a hospital is required to notify itsintermediary that it has obligated capital bythe later of October 1, 1992, or 90 days afterthe beginning of the hospital’s first costreporting period under the capitalprospective payment system. Theintermediary must then notify the hospital ofits determination whether the criteria forrecognition of obligated capital have beenmet by the later of the end of the hospital’sfirst cost reporting period subject to thecapital prospective payment system or 9months after the receipt of the hospital’snotification. The amount that is recognizedas old capital is limited to the lesser of theactual allowable costs when the asset is putin use for patient care or the estimated costsof the capital expenditure at the time it wasobligated. We have substantial informationregarding fiscal intermediary determinationsof projected aggregate obligated capitalamounts. However, we still do not knowwhen these projects will actually be put intouse for patient care, the actual amount thatwill be recognized as obligated capital whenthe project is put into use, or the Medicareshare of the recognized costs. Therefore, wedo not know actual obligated capitalcommitments for purposes of the FY 2001capital cost projections. In Appendix B ofthis final rule, we discuss the assumptionsand computations that we employ to generatethe amount of obligated capital commitmentsfor use in the FY 2001 capital costprojections.

In Table III of this section, we present theredistributive effects that are expected tooccur between ‘‘hold-harmless’’ hospitalsand ‘‘fully prospective’’ hospitals in FY 2001.In addition, we have integrated sufficienthospital-specific information into ouractuarial model to project the impact of theFY 2001 capital payment policies by thestandard prospective payment systemhospital groupings. While we now haveactual information on the effects of thetransition payment methodology and interimpayments under the capital prospectivepayment system and cost report data for mosthospitals, we still need to randomly generatenumbers for the change in old capital costs,

new capital costs for each year, and obligatedamounts that will be put in use for patientcare services and recognized as old capitaleach year. We continue to be unable topredict accurately FY 2001 capital costs forindividual hospitals, but with the mostrecent data on hospitals’ experience underthe capital prospective payment system,there is adequate information to estimate theaggregate impact on most hospital groupings.

B. Projected Impact Based on the FY 2001Actuarial Model

1. Assumptions

In this impact analysis, we modeldynamically the impact of the capitalprospective payment system from FY 2000 toFY 2001 using a capital cost model. The FY2001 model, as described in Appendix B ofthis final rule, integrates actual data fromindividual hospitals with randomlygenerated capital cost amounts. We havecapital cost data from cost reports beginningin FY 1989 through FY 1998 as reported onthe March 2000 update of HCRIS, interimpayment data for hospitals already receivingcapital prospective payments throughPRICER, and data reported by theintermediaries that include the hospital-specific rate determinations that have beenmade through April 1, 2000 in the provider-specific file. We used these data to determinethe FY 2001 capital rates. However, we donot have individual hospital data on oldcapital changes, new capital formation, andactual obligated capital costs. We have dataon costs for capital in use in FY 1998, andwe age that capital by a formula described inAppendix B. Therefore, we need to randomlygenerate only new capital acquisitions forany year after FY 1998. All Federal ratepayment parameters are assigned to theapplicable hospital.

For purposes of this impact analysis, theFY 2001 actuarial model includes thefollowing assumptions:

• Medicare inpatient capital costs perdischarge will change at the following ratesduring these periods:

AVERAGE PERCENTAGE CHANGE INCAPITAL COSTS PER DISCHARGE

Fiscal year Percentagechange

1999 .......................................... 3.122000 .......................................... 3.312001 .......................................... 2.95

• We estimate that the Medicare case-mixindex will increase by 0.5 percent in FY 2000and in FY 2001.

• The Federal capital rate and the hospital-specific rate were updated in FY 1996 by ananalytical framework that considers changesin the prices associated with capital-relatedcosts and adjustments to account for forecasterror, changes in the case-mix index,allowable changes in intensity, and otherfactors. The FY 2001 update is 0.9 percent(see section IV. of the Addendum to this finalrule).



2. Results

We have used the actuarial model toestimate the change in payment for capital-related costs from FY 2000 to FY 2001. TableIII shows the effect of the capital prospectivepayment system on low capital cost hospitals

and high capital cost hospitals. We considera hospital to be a low capital cost hospitalif, based on a comparison of its initialhospital-specific rate and the applicableFederal rate, it will be paid under the fullyprospective payment methodology. A high

capital cost hospital is a hospital that, basedon its initial hospital-specific rate and theapplicable Federal rate, will be paid underthe hold-harmless payment methodology.Based on our actuarial model, the breakdownof hospitals is as follows:

CAPITAL TRANSITION PAYMENT METHODOLOGY FOR FY 2001

Type of hospital Percent ofhospitals

Percent ofdischarges

Percent ofcapital costs

Percent ofcapital pay-

ments

Low Cost Hospital ............................................................................................................ 67 62 56 61High Cost Hospital ........................................................................................................... 33 38 44 39

A low capital cost hospital may request tohave its hospital-specific rate redeterminedbased on old capital costs in the current year,through the later of the hospital’s costreporting period beginning in FY 1994 or thefirst cost reporting period beginning afterobligated capital comes into use (within thelimits established in § 412.302(e) for puttingobligated capital into use for patient care). Ifthe redetermined hospital-specific rate isgreater than the adjusted Federal rate, thesehospitals will be paid under the hold-

harmless payment methodology. Regardlessof whether the hospital became a hold-harmless payment hospital as a result of aredetermination, we continue to show thesehospitals as low capital cost hospitals inTable III.

Assuming no behavioral changes in capitalexpenditures, Table III displays thepercentage change in payments from FY 2000to FY 2001 using the above describedactuarial model. With the Federal rate, weestimate aggregate Medicare capital payments

will increase by 5.48 percent in FY 2001.This increase is noticeably higher than lastyear’s (3.64 percent) due to the combinationof the increase in the number of hospitaladmissions, the increase in case-mix, and theincrease in the Federal blend percentage from90 percent to 100 percent and a decrease inthe hospital-specific rate percentage from 10percent to 0 percent for fully prospectivepayment hospitals.

TABLE III.—IMPACT OF PROPOSED CHANGES FOR FY 2001 ON PAYMENTS PER DISCHARGE

Numberof hos-pitals

DischargesAdjustedfederal

payment

Averagefederalpercent

Hopitalspecificpayment

Holdharmlesspayment

Excep-tions pay-

ment

Total pay-ment

Percentchangeover FY

2000

FY 2000 Payments per Discharge:Low Cost Hospitals ............................................ 3,194 6,723,732 $574.73 90.41 $30.18 $2.95 $7.84 $615.72 ................

Fully Prospective ........................................ 3,020 6,252,299 571.02 90.00 32.46 ................ 7.45 610.93 ................100% Federal Rate ..................................... 159 438,006 635.95 100.00 ................ ................ 3.42 639.38 ................Hold Harmless ............................................ 15 33,426 467.66 54.25 ................ 594.40 139.14 1,201.21 ................

High Cost Hospitals ........................................... 1,598 4,078,374 650.66 97.86 ................ 19.26 13.05 682.97 ................100% Federal Rate ..................................... 1,383 3,717,412 665.24 100.00 ................ ................ 6.98 672.22 ................Hold Harmless ............................................ 215 360,962 500.42 75.67 ................ 217.62 75.58 793.63 ................

Total Hospitals ........................................ 4,792 10,802,106 603.40 93.30 18.79 9.11 9.81 641.11 ................FY 2001 Payments per Discharge:

Low Cost Hospitals ............................................ 3,194 6,835,654 $637.91 99.74 ................ $2.42 $9.69 $650.02 5.57Fully Prospective ........................................ 3,020 6,356,377 638.58 100.00 ................ ................ 9.20 647.78 6.03100% Federal Rate ..................................... 159 445,296 638.34 100.00 ................ ................ 4.35 642.69 0.52Hold Harmless ............................................ 15 33,981 506.60 60.11 ................ 486.54 170.96 1,164.09 ¥3.09

High Cost Hospitals ........................................... 1,598 4,146,181 653.32 98.38 ................ 15.35 21.47 690.15 1.05100% Federal Rate ..................................... 1,394 3,793,349 664.47 100.00 ................ ................ 10.65 675.12 0.43Hold Harmless ............................................ 204 352,832 533.52 80.86 ................ 180.41 137.76 851.69 7.32

Total Hospitals ........................................ 4,792 10,981,835 643.73 99.21 ................ 7.30 14.14 665.17 3.75

We project that low capital cost hospitalspaid under the fully prospective paymentmethodology will experience an averageincrease in payments per case of 6.03percent, and high capital cost hospitals willexperience an average increase of 1.05percent. These results are due to the changein the blended percentages to the paymentsystem to 100 percent adjusted Federal rateand 0 percent hospital-specific rate.

For hospitals paid under the fullyprospective payment methodology, theFederal rate payment percentage willincrease from 90 percent to 100 percent andthe hospital-specific rate payment percentagewill decrease from 10 to 0 percent in FY2001. The Federal rate payment percentagefor hospitals paid under the hold-harmlesspayment methodology is based on thehospital’s ratio of new capital costs to totalcapital costs. The average Federal rate

payment percentage for high cost hospitalsreceiving a hold-harmless payment for oldcapital will increase from 75.67 percent to80.86 percent. We estimate the percentage ofhold-harmless hospitals paid based on 100percent of the Federal rate will increase from86.55 percent to 87.23 percent. We estimatethat the few remaining high cost hold-harmless hospitals (204) will experience anincrease in payments of 7.32 percent from FY2000 to FY 2001. This increase reflects ourestimate that exception payments perdischarge will increase 82.27 percent fromFY 2000 to FY 2001 for high cost hold-harmless hospitals. While we estimate thatthis group’s regular hold-harmless paymentsfor old capital will decline by 17.10 percentdue to the retirement of old capital, weestimate that its high overall capital costswill cause an increase in these hospitals’exceptions payments from $75.58 per

discharge in FY 2000 to $137.76 perdischarge in FY 2001. This is primarily dueto the estimated decrease in outlierpayments, which will cause an estimatedincrease in exceptions payments to coverunmet capital costs.

We estimate that the average hospital-specific rate payment per discharge willdecrease from $32.46 in FY 2000 to $0.00 inFY 2001. This decrease is due to the decreasein the hospital-specific rate paymentpercentage from 10 percent in FY 2000 to 0percent in FY 2001 for fully prospectivepayment hospitals.

We have made no changes in ourexceptions policies for FY 2001. As a result,the minimum payment levels would be—

• 90 percent for sole community hospitals;• 80 percent for urban hospitals with 100

or more beds and a disproportionate sharepatient percentage of 20.2 percent or more; or



• 70 percent for all other hospitals.We estimate that exceptions payments will

increase from 1.53 percent of total capitalpayments in FY 2000 to 2.13 percent ofpayments in FY 2001. The projecteddistribution of the exception payments isshown in the chart below:

ESTIMATED FY 2001 EXCEPTIONSPAYMENTS

Type of hospital Number ofhospitals

Percent ofexceptionspayments

Low CapitalCost ............... 201 43

High CapitalCost ............... 214 57

Total ........... 415 100

C. Cross-Sectional Comparison of CapitalProspective Payment Methodologies

Table IV presents a cross-sectionalsummary of hospital groupings by capitalprospective payment metholology. Thisdistribution is generated by our acturarialmodel.

TABLE IV.—DISTRIBUTION BY METHOD OF PAYMENT (HOLD-HARMLESS/FULLY PROSPECTIVE) OF HOSPITALS RECEIVINGCAPITAL PAYMENTS (ESTIMATED FOR FY 2001)

(1)Total No. of

Hospitals

(2)Hold-harmless (3)

Percentagepaid fully

prospectiverate

Percentagepaid hold-harmless

(A)

Percentagepaid fullyfederal

(B)

By Geographic Location:All hospitals .............................................................................................................. 4,792 4.6 32.4 63.0Large urban areas (populations over 1 million) ....................................................... 1,524 4.3 41.0 54.7Other urban areas (populations of 1 million or fewer) ............................................. 1,149 5.8 39.5 54.7Rural areas ............................................................................................................... 2,119 4.1 22.4 73.5Urban hospitals ......................................................................................................... 2,673 4.9 40.4 54.7

0–99 beds .......................................................................................................... 658 6.2 33.9 59.9100–199 beds .................................................................................................... 929 7.2 45.5 47.3200–299 beds .................................................................................................... 543 3.3 41.4 55.2300–499 beds .................................................................................................... 400 0.8 37.0 62.3500 or more beds .............................................................................................. 143 2.1 42.0 55.9

Rural hospitals .......................................................................................................... 2,119 4.1 22.4 73.50–49 beds .......................................................................................................... 1,220 2.9 16.6 80.650–99 beds ........................................................................................................ 531 6.8 26.7 66.5100–149 beds .................................................................................................... 219 5.9 35.2 58.9150–199 beds .................................................................................................... 81 2.5 25.9 71.6200 or more beds .............................................................................................. 68 1.5 47.1 51.5

By Region:Urban by Region ...................................................................................................... 2,673 4.9 40.4 54.7

New England ..................................................................................................... 145 0.7 25.5 73.8Middle Atlantic ................................................................................................... 408 2.9 34.8 62.3South Atlantic .................................................................................................... 398 5.5 51.8 42.7East North Central ............................................................................................. 454 4.2 29.7 66.1East South Central ............................................................................................ 154 8.4 46.1 45.5West North Central ............................................................................................ 182 6.0 36.8 57.1West South Central ........................................................................................... 328 8.8 58.2 32.9Mountain ............................................................................................................ 124 4.8 48.4 46.8Pacific ................................................................................................................ 435 4.1 36.3 59.5Puerto Rico ........................................................................................................ 45 2.2 26.7 71.1

Rural by Region ........................................................................................................ 2,119 4.1 22.4 73.5New England ..................................................................................................... 52 0.0 23.1 76.9Middle Atlantic ................................................................................................... 78 5.1 19.2 75.6South Atlantic .................................................................................................... 276 2.2 33.3 64.5East North Central ............................................................................................. 279 3.9 16.5 79.6East South Central ............................................................................................ 265 3.4 32.8 63.8West North Central ............................................................................................ 491 3.3 14.5 82.3West South Central ........................................................................................... 334 4.5 26.3 69.2Mountain ............................................................................................................ 200 9.5 15.0 75.5Pacific ................................................................................................................ 139 5.0 23.7 71.2

By Payment Classification:Large urban areas (populations over 1 million) ....................................................... 1,618 4.2 41.3 54.5Other urban areas (populations of 1 million or fewer) ............................................. 1,136 6.0 38.8 55.2Rural areas ............................................................................................................... 2,038 4.1 21.8 74.1Teaching Status:

Non-teaching ..................................................................................................... 3,682 5.1 31.6 63.3Fewer than 100 Residents ................................................................................ 871 2.9 35.9 61.2100 or more Residents ...................................................................................... 239 2.1 32.2 65.7

Disproportionate share hospitals (DSH): 2,988 4.7 28.3 67.0By Geographic Location:

All hospitals .............................................................................................................. 4,792 4.6 32.4 63.0



TABLE IV.—DISTRIBUTION BY METHOD OF PAYMENT (HOLD-HARMLESS/FULLY PROSPECTIVE) OF HOSPITALS RECEIVINGCAPITAL PAYMENTS (ESTIMATED FOR FY 2001)—Continued

(1)Total No. of

Hospitals

(2)Hold-harmless (3)

Percentagepaid fully

prospectiverate

Percentagepaid hold-harmless

(A)

Percentagepaid fullyfederal

(B)

Non-DSHUrban DSH:

100 or more beds ....................................................................................... 1,379 4.6 42.5 52.9Less than 100 beds ................................................................................... 70 4.3 25.7 70.0

Rural DSH:Sole Community (SCH/EACH) ................................................................... 149 5.4 20.1 74.5Referral Center (RRC/EACH) .................................................................... 56 3.6 51.8 44.6OTHER RURAL:

100 OR MORE BEDS ......................................................................... 48 .................... 39.6 60.4Less than 100 beds ............................................................................ 102 2.0 23.5 74.5

Urban teaching and DSH:Both teaching and DSH .................................................................................... 720 2.5 36.7 60.8Teaching and no DSH ....................................................................................... 325 3.1 33.8 63.1No teaching and DSH ....................................................................................... 729 6.7 46.6 46.6No teaching and no DSH .................................................................................. 980 6.0 40.3 53.7

Rural Hospital Types:Non special status hospitals ............................................................................. 819 1.5 24.1 74.5RRC/EACH ........................................................................................................ 150 2.7 36.0 61.3SCH/EACH ........................................................................................................ 661 8.5 18.2 73.4Medicare-dependent hospitals (MDH) .............................................................. 351 1.4 16.5 82.1SCH, RRC and EACH ....................................................................................... 57 10.5 26.3 63.2

Type of Ownership:Voluntary ........................................................................................................... 2,520 4.5 32.4 63.1Proprietary ......................................................................................................... 655 7.2 57.1 35.7Government ....................................................................................................... 1,093 4.1 19.2 76.7

Medicare Utilization as a Percent of Inpatient Days:0–25 ................................................................................................................... 369 5.4 27.6 66.925–50 ................................................................................................................. 1,820 4.3 35.1 60.750–65 ................................................................................................................. 1,882 4.7 31.2 64.1Over 65 .............................................................................................................. 688 4.8 32.1 63.1

As we explain in Appendix B of this finalrule, we were not able to use 96 of the 4,888hospitals in our database due to insufficient(missing or unusable) data. Consequently, thepayment methodology distribution is basedon 4,792 hospitals. These data should befully representative of the paymentmethodologies that will be applicable tohospitals.

The cross-sectional distribution of hospitalby payment methodology is presented by: (1)geographic location; (2) region; and (3)payment classification. This provides anindication of the percentage of hospitalswithin a particular hospital grouping thatwill be paid under the fully prospectivepayment methodology and the hold-harmlesspayment methodology.

The percentage of hospitals paid fullyFederal (100 percent of the Federal rate) ashold-harmless hospitals is expected toincrease to 32.4 percent in FY 2001.

Table IV indicates that 63.0 percent ofhospitals will be paid under the fullyprospective payment methodology. (Thisfigure, unlike the figure of 67 percent for lowcost capital hospitals in the chart on ‘‘CapitalTransition Payment Methodology for FY2001,’’ in section VII.B.2. of this impactanalysis takes into account the effects ofredeterminations. In other words, this figuredoes not include low cost hospitals that,following a hospital-specific rate

redetermination, are now paid under thehold-harmless methodology.) As expected, arelatively higher percentage of rural andgovernmental hospitals (74.1 percent and76.7 percent, respectively by paymentclassification) are being paid under the fullyprospective payment methodology. This is areflection of their lower than average capitalcosts per case. In contrast, only 35.7 percentof proprietary hospitals are being paid underthe fully prospective methodology. This is areflection of their higher than average capitalcosts per case. (We found at the time of theAugust 30, 1991 final rule (56 FR 43430) that62.7 percent of proprietary hospitals had acapital cost per case above the nationalaverage cost per case.)

D. Cross-Sectional Analysis of Changes inAggregate Payments

We used our FY 2001 actuarial model toestimate the potential impact of our changesfor FY 2001 on total capital payments percase, using a universe of 4,792 hospitals. Theindividual hospital payment parameters aretaken from the best available data, including:the April 1, 2000 update to the provider-specific file, cost report data, and auditinformation supplied by intermediaries. InTable V we present the results of the cross-sectional analysis using the results of ouractuarial model and the aggregate impact ofthe FY 2001 payment policies. Columns 3

and 4 show estimates of payments per caseunder our model for FY 2000 and FY 2001.Column 5 shows the total percentage changein payments from FY 2000 to FY 2001.Column 6 presents the percentage change inpayments that can be attributed to Federalrate changes alone.

Federal rate changes represented inColumn 6 include the 1.33 percent increasein the Federal rate, a 0.5 percent increase incase mix, changes in the adjustments to theFederal rate (for example, the effect of thenew hospital wage index on the geographicadjustment factor), and reclassifications bythe MGCRB. Column 5 includes the effects ofthe Federal rate changes represented inColumn 6. Column 5 also reflects the effectsof all other changes, including the changefrom 90 percent to 100 percent in the portionof the Federal rate for fully prospectivehospitals, the hospital-specific rate update,changes in the proportion of new to totalcapital for hold-harmless hospitals, changesin old capital (for example, obligated capitalput in use), hospital-specific rateredeterminations, and exceptions. Thecomparisons are provided by: (1) geographiclocation, (2) region, and (3) paymentclassification.

The simulation results show that, onaverage, capital payments per case can beexpected to increase 3.8 percent in FY 2001.The results show that the effect of the Federal



rate change alone is to increase payments by0.3 percent. In addition to the increaseattributable to the Federal rate change, a 3.5percent increase is attributable to the effectsof all other changes.

Our comparison by geographic locationshows an overall increase in payments tohospitals in all areas. This comparison alsoshows that urban and rural hospitals willexperience slightly different rates of increasein capital payments per case (3.6 percent and4.6 percent, respectively). This difference isdue to the lower rate of increase for urbanhospitals relative to rural hospitals (0.1percent and 1.4 percent, respectively) fromthe Federal rate changes alone. Urbanhospitals are actually projected to gainslightly more than rural hospitals (3.5percent versus 3.2 percent, respectively) fromthe effects of all other changes.

All regions are estimated to receiveincreases in total capital payments per case,partly due to the increased share of paymentsthat are based on the Federal rate (from 90to 100 percent). Changes by region vary froma minimum of 2.6 percent increase (WestSouth Central urban region) to a maximum of7.4 percent increase (Pacific rural region).

By type of ownership, governmenthospitals are projected to have the largest rateof increase of total payment changes (4.5percent, a 0.6 percent increase due to theFederal rate changes, and a 3.9 percentincrease from the effects of all other changes).Payments to voluntary hospitals will increase3.7 percent (a 0.3 percent increase due toFederal rate changes, and a 3.4 percentincrease from the effects of all other changes)and payments to proprietary hospitals willincrease 2.6 percent (a 0.1 percent decreasedue to Federal rate changes, and a 2.7 percentincrease from the effects of all other changes).

Section 1886(d)(10) of the Act establishedthe MGCRB. Hospitals may apply forreclassification for purposes of thestandardized amount, wage index, or both,and for purposes of DSH for FYs 1999through 2001. Although the Federal capitalrate is not affected, a hospital’s geographicclassification for purposes of the operatingstandardized amount does affect a hospital’scapital payments as a result of the largeurban adjustment factor and thedisproportionate share adjustment for urbanhospitals with 100 or more beds.Reclassification for wage index purposesaffects the geographic adjustment factor,

since that factor is constructed from thehospital wage index.

To present the effects of the hospitals beingreclassified for FY 2001 compared to theeffects of reclassification for FY 2000, weshow the average payment percentageincrease for hospitals reclassified in eachfiscal year and in total. For FY 2001reclassifications, we indicate those hospitalsreclassified for standardized amountpurposes only, for wage index purposes only,and for both purposes. The reclassifiedgroups are compared to all othernonreclassified hospitals. These categoriesare further identified by urban and ruraldesignation.

Hospitals reclassified for FY 2001 as awhole are projected to experience a 5.2percent increase in payments (a 2.0 percentincrease attributable to Federal rate changesand a 3.2 percent increase attributable to theeffects of all other changes). Payments tononreclassified hospitals will increaseslightly less (3.8 percent) than reclassifiedhospitals (5.2 percent) overall. Payments tononreclassified hospitals will increase lessthan reclassified hospitals due to the Federalrate changes (0.3 percent compared to 2.0percent).

TABLE V.—COMPARISON OF TOTAL PAYMENTS PER CASE

[FY 2000 payments compared to FY 2001 payments]

Number ofhospitals

Average FY2000 pay-

ments/case

Average FY2001 pay-

ments/caseAll changes

Portion at-tributable tofederal rate

change

By Geographic Location:All hospitals ...................................................................................... 4,792 641 665 3.8 0.3Large urban areas (populations over 1 million) ............................... 1,524 745 772 3.6 0.0Other urban areas (populations of 1 million or fewer) ..................... 1,149 629 653 3.7 0.4Rural areas ....................................................................................... 2,119 429 449 4.6 1.4Urban hospitals ................................................................................. 2,673 695 720 3.6 0.1

0–99 beds .................................................................................. 658 499 518 3.8 0.6100–199 beds ............................................................................ 929 610 630 3.4 0.3200–299 beds ............................................................................ 543 662 684 3.4 0.3300–499 beds ............................................................................ 400 726 754 3.8 ¥0.1500 or more beds ...................................................................... 143 889 923 3.8 0.0

Rural hospitals .................................................................................. 2,119 429 449 4.6 1.40–49 beds .................................................................................. 1,220 358 378 5.8 2.050–99 beds ................................................................................ 531 409 429 4.9 1.4100–149 beds ............................................................................ 219 444 461 3.8 1.0150–199 beds ............................................................................ 81 467 489 4.7 1.8200 or more beds ...................................................................... 68 526 547 3.9 1.0

By Region:Urban by Region ............................................................................... 2,673 695 720 3.6 0.1

New England ............................................................................. 145 723 751 3.9 ¥0.1Middle Atlantic ........................................................................... 408 769 797 3.7 ¥0.1South Atlantic ............................................................................ 398 674 693 2.9 ¥0.2East North Central ..................................................................... 454 660 692 4.9 0.8East South Central .................................................................... 154 638 660 3.4 ¥0.3West North Central .................................................................... 182 691 715 3.4 0.1West South Central ................................................................... 328 661 678 2.6 0.8Mountain .................................................................................... 124 687 723 5.3 0.3Pacific ........................................................................................ 435 780 804 3.1 ¥0.5Puerto Rico ................................................................................ 45 293 311 6.1 2.3

Rural by Region ................................................................................ 2,119 429 449 4.6 1.4New England ............................................................................. 52 525 544 3.6 0.2Middle Atlantic ........................................................................... 78 450 469 4.1 0.8South Atlantic ............................................................................ 276 443 462 4.4 1.8East North Central ..................................................................... 279 432 459 6.2 1.6East South Central .................................................................... 265 395 411 4.2 1.5West North Central .................................................................... 491 420 440 4.6 1.5West South Central ................................................................... 334 391 404 3.4 1.0Mountain .................................................................................... 200 461 478 3.7 1.1



TABLE V.—COMPARISON OF TOTAL PAYMENTS PER CASE—Continued[FY 2000 payments compared to FY 2001 payments]

Number ofhospitals

Average FY2000 pay-

ments/case

Average FY2001 pay-

ments/caseAll changes

Portion at-tributable tofederal rate

change

Pacific ........................................................................................ 139 506 543 7.4 1.4By Payment Classification:

All hospitals ...................................................................................... 4,792 641 665 3.8 0.3Large urban areas (populations over 1 million) ............................... 1,618 736 763 3.6 0.1Other urban areas (populations of 1 million or fewer) ..................... 1,136 628 650 3.5 0.2Rural areas ....................................................................................... 2,038 425 446 4.8 1.5Teaching Status:

Non-teaching ............................................................................. 3,682 530 549 3.5 0.6Fewer than 100 Residents ........................................................ 871 669 694 3.7 0.3100 or more Residents .............................................................. 239 979 1,022 4.4 ¥0.2Urban DSH:

100 or more beds ............................................................... 1,379 733 759 3.6 0.1Less than 100 beds ............................................................ 70 570 604 5.9 0.5

Rural DSH:Sole Community (SCH/EACH) ........................................... 149 382 399 4.5 2.1Referral Center (RRC/EACH) ............................................ 56 490 506 3.2 1.0Other Rural:

100 or more beds ........................................................ 48 383 401 4.9 2.3Less than 100 beds .................................................... 102 343 360 5.0 1.9

Urban teaching and DSH:Both teaching and DSH ............................................................. 720 807 838 3.8 0.1Teaching and no DSH ............................................................... 325 699 728 4.1 0.2No teaching and DSH ............................................................... 729 603 621 3.1 0.2No teaching and no DSH .......................................................... 980 570 588 3.0 0.2

Rural Hospital Types:Non special status hospitals ...................................................... 819 376 394 5.0 1.7RRC/EACH ................................................................................ 150 493 515 4.3 1.4SCH/EACH ................................................................................ 661 425 448 5.5 1.5Medicare-dependent hospitals (MDH) ....................................... 351 356 377 5.7 1.9SCH, RRC and EACH ............................................................... 57 499 516 3.5 0.6

Hospitals Reclassified by the Medicare Geographic ClassificationReview Board:

Reclassification Status During FY00 and FY01:Reclassified During Both FY00 and FY01 ......................... 377 546 569 4.1 0.9Reclassified During FY01 Only .......................................... 149 531 579 9.1 6.0Reclassified During FY00 Only .......................................... 131 553 546 ¥1.2 ¥3.1

FY01 Reclassifications:All Reclassified Hospitals ................................................... 526 543 571 5.2 2.0All Nonreclassified Hospitals .............................................. 4,268 654 679 3.8 0.3All Urban Reclassified Hospitals ........................................ 88 701 746 6.3 2.3Urban Nonreclassified Hospitals ........................................ 2,559 696 720 3.5 0.0All Reclassified Rural Hospitals ......................................... 438 488 510 4.7 1.9Rural Nonreclassified Hospitals ......................................... 1,681 386 404 4.6 1.0

Other Reclassified Hospitals (Section 1886(D)(8)(B)) .............. 26 463 473 2.1 0.7Type of Ownership:

Voluntary .................................................................................... 2,520 655 680 3.7 0.3Proprietary ................................................................................. 655 626 643 2.6 ¥0.1Government ............................................................................... 1,093 576 602 4.5 0.6

Medicare Utilization as a Percent of Inpatient Days:0–25 ........................................................................................... 369 801 838 4.7 0.125–50 ......................................................................................... 1,820 736 763 3.7 0.050–65 ......................................................................................... 1,882 568 590 3.8 0.6Over 65 ...................................................................................... 688 512 528 3.2 0.7

Appendix B: Technical Appendix onthe Capital Cost Model and RequiredAdjustments

Under section 1886(g)(1)(A) of the Act, weset capital prospective payment rates for FY1992 through FY 1995 so that aggregateprospective payments for capital costs wereprojected to be 10 percent lower than theamount that would have been payable on areasonable cost basis for capital-related costsin that year. To implement this requirement,

we developed the capital acquisition modelto determine the budget neutralityadjustment factor. Even though the budgetneutrality requirement expired effective withFY 1996, we must continue to determine therecalibration and geographic reclassificationbudget neutrality adjustment factor and thereduction in the Federal and hospital-specificrates for exceptions payments.

To determine these factors, we mustcontinue to project capital costs andpayments.

We used the capital acquisition modelfrom the start of prospective payments forcapital costs through FY 1997. We now have7 years of cost reports under the capitalprospective payment system. For FY 1998,we developed a new capital cost model toreplace the capital acquisition model. Thisrevised model makes use of the data fromthese cost reports.

The following cost reports are used in thecapital cost model for this final rule: theMarch 31, 2000 update of the cost reports for



PPS–IX (cost reporting periods beginning inFY 1992), PPS–X (cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 1993), PPS–XI (costreporting periods beginning in FY 1994),PPS–XII (cost reporting periods beginning inFY 1995), PPS–XIII (cost reporting periodsbeginning in FY 1996), PPS–XIV (costreporting periods beginning in FY 1997), andPPS–XV (cost reporting periods beginning inFY 1998). In addition, to model payments,we use the April 1, 2000 update of theprovider-specific file, and the March 1994update of the intermediary audit file.

Since hospitals under alternative paymentsystem waivers (that is, hospitals inMaryland) are currently excluded from thecapital prospective payment system, weexcluded these hospitals from our model.

We developed FY 1992 through FY 2000hospital-specific rates using the provider-specific file and the intermediary audit file.(We used the cumulative provider-specificfile, which includes all updates to eachhospital’s records, and chose the latest recordfor each fiscal year.) We checked theconsistency between the provider-specificfile and the intermediary audit file. Weensured that increases in the hospital-specific rates were at least as large as thepublished updates (increases) for thehospital-specific rates each year. We wereable to match hospitals to the files as shownin the following table:

Source Number ofhospitals

Provider-Specific File Only ....... 173Provider-Specific and Audit File 4,715

Total ................................... 4,888

One hundred forty-three of the 4,888hospitals had unusable or missing data, orhad no cost reports available. For 42 of the143 hospitals, we were unable to determinea hospital-specific rate from the availablecost reports. However, there was adequatecost information to determine that thesehospitals were paid under the hold-harmlessmethodology. Since the hospital-specific rateis not used to determine payments forhospitals paid under the hold-harmlessmethodology, there was sufficient cost reportinformation available to include these 42hospitals in the analysis. We were able toestimate hospital-specific amounts for fiveadditional hospitals from the cost reports asshown in the following table:

Cost report Number ofhospitals

PPS–9 ....................................... 1PPS–12 ..................................... 2PPS–14 ..................................... 1PPS–15 ..................................... 1

Total ................................... 5

Hence we were able to use 47 of the 143hospitals. We used 4,792 hospitals for theanalysis. Ninety-six hospitals could not beused in the analysis because of insufficientinformation. These hospitals account for lessthan 0.5 percent of admissions. Therefore,

any effects from the elimination of their costreport data should be minimal.

We analyzed changes in capital-relatedcosts (depreciation, interest, rent, leases,insurance, and taxes) reported in the costreports. We found a wide variance amonghospitals in the growth of these costs. Forhospitals with more than 100 beds, thedistribution and mean of these cost increaseswere different for large changes in bed-size(greater than ±20 percent). We also analyzedchanges in the growth in old capital and newcapital for cost reports that provided thisinformation. For old capital, we limited theanalysis to decreases in old capital. We didthis since the opportunity for most hospitalsto treat ‘‘obligated’’ capital put into service asold capital has expired. Old capital costsshould decrease as assets become fullydepreciated and as interest costs decrease asthe loan is amortized.

The new capital cost model separates thehospitals into three mutually exclusivegroups. Hold-harmless hospitals with data onold capital were placed in the first group. Ofthe remaining hospitals, those hospitals withfewer than 100 beds comprise the secondgroup. The third group consists of allhospitals that did not fit into either of thefirst two groups. Each of these groupsdisplayed unique patterns of growth incapital costs. We found that the gammadistribution is useful in explaining anddescribing the patterns of increase in capitalcosts. A gamma distribution is a statisticaldistribution that can be used to describepatterns of growth rates, with the greatestproportion of rates being at the low end. Weuse the gamma distribution to estimateindividual hospital rates of increase asfollows:

(1) For hold-harmless hospitals, old capitalcost changes were fitted to a truncatedgamma distribution, that is, a gammadistribution covering only the distribution ofcost decreases. New capital costs changeswere fitted to the entire gamma distribution,allowing for both decreases and increases.

(2) For hospitals with fewer than 100 beds(small), total capital cost changes were fittedto the gamma distribution, allowing for bothdecreases and increases.

(3) Other (large) hospitals were furtherseparated into three groups:

• Bed-size decreases over 20 percent(decrease).

• Bed-size increases over 20 percent(increase).

• Other (no change).Capital cost changes for large hospitals

were fitted to gamma distributions for eachbed-size change group, allowing for bothdecreases and increases in capital costs. Weanalyzed the probability distribution ofincreases and decreases in bed size for largehospitals. We found the probabilitysomewhat dependent on the prior yearchange in bed size and factored thisdependence into the analysis. Probabilities ofbed-size change were determined. Separatesets of probability factors were calculated toreflect the dependence on prior year changein bed size (increase, decrease, and nochange).

The gamma distributions were fitted tochanges in aggregate capital costs for the

entire hospital. We checked the relationshipbetween aggregate costs and Medicare perdischarge costs. For large hospitals, there wasa small variance, but the variance was largerfor small hospitals. Since costs are used onlyfor the hold-harmless methodology and todetermine exceptions, we decided to use thegamma distributions fitted to aggregate costincreases for estimating distributions of costper discharge increases.

Capital costs per discharge calculated fromthe cost reports were increased by randomnumbers drawn from the gamma distributionto project costs in future years. Old and newcapital were projected separately for hold-harmless hospitals. Aggregate capital perdischarge costs were projected for all otherhospitals. Because the distribution ofincreases in capital costs varies with changesin bed size for large hospitals, we firstprojected changes in bed size for largehospitals before drawing random numbersfrom the gamma distribution. Bed-sizechanges were drawn from the uniformdistribution with the probabilities dependenton the previous year bed-size change. Thegamma distribution has a shape parameterand a scaling parameter. (We used differentparameters for each hospital group, and forold and new capital.)

We used discharge counts from the costreports to calculate capital cost per discharge.To estimate total capital costs for FY 1999(the MedPAR data year) and later, we use thenumber of discharges from the MedPAR data.Some hospitals had considerably moredischarges in FY 1999 than in the years forwhich we calculated cost per discharge fromthe cost report data. Consequently, a hospitalwith few cost report discharges would havea high capital cost per discharge, since fixedcosts would be allocated over only a fewdischarges. If discharges increasesubstantially, the cost per discharge woulddecrease because fixed costs would beallocated over more discharges. If theprojection of capital cost per discharge is notadjusted for increases in discharges, theprojection of exceptions would be overstated.We address this situation by recalculating thecost per discharge with the MedPARdischarges if the MedPAR discharges exceedthe cost report discharges by more than 20percent. We do not adjust for increases of lessthan 20 percent because we have notreceived all of the FY 1999 discharges, andwe have removed some discharges from theanalysis because they are statistical outliers.This adjustment reduces our estimate ofexceptions payments, and consequently, thereduction to the Federal rate for exceptionsis smaller. We will continue to monitor ourmodeling of exceptions payments and makeadjustments as needed.

The average national capital cost perdischarge generated by this model is thecombined average of many randomlygenerated increases. This average must equalthe projected average national capital costper discharge, which we projected separately(outside this model). We adjusted the shapeparameter of the gamma distributions so thatthe modeled average capital cost perdischarge matches our projected capital costper discharge. The shape parameter for oldcapital was not adjusted since we are



modeling the aging of ‘‘existing’’ assets. Thismodel provides a distribution of capital costsamong hospitals that is consistent with ouraggregate capital projections.

Once each hospital’s capital-related costsare generated, the model projects capitalpayments. We use the actual paymentparameters (for example, the case-mix indexand the geographic adjustment factor) thatare applicable to the specific hospital.

To project capital payments, the modelfirst assigns the applicable paymentmethodology (fully prospective or hold-harmless) to the hospital as determined fromthe provider-specific file and the cost reports.The model simulates Federal rate paymentsusing the assigned payment parameters andhospital-specific estimated outlier payments.The case-mix index for a hospital is derivedfrom the FY 1999 MedPAR file using the FY2001 DRG relative weights included insection VI. of the Addendum to this finalrule. The case-mix index is increased eachyear after FY 1999 based on analysis of pastexperiences in case-mix increases. Based onanalysis of recent case-mix increases, weestimate that case-mix will increase 0.0percent in FY 2000. We project that case-mixwill increase 0.0 percent in FY 2001. (Sincewe are using FY 1999 cases for our analysis,the FY 1999 increase in case-mix has noeffect on projected capital payments.)

Changes in geographic classification andrevisions to the hospital wage data used toestablish the hospital wage index affect thegeographic adjustment factor. Changes in the

DRG classification system and the relativeweights affect the case-mix index.

Section 412.308(c)(4)(ii) requires that theestimated aggregate payments for the fiscalyear, based on the Federal rate after anychanges resulting from DRG reclassificationsand recalibration and the geographicadjustment factor, equal the estimatedaggregate payments based on the Federal ratethat would have been made without suchchanges. For FY 2000, the budget neutralityadjustment factors were 1.00142 for thenational rate and 1.00134 for the Puerto Ricorate.

Since we implemented a separategeographic adjustment factor for Puerto Rico,we applied separate budget neutralityadjustments for the national geographicadjustment factor and the Puerto Ricogeographic adjustment factor. We applied thesame budget neutrality factor for DRGreclassifications and recalibration nationallyand for Puerto Rico. Separate adjustmentswere unnecessary for FY 1998 and earliersince the geographic adjustment factor forPuerto Rico was implemented in FY 1998.

To determine the factors for FY 2001, wefirst determined the portions of the Federalnational and Puerto Rico rates that would bepaid for each hospital in FY 2001 based onits applicable payment methodology. Usingour model, we then compared, separately forthe national rate and the Puerto Rico rate,estimated aggregate Federal rate paymentsbased on the FY 2000 DRG relative weightsand the FY 2000 geographic adjustmentfactor to estimated aggregate Federal rate

payments based on the FY 2000 relativeweights and the FY 2001 geographicadjustment factor. In making the comparison,we held the FY 2001 Federal rate portionconstant and set the other budget neutralityadjustment factor and the exceptionsreduction factor to 1.00. To achieve budgetneutrality for the changes in the nationalgeographic adjustment factor, we applied anincremental budget neutrality adjustment of0.99782 for FY 2001 to the previouscumulative FY 2000 adjustment of 1.00142,yielding a cumulative adjustment of 0.99924through FY 2001. For the Puerto Ricogeographic adjustment factor, we applied anincremental budget neutrality adjustment of1.00365 for FY 2001 to the previouscumulative FY 2000 adjustment of 1.00134,yielding a cumulative adjustment of 1.00499through FY 2001. We then comparedestimated aggregate Federal rate paymentsbased on the FY 2000 DRG relative weightsand the FY 2001 geographic adjustmentfactors to estimated aggregate Federal ratepayments based on the FY 2001 DRG relativeweights and the FY 2001 geographicadjustment factors. The incrementaladjustment for DRG classifications andchanges in relative weights would be 1.00009nationally and for Puerto Rico. Thecumulative adjustments for DRGclassifications and changes in relativeweights and for changes in the geographicadjustment factors through FY 2001 would be0.99933 nationally and 1.00508 for PuertoRico. The following table summarizes theadjustment factors for each fiscal year:

BUDGET NEUTRALITY ADJUSTMENT FOR DRG RECLASSIFICATIONS AND RECALIBRATION AND THE GEOGRAPHICADJUSTMENT FACTORS

Fiscal year

National Puerto Rico

Incremental adjustment

Cumulative

Incremental adjustment

CumulativeGeographicadjustment

factor

DRG reclas-sifications

and re-calibration

CombinedGeographicadjustment

factor

DRG reclas-sifications

and re-calibration

Combined

1992 .................................................................. .................... .................... .................... 1.00000 .................... .................... .................... ....................1993 .................................................................. .................... .................... 0.99800 0.99800 .................... .................... .................... ....................1994 .................................................................. .................... .................... 1.00531 1.00330 .................... .................... .................... ....................1995 .................................................................. .................... .................... 0.99980 1.00310 .................... .................... .................... ....................1996 .................................................................. .................... .................... 0.99940 1.00250 .................... .................... .................... ....................1997 .................................................................. .................... .................... 0.99873 1.00123 .................... .................... .................... ....................1998 .................................................................. .................... .................... 0.99892 1.00015 .................... .................... .................... 1.000001999 .................................................................. 0.99944 1.00335 1.00279 1.00294 0.99898 1.00335 1.00233 1.002332000 .................................................................. 0.99857 0.99991 0.99848 1.00142 0.99910 0.99991 0.99901 1.001342001 .................................................................. 0.99782 1.00009 0.99791 0.99933 1.00365 1.00009 1.00374 1.00508

The methodology used to determine therecalibration and geographic (DRG/GAF)budget neutrality adjustment factor is similarto that used in establishing budget neutralityadjustments under the prospective paymentsystem for operating costs. One difference isthat, under the operating prospectivepayment system, the budget neutralityadjustments for the effect of geographicreclassifications are determined separatelyfrom the effects of other changes in thehospital wage index and the DRG relativeweights. Under the capital prospectivepayment system, there is a single DRG/GAFbudget neutrality adjustment factor (thenational rate and the Puerto Rico rate are

determined separately) for changes in thegeographic adjustment factor (includinggeographic reclassification) and the DRGrelative weights. In addition, there is noadjustment for the effects that geographicreclassification has on the other paymentparameters, such as the payments for servinglow-income patients or the large urban add-on payments.

In addition to computing the DRG/GAFbudget neutrality adjustment factor, we usedthe model to simulate total payments underthe prospective payment system.

Additional payments under the exceptionsprocess are accounted for through areduction in the Federal and hospital-specific

rates. Therefore, we used the model tocalculate the exceptions reduction factor.This exceptions reduction factor ensures thataggregate payments under the capitalprospective payment system, includingexceptions payments, are projected to equalthe aggregate payments that would have beenmade under the capital prospective paymentsystem without an exceptions process. Sincechanges in the level of the payment rateschange the level of payments under theexceptions process, the exceptions reductionfactor must be determined through iteration.

In the August 30, 1991 final rule (56 FR43517), we indicated that we would publisheach year the estimated payment factors



generated by the model to determinepayments for the next 5 years. The tablebelow provides the actual factors for FYs1992 through 2000, the final factors for FY2001, and the estimated factors that would beapplicable through FY 2005. We caution thatthese are estimates for FYs 2002 and later,

and are subject to revisions resulting fromcontinued methodological refinements,receipt of additional data, and changes inpayment policy. We note that in makingthese projections, we have assumed that thecumulative national DRG/GAF budgetneutrality adjustment factor will remain at

0.99933 (1.00508 for Puerto Rico) for FY 2001and later because we do not have sufficientinformation to estimate the change that willoccur in the factor for years after FY 2001.

The projections are as follows:

Fiscal year Updatefactor

Exceptionsreduction

factor

Budget neu-trality factor

DRG/GAFadjustment

factor 1

Outlier ad-justment

factor

Federal rateadjustment

Federal rate(after outlierreduction)

1992 .......................................................................................... N/A 0.9813 0.9602 .................... .9497 .................... 415.591993 .......................................................................................... 6.07 .9756 .9162 .9980 .9496 .................... 417.291994 .......................................................................................... 3.04 .9485 .8947 1.0053 .9454 2 .9260 378.341995 .......................................................................................... 3.44 .9734 .8432 .9998 .9414 .................... 376.831996 .......................................................................................... 1.20 .9849 N/A .9994 .9536 3 .9972 461.961997 .......................................................................................... 0.70 .9358 N/A .9987 .9481 .................... 438.921998 .......................................................................................... 0.90 .9659 N/A .9989 .9382 4 .8222 371.511999 .......................................................................................... 0.10 .9783 N/A 1.0028 .9392 .................... 378.102000 .......................................................................................... 0.30 .9730 N/A .9985 .9402 .................... 377.032001 .......................................................................................... 0.90 .9785 N/A .9979 .9409 .................... 382.032002 .......................................................................................... 0.90 6 1.0000 N/A 5 1.0000 5 .9409 .................... 393.942003 .......................................................................................... 0.90 6 1.0000 N/A 1.0000 .9409 4 1.0255 407.642004 .......................................................................................... 0.80 6 1.0000 N/A 1.0000 .9409 .................... 410.902005 .......................................................................................... 0.90 6 1.0000 N/A 1.0000 .9409 .................... 414.60

1 Note: The incremental change over the previous year.2 Note: OBRA 1993 adjustment.3 Note: Adjustment for change in the transfer policy.4 Note: Balanced Budget Act of 1997 adjustment.5 Note: Future adjustments are, for purposes of this projection, assumed to remain at the same level.6 Note: We are unable to estimate exceptions payments for the year under the special exceptions provision (§ 412.348(g) of the regulations) because the regular

exceptions provision (§ 412.348(e)) expires.

Appendix C: Recommendation ofUpdate Factors for Operating CostRates of Payment for Inpatient HospitalServices

I. BackgroundSeveral provisions of the Act address the

setting of update factors for inpatient servicesfurnished in FY 2001 by hospitals subject tothe prospective payment system and byhospitals or units excluded from theprospective payment system. Section1886(b)(3)(B)(i)(XVI) of the Act sets the FY2001 percentage increase in the operatingcost standardized amounts equal to the rateof increase in the hospital market basketminus 1.1 percent for prospective paymenthospitals in all areas. Section1886(b)(3)(B)(iv) of the Act sets the FY 2001percentage increase in the hospital-specificrates applicable to sole community andMedicare-dependent, small rural hospitalsequal to the rate set forth in section1886(b)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. For Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals, thepercentage increase is the same update factoras all other hospitals subject to theprospective payment system, or the rate ofincrease in the market basket minus 1.1percentage points. Section 406 of Public Law106–113 amended section 1886(b)(3)(B)(i) ofthe Act to provide that, for sole communityhospitals, the rate of increase for FY 2001 isequal to the market basket percentageincrease.

Under section 1886(b)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act,the FY 2001 percentage increase in the rate-of-increase limits for hospitals and unitsexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem ranges from the percentage increasein the excluded hospital market basket lessa percentage between 0 and 2.5 percentagepoints, depending on the hospital’s or unit’scosts in relation to its limit for the most

recent cost reporting period for whichinformation is available, or 0 percentagepoint if costs do not exceed two-thirds of thelimit.

In accordance with section 1886(d)(3)(A) ofthe Act, we are updating the standardizedamounts, the hospital-specific rates, and therate-of-increase limits for hospitals and unitsexcluded from the prospective paymentsystem as provided in section 1886(b)(3)(B)of the Act. Based on the second quarter 2000forecast of the FY 2001 market basketincrease of 3.4 percent for hospitals and unitssubject to the prospective payment system,the update to the standardized amounts is 2.3percent (that is, the market basket rate ofincrease minus 1.1 percent percentagepoints) for hospitals in both large urban andother areas. The update to the hospital-specific rate applicable to Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals is also 2.3percent. The update to the hospital-specificrate applicable to sole community hospitalsis 3.4 percent. The update for hospitals andunits excluded from the prospective paymentsystem can range from the percentageincrease in the excluded hospital marketbasket (currently estimated at 3.4 percent)minus a percentage between 0 and 2.5percentage points, or 0 percentage point,resulting in an increase in the rate-of-increaselimit between 0.9 and 3.4 percent, or zeropercent (see section V of the Addendum ofthis final rule).

Section 1886(e)(4) of the Act requires thatthe Secretary, taking into consideration therecommendations of the Medicare PaymentAdvisory Commission (MedPAC),recommend update factors for each fiscalyear that take into account the amountsnecessary for the efficient and effectivedelivery of medically appropriate andnecessary care of high quality. Under section1886(e)(5) of the Act, we are required topublish the update factors recommended

under section 1886(e)(4) of the Act.Accordingly, we published the FY 2001update factors recommended by the Secretaryin Appendix D of the May 5, 2000 proposedrule (65 FR 26434). In its March 1, 2000report, MedPAC did not make a specificupdate recommendation for FY 2001payments for Medicare acute inpatienthospitals. However, in its June 1, 2000 report,which was issued after the May 5, 2000proposed rule, MedPAC recommended acombined operating and capital update forhospital inpatient prospective paymentsystem payments for FY 2001. We describethe basis of our FY 2001 updaterecommendation in Appendix D of the May5, 2000 proposed rule at 65 FR 26434. Ourresponses to the MedPAC recommendationsconcerning the update factors for FY 2001 arediscussed below in section II of thisAppendix.

II. Secretary’s RecommendationsUnder section 1886(e)(4) of the Act, in the

May 5, 2000 proposed rule, we recommendedthat an appropriate update factor for thestandardized amounts was 2.0 percentagepoints for hospitals located in large urbanand other areas. We also recommended anupdate of 2.0 percentage points to thehospital-specific rate for Medicare-dependent, small rural hospitals. In addition,we recommended an update of 3.1percentage points to the hospital-specific ratefor sole community hospitals. We believedthese recommended update factors wouldensure that Medicare acts as a prudentpurchaser and provide incentives to hospitalsfor increased efficiency, thereby contributingto the solvency of the Medicare Part A TrustFund.

Also in the proposed rule, werecommended that hospitals excluded fromthe prospective payment system receive anupdate of between 0.6 and 3.1 percentage



points, or zero percentage points. The updatefor excluded hospitals and units is equal tothe increase in the excluded hospitaloperating market basket less a percentagebetween 0 and 2.5 percentage points, or 0percentage points, depending on thehospital’s or unit’s costs in relation to itsrate-of-increase limit for the most recent costreporting period for which information isavailable. For the proposed rule, the marketbasket rate of increase for excluded hospitalsand units was forecast at 3.1 percent.

III. MedPAC Recommendations for Updatingthe Prospective Payment System OperatingStandardized Amounts

In its June 2000 Report to Congress,MedPAC presented a combined operatingand capital update for hospital inpatientprospective payment system payments for FY2001 and recommended that Congressimplement a single combined (operating andcapital) prospective payment system rate.With the end of the transition to fullyprospective capital payments ending with FY2001, both operating and capital prospectivesystem payments will be made usingstandard Federal rates adjusted by hospitalspecific payment variables. Currently, section1886(b)(3)(B)(i)(XVI) of the Act sets forth theFY 2001 percentage increase in theprospective payment system operating coststandardized amounts. The prospectivepayment system capital update is set underthe framework established by the Secretaryoutlined in § 412.308(c)(1).

For FY 2001, MedPAC’s update frameworksupports a combined operating and capitalupdate for hospital inpatient prospectivepayment system payments of 3.5 percent to4.0 percent (or between the increase in thecombined operating and capital marketbasket plus 0.6 percentage points and theincrease in the combined operating andcapital market basket plus 1.1 percentagepoints). MedPAC also notes that while thenumber of hospitals with negative inpatienthospital margins have increased in FY 1998(most likely as the result of theimplementation of Public Law 105–33),overall high inpatient Medicare marginsgenerally offset hospital losses on other linesof Medicare services. MedPAC continues toproject positive (greater than 11 percentagepoints) Medicare inpatient hospital marginsthrough FY 2002.

MedPAC’s FY 2001 combined operatingand capital update framework uses aweighted average of HCFA’s forecasts of theoperating (prospective payment system inputprice index) and capital (CIPI) marketbaskets. This combined market basket wasused to develop an estimate of the change inoverall operating and capital prices. MedPACcalculated a combined market basket forecastby weighting the operating market basketforecast by 0.92 and the capital market basketforecast by 0.08, since operating costs areestimated to represent 92 percent of totalhospital costs (capital costs are estimated torepresent the remaining 8 percent of totalhospital costs). MedPAC’s combined marketbasket for FY 2001 is estimated to increaseby 2.9 percent, based on HCFA’s March 2000forecasted operating market basket increaseof 3.1 percent and HCFA’s March 2000

forecasted capital market basket increase of0.9 percent.

Response: As we stated in the May 5, 2000proposed rule (65 FR 26317), we respondedto a similar comment in the July 30, 1999final rule (64 FR 41552), the July 31, 1998final rule (63 FR 41013), and the September1, 1995 final rule (60 FR 45816). In thoserules, we stated that our long-term goal wasto develop a single update framework foroperating and capital prospective payments.However, we have not yet developed such asingle framework as the actual operatingsystem update has been determined byCongress through FY 2002. In the meantime,we intend to maintain as much consistencyas possible with the current operatingframework in order to facilitate the eventualdevelopment of a unified framework. Wemaintain our goal of combining the updateframeworks at the end of the 10-year capitaltransition period (the end of FY 2001) andmay examine combining the paymentsystems post-transition. Because of thesimilarity of the update frameworks, webelieve that they could be combined withlittle difficulty.

The update framework analysis is a largelyempirical process carried out by HCFA thatquantifies changes in the hospitalproductivity, scientific and technologicaladvances, practice pattern changes, hospitalcase mix, the effects of reclassification onrecalibration, and forecast error correction.The update framework suggests an update forthe prospective payment system operatingstandardized amounts ranging from of 2.4percent (market basket minus 1 percent) to2.9 percent (market basket minus 0.5 percent)is supported by the analyses outlined below.

A. Productivity

Service level productivity is defined as theratio of total service output to full-timeequivalent employees (FTEs). While werecognize that productivity is a function ofmany variables (for example, labor, nonlabormaterial, and capital inputs), we use a laborproductivity measure since this updateframework applies to operating payment. Torecognize that we are apportioning the short-run output changes to the labor input and notconsidering the nonlabor inputs, we weightour productivity measure for operating costsby the share of direct labor services in themarket basket to determine the expectedeffect on cost per case.

Our recommendation for the serviceproductivity component is based onhistorical trends in productivity and totaloutput for both the hospital industry and thegeneral economy, and projected levels offuture hospital service output. MedPAC’spredecessor, the Prospective PaymentAssessment Commission (ProPAC), estimatedcumulative service productivity growth to be4.9 percent from 1985 through 1989, or 1.2percent annually. At the same time, ProPACestimated total output growth at 3.4 percentannually, implying a ratio of serviceproductivity growth to output growth of 0.35.

As stated in the proposed rule, since it wasnot possible at that time to develop aproductivity measure specific to Medicarepatients, we examined productivity (outputper hour) and output (gross domestic

product) for the economy. Depending on theexact time period, annual changes inproductivity range from 0.3 to 0.35 percentof the change in output (that is, a 1.0 percentincrease in output would be correlated witha 0.3 to 0.35 percent change in output perhour).

Under our framework, the recommendedupdate is based in part on expectedproductivity—that is, projected serviceoutput during the year, multiplied by thehistorical ratio of service productivity to totalservice output, multiplied by the share oflabor in total operating inputs, as calculatedin the hospital market basket. This methodestimates an expected labor productivityimprovement in the same proportion toexpected total service growth that hasoccurred in the past and assumes that, at aminimum, growth in FTEs changesproportionally to the growth in total serviceoutput. Thus, the recommendation allows forunit productivity to be smaller than thehistorical averages in years that outputgrowth is relatively low and larger in yearsthat output growth is higher than thehistorical averages. Based on the aboveestimates from both the hospital industry andthe economy, we have chosen to employ therange of ratios of productivity change tooutput change of 0.30 to 0.35.

The expected change in total hospitalservice output is the product of projectedgrowth in total admissions (adjusted foroutpatient usage), projected real case-mixgrowth, expected quality-enhancing intensitygrowth, and net of expected decline inintensity due to reduction of cost-ineffectivepractice. Case-mix growth and intensitynumbers for Medicare are used as proxies forthose of the total hospital, since case-mixincreases (used in the intensity measure aswell) are unavailable for non-Medicarepatients. Thus, expected output growth issimply the sum of the expected change inintensity (0.0 percent), projected admissionschange (1.6 percent for FY 2001), andprojected real case-mix growth (0.5 percent),or 2.1 percent. The share of direct laborservices in the market basket (consisting ofwages, salaries, and employee benefits) is61.4 percent.

Multiplying the expected change in totalhospital service output (2.1 percent) by theratio of historical service productivity changeto total service growth of 0.30 to 0.35 and bythe direct labor share percentage 61.4,provides our productivity standard of -0.5 to-0.4 percent. In past years, MedPAC made anadjustment for productivity improvement toreflect the level of improvement in theproduction of health care services, withoutaffecting the quality of those services.Typically, MedPAC made a downwardadjustment in their framework to reflectexpected improvements in hospitalproductivity. In their FY 2001 combinedupdate framework, MedPAC did not make anadjustment for productivity. Instead,MedPAC believes that the costs associatedwith scientific and technological advancesshould be financed partially throughimprovements in hospital productivity. As aresult, MedPAC offset its adjustment forscientific and technological advances by afixed standard of expected productivity



growth of 0.5 percent for FY 2001. Ourproductivity adjustment of -0.5 to -0.4percent is within the range of MedPAC’sfixed standard of expected productivitygrowth of 0.5 percent used to offset itsscientific and technological advancesadjustment for FY 2001.

B. Intensity

We base our intensity standard on thecombined effect of three separate factors:changes in the use of quality enhancingservices, changes in the use of services dueto shifts in within-DRG severity, and changesin the use of services due to reductions ofcost-ineffective practices. For FY 2001, werecommended an adjustment of 0.0 percent.The basis of this recommendation isdiscussed below. We have no empiricalevidence that accurately gauges the level ofquality-enhancing technology changes. Astudy published in the Winter 1992 issue ofthe Health Care Financing Review,‘‘Contributions of case mix and intensitychange to hospital cost increases’’ (pp. 151–163), suggests that one-third of the intensitychange is attributable to high-costtechnology. The balance was unexplainedbut the authors speculated that it isattributable to fixed costs in service delivery.

Typically, a specific new technologyincreases cost in some uses and decreasescost in others. Concurrently, health status isimproved in some situations while in othersituations it may be unaffected or evenworsened using the same technology. It isdifficult to separate out the relativesignificance of each of the cost-increasingeffects for individual technologies and newtechnologies.

Other things being equal, per-dischargefixed costs tend to fluctuate in inverseproportion to changes in volume. Fixed costsexist whether patients are treated or not. Ifvolume is declining, per-discharge fixedcosts will rise, but the reverse is true ifvolume is increasing.

Following methods developed by HCFA’sOffice of the Actuary for deriving hospitaloutput estimates from total hospital charges,we have developed Medicare-specificintensity measures based on a 5-year averageusing FYs 1995 through 1999 MedPARbilling data. Case-mix constant intensity iscalculated as the change in total Medicarecharges per discharge adjusted for changes inthe average charge per unit of service asmeasured by the CPI for hospital and relatedservices and changes in real case-mix. Thus,in order to measure changes in intensity, onemust measure changes in real case-mix.

For FYs 1995 through 1999, observed case-mix index change ranged from a low of ¥0.3percent to a high of 1.7 percent, with a 5-yearaverage change of 0.6 percent. Based onevidence from past studies of case-mixchange, we estimate that real case-mixchange fluctuates between 1.0 and 1.4percent and the observed values generallyfall in this range, although some years thefigures fall outside this range. The averagepercentage change in charge per dischargewas 3.6 percent and the average annualchange in the CPI for hospital and relatedservices was 4.1 percent. Dividing the changein charge per discharge by the quantity of the

real case-mix index change and the CPI forhospital and related services yields anaverage annual change in intensity of ¥1.9percent. Assuming the technology/fixed costratio still holds (.33), technology wouldaccount for a ¥0.6 percent annual declinewhile fixed costs would account for a ¥1.3percent annual decline. The decline in fixedcosts per discharge makes intuitive sense asvolume, measured by total discharges, hasincreased during the period. In the past, wehave not recommended a negative intensityadjustment. Although we did not recommenda negative adjustment for FY 2001, wereflected the possible range that such anegative adjustment could span, based on ouranalysis. Accordingly, for FY 2001, werecommended an intensity adjustmentbetween 0 percent and ¥0.6 percent.

MedPAC does not make an adjustment forintensity per se, but its combined updaterecommendation for FY 2001 includes twocategories that we consider to be comparablewith our intensity recommendation. MedPACis recommending a 0.0 to 0.5 percent updatefor scientific and technological advances toaccount for anticipated uses of emergingtechnologies that enhance the quality ofhospital services, but increase costs ofhospital care. The Commission recognized anallowance for science and technologicaladvances of 0.5 percent to 1.0 percent.However, with their productivity offset of 0.5percent, MedPAC’s combined FY 2001adjustment for science and technologicaladvances is 0.0 percent to 0.5 percent.

MedPAC’s recommendation also takes intoaccount the increasingly apparent trend ofsome acute care providers to shift care to apost acute care facility. While this can occurfor many reasons and the shifting of costsmay maintain or improve quality of care forMedicare beneficiaries, it leads to aredistribution of payments and reduces theresources available for acute care providers topay for services to other Medicarebeneficiaries. In the past two years, MedPACrecommended a negative adjustment for site-of-care substitution or unbundling of thepayment unit. However, in light of thefinancial pressures in the hospital industryduring FYs 1998–1999 since theimplementation of Public Law 105–33,MedPAC recommends a 0.0 percentadjustment for site-of-care substitution for FY2001. We agree with MedPAC that the site-of-care substitution effect is real and that itis accounted for by our intensityrecommendation.

C. Change in Case-Mix

Our analysis takes into account projectedchanges in case-mix, adjusted for changesattributable to improved coding practices.For our FY 2001 update recommendation, weprojected a 0.5 percent increase in the case-mix index. We defined real case-mix asactual changes in the mix (and resourcerequirements) of Medicare patients asopposed to changes in coding behavior thatresults in assignment of cases to higherweighted DRGs, but do not reflect greaterresource requirements. Unlike in past years,where we differentiated between ‘‘real’’ case-mix increase and increases attributable tochanges in coding behavior, we do not feel

changes in coding behavior will impact theoverall case-mix in FY 2001. As such, for FY2001, we estimate that real case-mix is equalto projected change in case-mix. Thus, werecommended a 0.0 adjustment for case-mix.

MedPAC’s analysis indicates that codingchange has reduced case-mix index growth.In the past, MedPAC has recommended anegative adjustment when DRG codingchanges has led to case-mix index growth.However, MedPAC now believes that it isappropriate to include a positive adjustmentfor DRG coding change in the FY 2001update and recommends a combinedadjustment of 0.5 percent.

MedPAC also makes an adjustment forwithin DRG severity. In past years, MedPAChas included an adjustment for increasedcase complexity not captured by the DRGclassification system. The Commissionrecognizes that as the DRG system adjusts, itshould account for more of the variation incosts by DRG assignment, leaving lesswithin-DRG variation in case complexity andcostliness. Therefore, MedPAC recommendeda combined adjustment of 0.0 for FY 2001.As a result, for FY 2001, MedPACrecommends a total combined case-mixadjustment of 0.5 percent.

D. Effect of FY 1999 DRG Reclassificationand Recalibration

We estimate that DRG reclassification andrecalibration for FY 1999 resulted in a 0.0percent change in the case-mix index whencompared with the case-mix index thatwould have resulted if we had not made thereclassification and recalibration changes tothe GROUPER.

E. Forecast Error Correction

We make a forecast error correction if theactual market basket changes differ from theforecasted market basket by 0.25 percentagepoints or more. There is a 2-year lag betweenthe forecast and the measurement of forecasterror. Our proposed update framework for FY2001 did not reflect a forecast errorcorrection because, for FY 1999, there wasless than a 0.25 percentage point differencebetween the actual market basket and theforecasted market basket.

MedPAC also made a recommendation inits FY 2001 combined update framework toadjust for any error in the market basketforecasts used to set FY 1999 payment rates.

MedPAC recommended a combinedadjustment for FY 1999 forecast errorcorrection of 0.1 percent. However, theynoted that this forecast error adjustment is aresult of the difference between theforecasted FY 1999 operating market basketof 2.4 percent and the actual FY 1999operating market basket increase of 2.5percent. The FY 1999 capital market basketforecast was equal to the actual observedincrease of 0.7 percent for capital costs.Therefore, we have included MedPAC’sentire 0.1 percent adjustment for FY 1999forecast error correction in the comparison ofMedPAC and HCFA’s updaterecommendations for FY 2001 shown belowin Table 1.

F. One Time Factors

MedPAC includes an adjustment for one-time factors in its update framework to



account for significant costs incurred byhospitals for unusual nonrecurring events.While MedPAC’s update framework has notexplicitly considered such costs in the past,the Commission believes Medicare shouldaid hospitals when incurring systematic andsubstantial one-time costs will improve carefor Medicare beneficiaries. For its FY 2001update recommendation, MedPAC

considered the costs of year 2000improvements and the costs of major newregulatory requirements. The Commissiondid not recommend any additional allowancefor these costs for FY 2001. Accordingly,MedPAC recommended a 0.0 percentcombined adjustment for one-time factors intheir update framework for FY 2001.

HCFA’s update framework does notinclude an adjustment for one-time factors.As we mentioned in last year’s proposedrule, higher input prices that hospitals incurto convert computer systems to be complianton January 1, 2000, were accounted forthrough the market basket percentageincrease.

TABLE 1.—COMPARISON OF FY 2001 UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS

HCFA MedPAC

Market basket .................................................................................................................................. MB MB1

Policy Adjustment Factors

Productivity ...................................................................................................................................... ¥0.5 to ¥0.4 (2)Site-Of-Service Substitution ............................................................................................................. (3) 0.0Intensity ............................................................................................................................................ 0.0 to ¥0.6Science & Technology ..................................................................................................................... 0.0 to 0.5Practice Patterns ............................................................................................................................. (4)Real Within DRG Change ............................................................................................................... (5)

Subtotal ............................................................................................................................. ¥0.5 to ¥1.0 0.0 to 0.5

Case-Mix Adjustment Factors

Projected Case-Mix Change ............................................................................................................ ¥0.5Real Across DRG Change .............................................................................................................. 0.5 0.5Real Within DRG Change ............................................................................................................... (3) 0.0

Subtotal ............................................................................................................................. 0.0 0.5

Effect of FY 1999 Reclassification and Recalibration ..................................................................... 0.0Forecast Error Correction ................................................................................................................ 0.0 0.1

Total Recommendation Update ................................................................................................ MB ¥0.5 to MB ¥1.0 MB1 ∂ 0.6 to MB1

+1.1

1 Used HCFA’s March 2000 operating market basket forecast in its combined update recommendation.2 Included in MedPAC’s Science and Technology Adjustment.3 Included in HHS’ Intensity Factor.4 Included in MedPAC’s Productivity Measure in its Science and Technology Adjustment.5 Included in MedPAC’s Case-Mix Adjustment.

MedPAC’s combined updaterecommendation of between 3.5 percent and4.0 percent for FY 2001 operating and capitalpayments is higher than the current lawamount as set forth by Public Law 105–33and the amount in the proposed rule. Whilethe above analysis would support arecommendation that the update be betweenthan the operating market basket minus 0.5percentage points and the operating marketbasket minus 1.0 percentage points,consistent with current law werecommended an update of market basketincrease minus 1.1 percentage points (or 2.3percent). We note that this approximates thelower bound of the range suggested by ourframework when accounting for a negativeintensity change.

IV. Secretary’s Final Recommendations forUpdating the Prospective Payment SystemStandardized Amounts

In recommending an update, the Secretarytakes into account the factors in the updateframework, as well as other factors such asthe recommendations of MedPAC, the long-term solvency of the Medicare Trust Funds,and the capacity of the hospital industry tocontinually provide access to high-quality

care to Medicare beneficiaries throughadequate reimbursement to health careproviders.

To ensure that beneficiaries continue tohave access to high-quality care and to allowmore time to assess the full impact of PublicLaw 105–33 and Public Law 106–113, theSecretary recommends an update of 3.4percent (full market basket) for FY 2001. Wenote that this recommendation requires achange in law. The FY 2001 President’sBudget Mid-Session Review, released on June26, 2000, included a proposal to provide forthe full market basket update for FY 2001.We will continue to evaluate our currentframework to ensure that the recommendedupdate appropriately reflects current trendsin health care delivery and that Medicare actsas a prudent purchaser providing incentivesto hospitals for increased efficiency, therebycontributing to the solvency of the MedicarePart A Trust Fund.

We received one comment concerning ourproposed update recommendation.

Comment: One commenter stated that thecontinual update and routine replacement ofprocedures with more sophisticated, highercost procedures is not picked up within theHCFA pricing system, particularly the use of

pharmaceuticals and other scientific andtechnological advances. The commenterargued that the market basket minus 1.1percent update for FY 2001 does notrecognize the true impact of these factors onhospital-based payments, noting that fromFYs 1998 through 2000 the cumulativemarket basket rose significantly higher thanthe Medicare operating prospective paymentsystem updates, which were mandated byPublic Law 105–33.

Response: By design, the market basketcaptures only the pure price change of inputssuch as labor, materials, and capital that areused to produce a constant quantity andquality of care. This is done using priceproxies that reflect the prices of the majorinputs hospitals utilize in providing care. Forpharmaceuticals, the price proxy used is theProducer Price Index (PPI) forpharmaceutical preparations produced byBureau of Labor Statistics. This price proxycaptures the price change of ‘new’pharmaceuticals after they are introducedand the price changes between new drugsthat replace existing drugs or generic drugsthat replace brand-name drugs.

The market basket appropriately does notrecognize the introduction or the increased



utilization of ‘new’ scientific andtechnological advances. Instead, thesefactors, including the increased use of ‘new’pharmaceutical drugs, would be reflected inthe intensity adjustment of the updateframework. Our intensity standard is partly

based on changes in the use of qualityenhancing services or technology changes(along with changes in case-mix). HCFA’supdate recommendation uses this adjustmentto account for the additional costs ofadopting and utilizing new advances that an

efficient provider would face in providing ahigh quality of patient care.



Tuesday,

August 1, 2000

Part III

Department ofCommerceNational Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration

50 CFR Part 635Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; PelagicLongline Management; Final Rule





50 CFR Part 635

[Docket No. 991210332-0212-02; I.D.110499B]

RIN 0648–AM79

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;Pelagic Longline Management

AGENCY: National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS), National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA),Commerce.ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues final regulationsto prohibit pelagic longline fishing atcertain times and in certain areas withinthe Exclusive Economic Zone of theAtlantic Ocean off the coast of theSoutheastern United States and in theGulf of Mexico, and to prohibit the useof live bait when deploying pelagiclongline gear in the Gulf of Mexico. Thisaction is necessary to reduce bycatchand incidental catch of overfished andprotected species by pelagic longlinefishermen who target highly migratoryspecies (HMS).DATES: This final rule is effectiveSeptember 1, 2000.ADDRESSES: For copies of the FinalSupplemental Environmental ImpactStatement/Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis(FSEIS/RIR/FRFA), contact SteveMeyers at 301–713–2347 or write toRebecca Lent, Chief, HMS Division (SF/1), Office of Sustainable Fisheries,NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, SilverSpring, MD 20910.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Steve Meyers at 301–713–2347, fax 301–713–1917, [email protected]; or Buck Sutterat 727–570–5447, fax 727–570–5364, e-mail [email protected] INFORMATION: TheAtlantic swordfish and tuna fisheriesare managed under the authority of theMagnuson-Stevens FisheryConservation and Management Act(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and theAtlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA).The Fishery Management Plan forAtlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks(HMS FMP) is implemented byregulations at 50 CFR part 635.

Pelagic Longline FisheryPelagic longline gear is the dominant

commercial fishing gear used by U.S.fishermen in the Atlantic Ocean totarget highly migratory species. The gear

consists of a mainline, often many milesin length, suspended in the watercolumn by floats and from which baitedhooks are attached on leaders(gangions). Though not completelyselective, longline gear can be modified(e.g., gear configuration, hook depth,timing of sets) to target preferentiallyyellowfin tuna, bigeye tuna, orswordfish.

Observer data and vessel logbooksindicate that pelagic longline fishing forAtlantic swordfish and tunas results incatch of non-target finfish species suchas bluefin tuna, billfish, and undersizedswordfish, and of protected species,including threatened and endangeredsea turtles. Also, this fishing gearincidentally hooks marine mammalsand sea birds during tuna and swordfishoperations. The bycatch of animals thatare hooked but not retained due toeconomic or regulatory factorscontributes to overall fishing mortality.Such bycatch mortality maysignificantly impair rebuilding ofoverfished finfish stocks or the recoveryof protected species.

Proposed Bycatch Reduction StrategyAtlantic blue marlin, white marlin,

sailfish, bluefin tuna, and swordfish areoverfished. In the HMS FMP andAmendment 1 to the Atlantic BillfishFMP (Billfish FMP Amendment), NMFSadopted a strategy for rebuilding thesestocks through international cooperationat the International Commission for theConservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT).This strategy primarily involvesreducing fishing mortality through thenegotiation of country-specific catchquotas according to rebuildingschedules. However, the contribution ofbycatch to total fishing mortality andthe fact that ICCAT catch quotas forsome species require that countriesaccount for dead discards must beconsidered in the HMS fisheries. Theswordfish rebuilding plan that wasadopted by ICCAT at its 1999 meetingprovides added incentive for the UnitedStates to reduce swordfish discards.

In addition to ICCAT stock rebuildingefforts, several other applicable lawsrequire that NMFS address bycatchissues in the HMS fisheries. Theseinclude the Magnuson-Stevens Act, theMarine Mammal Protection Act(MMPA), and the Endangered SpeciesAct (ESA). Magnuson-Stevens Actnational standard 9 for fisherymanagement plans requires U.S. actionto minimize bycatch and bycatchmortality to the extent practicable.

Under the MMPA, the Atlanticpelagic longline fishery has been listedas a Category I fishery due to thefrequency of incidental mortality and

serious injury to marine mammals. TheAtlantic Offshore Cetacean TakeReduction Team was formed in May1996 to address protected speciesbycatch in the Atlantic pelagic fisheries.A take reduction plan, submitted toNMFS in November, 1996, thatcontained measures to address thebycatch of strategic stocks of marinemammals, noted that additionalreductions in takes of marine mammalscould occur with closures of certainfishing areas during times of highinteraction rates.

Finally, under the ESA, NMFS isrequired to address fishery-related takeof sea turtles that are consideredthreatened or endangered. Althoughmost turtles are released alive, NMFSremains concerned about seriousinjuries of turtles hooked on pelagiclongline gear. To the extent that turtleinteractions occur at higher rates incertain fishing areas at particular times,time-area closures for pelagic longlinefishing could affect turtle takes. An areaclosure to address swordfish discardscould also help reduce sea turtleinteractions if these animals tend tooccur in the same ocean areas at thesame time. Conversely, if sea turtleinteractions are relatively higher inareas that remain open, fishing effortdisplaced from areas closed to protectjuvenile swordfish could lead toincreased turtle takes.

In the final HMS FMP and BillfishFMP Amendment, NMFS stated that acomprehensive approach to time-areaclosures would be undertaken as part ofa bycatch reduction strategy after furtheranalysis of the data and consultationwith the HMS and Billfish AdvisoryPanels (APs). NMFS held a combinedmeeting of the HMS and Billfish APs onJune 10–11, 1999, to discuss possiblealternatives for a proposed rule underthe framework provisions of the HMSFMP. The AP members were generallysupportive of the time-area managementstrategy, provided several comments ontemporal and/or spatial componentsthat NMFS should consider further inits analyses, and requested that NMFSdevelop a written document outliningall analytical methods and results of thetime-area evaluation. The APs’comments and suggestions wereincluded in the development of a draftTechnical Memorandum, which wasmade available to the public onNovember 2, 1999 (64 FR 59162).

Subsequent to the release of theTechnical Memorandum, NMFSconsidered three alternative actions toreduce bycatch and/or bycatch mortalityin the Atlantic HMS pelagic longlinefishery: status quo, gear modificationsthat would decrease hook-ups and/or



increase survival of bycatch species, andthe prohibition of longline fishing inareas where rates of bycatch orincidental catch are higher. NMFSconsidered gear modifications beyondthose examined previously duringdevelopment of the HMS FMP. NMFSalso considered a broad range ofclosures, both in terms of area and time.A proposed rule was publishedDecember 15, 1999 (64 FR 69982), forwhich alternatives were identified andanalyzed in a draft SupplementalEnvironmental Impact Statement (64 FR73550, December 30, 1999). Theproposed rule included closed areas forpelagic longline gear in the western Gulfof Mexico and off the southeast coast ofthe United States.

During the comment period on theproposed rule, NMFS received commenton many issues related to the proposedtime/area closures. In particular,commenters noted that the proposedclosure in the western Gulf of Mexicowould not adequately address juvenileswordfish bycatch in the DeSoto Canyonarea of the eastern portion of the Gulf.Additionally, commenters noted thesignificant economic impacts associatedwith large scale area closures in thatvessel operators and shoreside supportservices would need considerable timefor adjustment and relocation. Giventhese comments, NMFS analyzed thepotential impacts of an additionalclosed area in the DeSoto Canyon.Subsequently, NMFS publishedsupplementary information regardingthe potential impacts of closing theDeSoto Canyon Area together with arevised summary of the IRFA preparedfor the proposed rule (65 FR 24440,April 26, 2000). The comment period forthe proposed rule was reopened throughMay 12, 2000, and NMFS specificallyrequested comments on the extent towhich delayed effectiveness couldmitigate the economic impacts of areaclosures.

ESA ConsultationOn November 19, 1999, NMFS

reinitiated consultation under section 7of the ESA based on preliminary reportsthat observed incidental take ofloggerhead sea turtles by the Atlanticpelagic longline fishery during 1999 hadexceeded levels anticipated in theIncidental Take Statement (ITS)previously issued for the HMS FMP.Additionally, the consultation includedthe pelagic longline managementrulemaking that was in preparation, asit was recognized that the time/areaclosures, if implemented, could affectthe overall interaction rates with seaturtles. In a Biological Opinion issuedon June 30, 2000 (BO), NMFS concluded

that operation of the pelagic longlinefishery was likely to jeopardize thecontinued existence of loggerhead andleatherback sea turtles. The BOidentified the Reasonable and PrudentAlternatives (RPAs) necessary to avoidjeopardy and listed the Reasonable andPrudent Measures (RPMs) and Termsand Conditions (TCs) necessary toauthorize continued take as part of arevised ITS. While the implications ofthe BO are discussed in this final rule,NMFS will undertake additionalrulemaking and non-regulatory actionsas required to implement the additionalmanagement measures required underthe BO.

Response to CommentsNMFS received several hundred

comments and several thousand formletters during the 2 comment periods, 13public hearings, and 2 joint AP meetingsof this rulemaking. Following aresummaries of the comments togetherwith NMFS’ responses.

GeneralComment 1: There is no conservation

benefit from the proposed closuresexcept for small swordfish; therefore,the proposed time/area closures willprobably have an imperceptible effecton rebuilding overfished HMS.

Response: NMFS disagrees.Depending on the amount ofredistribution of effort under theproposed closed areas, other species,such as sailfish and large coastal sharks,may benefit from these closures. Underthe no-effort redistribution model,billfish discards are reduced by 19 to 43percent, although, as discussed in theFSEIS, the actual benefit of these time/area closures is likely somewherebetween the extremes predicted by theeffort redistribution models. Further,prohibiting the use of live bait willprovide a 10- to 46-percent reduction inbillfish discards in the Gulf of Mexico.National standard 9 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that FMPs reducebycatch to the extent practicable.Although it was not a stated objective ofthe final rule to rebuild overfishedstocks through time/area closures orgear modifications, some benefit torebuilding may also be experienced tothe degree that mortality rates will bereduced for juveniles, pre-adults, andreproductive fish. Also, to the extentthat the United States can use thedomestic bycatch reduction program,including time/area closures and gearmodifications, to convince other ICCATmember nations that bycatch should beminimized, these actions may have asignificant impact on Atlantic-widerebuilding of overfished HMS stocks.

Comment 2: NMFS is already past thedeadline for a rebuilding program foroverfished HMS that includes bycatchreduction measures.

Response: NMFS disagrees. The HMSFMP and the Billfish FMP Amendmentinclude rebuilding plans that meetMagnuson-Stevens Act guidelines. Theswordfish rebuilding program recentlyadopted by ICCAT is based in large parton the rebuilding plan outlined in theHMS FMP. Similarly, the rebuildingplans for blue and white marlinemphasize the importance ofinternational efforts to reduce bycatchand bycatch mortality. NMFSimplemented bycatch reductionmeasures in the HMS FMP, includinglimited access for swordfish and sharkfisheries, time/area closure for pelagiclongline gear to reduce bluefin tunadead discards, limiting the length ofmainline for longline fishermen, andother measures summarized in the HMSFMP. The Billfish FMP Amendmentalso outlined a bycatch reductionstrategy. NMFS expects that additionalmeasures will continue to beimplemented for all HMS fisheries,including educational workshops thatshare results of recent research on gearmodifications. Finally, as a result of thejeopardy finding in the BO, NMFS willinitiate implementation of therequirements of the BO via additionalrulemaking and other non-regulatorymeans.

Comment 3: NMFS should extend theVMS implementation deadline past June1, 2000.

Response: NMFS agrees. On April 19,2000 (65 FR 20918), NMFS extended theeffective date until September 1, 2000.This will provide adequate time (2months) to ensure that all systems arefully functional prior to theimplementation of the time/areaclosures. Also, implementation of themeasures in the BO may require a time/area closure and/or gear settingrestrictions to be enforced by VMS.

Comment 4: As the swordfish stockscontinue to rebuild, the United Statesmay need more U.S. boats to harvest theswordfish quota.

Response: NMFS disagrees. The finalregulations implementing the HMS FMP(May 28, 1999; 64 FR 29090), NMFSestablished a limited access program forAtlantic swordfish, Atlantic shark, andthe pelagic longline sector of theAtlantic tuna fisheries. A description ofthe qualifying requirements for adirected or incidental limited accesspermit is contained in Chapter 4 of theHMS FMP. Using a multi-tiered processbased on participation, approximately450 limited access swordfish permits(directed and incidental) were awarded.



Subsequent examination of fishingactivity by these vessels in preparationof the proposed and final rule indicatesthat a significant portion did not reportany HMS landings in either 1997 (331vessels reported HMS landings) or 1998(208 vessels reported HMS landings).Currently, the North Atlantic swordfishstock is estimated to be at 65 percent ofthe level needed to support maximumsustainable yield (MSY). When the stockattains the level consistent with MSY, itis likely that the number of U.S.-flaggedvessels with directed or incidentalswordfish permits will be sufficient tohandle any potential increase in theU.S. swordfish quota.

Comment 5: NMFS should beconcerned about small sources ofmortality that may exacerbateoverfishing and slow rebuilding.

Response: NMFS agrees and isconcerned about all sources of mortalityon HMS stocks. NMFS is committed towork through available internationalfora to rebuild overfished HMS stocks,even when U.S. fishing is responsiblefor only a small source of the totalAtlantic-wide mortality. The rebuildingplans provided in the Billfish FMPAmendment are indicative of thiscommitment. Further, the Agency isrequired by the Magnuson-Stevens Actto take appropriate conservation actions,while considering the social andeconomic impacts on fishermen andfishing communities, and as such mustconsider management actions that meetthe national standard guidelines.

Comment 6: NMFS should increaseoutreach efforts to inform the public ofthe need for management of HMSresources.

Response: NMFS agrees but iscurrently restricted from increasingoutreach efforts by competing demandsfor funding (e.g., funds for observers,science). Note that the NMFS HighlyMigratory Species Management Divisionposts current events and usefuldocuments on the websitewww.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hmspg.html.NMFS also produces informationalbrochures on current fishing regulationsand mailouts, and NMFS uses a faxnetwork for distribution of information.NMFS scientists are also participating inperiodic outreach programs to shareinformation on life history of billfish,sharks and tunas, as well as sharinginformation on methods that willenhance survival of released fish. Aninformation hotline has also beenestablished that summarizes currentfisheries regulations as they apply toHMS. The hotline can be accessed bycalling toll-free at 1–800–894–5528.Additional outreach efforts will be

implemented as funding becomesavailable.

Comment 7: The proposed closedareas will result in an increase inswordfish imports into the UnitedStates; this would deny U.S. seafoodconsumers access to fresh, quality-controlled fish.

Response: NMFS does not anticipatethat the U.S. fleet will be unable to meetits quota as a result of this final rule.Therefore, it is unlikely that importswill increase as a result of closed areas,although imports may increase for otherunrelated reasons. NMFS does regulatethe swordfish market other than toprohibit the import of undersizedAtlantic swordfish into the U.S., whichis monitored through the Certificate ofEligibility program. NMFS does notanticipate that this rule would affect theavailability of high-quality, inspectedseafood products provided to citizens ofthe United States by U.S. commercialfishermen. Imports of fishery productsinto the United States are also subject tothe same hazard analysis and criticalcontrol point (HACCP) guidelines as aredomestic landings.

Comment 8: The proposed closedareas are not equitable for constituentsin different states.

Response: As required by nationalstandard 2 of the Magnuson-StevensAct, NMFS utilized the best availablescientific information to develop theproposed rule and the final action.NMFS used logbooks, observerprograms, and various scientific studiesto identify distributional patterns ofseasonal abundance, by species, andareas of overlap between various HMS,protected and endangered species, asdefined by concentrations of bycatchand incidental catch from pelagiclongline gear in the U.S. EEZ. Therefore,in large part, the biology of the speciesdictated the locations of the closures. Inthe selection of the final actions,international obligations and thenational standards were considered,including the issue of equity, asrequired by national standard 4. Whilethe final closed areas may have largerimpacts on fishermen who fish in thoseareas, such impacts are not inconsistentwith national standard 4.

Comment 9: NMFS is ignoring seabird bycatch by the recreationalfishermen who troll for HMS.

Response: NMFS disagrees that it isignoring sea bird bycatch. NMFS has nodata indicating that sea birds are caughtand discarded in the recreational fisheryfor HMS. NMFS is currentlyimplementing a logbook and a voluntaryobserver program for charter/headboatsinvolved with HMS fisheries. Thisprogram will provide additional

information on recreational fishing,including any possible interactions withseabirds or other protected orendangered species. If the data collectedindicate that a sea bird bycatch problemexists in the U.S. recreational trollfisheries, NMFS will take appropriateaction.

Comment 10: NMFS should quantifybycatch and bycatch mortality in therecreational fishery.

Response: NMFS agrees thatquantifying bycatch and bycatchmortality in recreational fisheries isimportant and has collected data used toquantify bycatch of large pelagics in therecreational fishery. Such data arereported in the U.S. National Reportprepared each year by NMFS forsubmission to ICCAT. The Billfish FMPAmendment established a catch-and-release fishery management program forthe recreational Atlantic billfish fishery;therefore, all billfish released alive,regardless of size, by recreationalanglers are not considered as bycatch.However, the mortality associated withthe capture-and-release event is animportant component to quantify forpopulation assessment. NMFS currentlycollects data on the number of billfishretained and released at selectedtournaments. NMFS has funded studiesto quantify the bycatch mortality inbluefin tuna and billfish recreationalfisheries, and NMFS scientists haverecently reported on the use of circlehooks to reduce release mortality for therecreational billfish fishery. NMFSencourages fishermen to handle andrelease HMS in a manner thatmaximizes their chances of survival.

Comment 11: NMFS should re-establish the Second Harvest Programfor swordfish whereby undersizedswordfish are fed to the hungry insteadof being discarded as bycatch.

Response: The specific regulations forthe swordfish donation program wereeliminated when the HMS regulationswere consolidated in implementing thefinal HMS FMP and Billfish FMPAmendment (May 29, 1999; 64 FR29090). During the consolidationprocess, the swordfish donationprogram regulations were evaluatedunder the President’s RegulatoryReinvention Initiative. Given the lowlevel of participation in the program atthe time and the anticipated reductionin dead discards of undersizedswordfish as the U.S. moved to adoptthe alternative minimum size, it wasdetermined that potential scale ofoperations did not require extensiveregulatory text. However, under thecurrent consolidated regulations, afishermen could apply for an ExemptedFishing Permit (EFP) to authorize the



donation of certain fish that could nototherwise be retained (e.g., swordfish inexcess of the bycatch limits in effect forthe particular vessel). Thus, theregulations still provide a mechanismfor a donation program.

Comment 12: NMFS regulations forcepelagic longline fishermen to discardswordfish, thus increasing bycatch inthis fishery. NMFS should have a higherminimum size with a tolerance forundersized fish to reduce bycatch.

Response: Swordfish caught belowthe minimum size are regulatorydiscards and, as such, are consideredbycatch. The minimum size limit wasestablished to create an incentive forfishermen to avoid areas of undersizedswordfish, though this was found to beless successful than anticipated. NMFSdiscontinued the use of a higherminimum size with a 15-percenttolerance for smaller fish because ofconcerns about the difficulty inenforcing such a measure. NMFSproposed a lower minimum size with notolerance, and industry participantslargely supported this decrease, statingthat most of the fish landed under thetolerance provisions were just under thehigher minimum size. In the Spring of1999, the ICCAT Advisory Committeerecommended that NMFS evaluate theefficacy of the swordfish minimum sizelimit and reconsider eliminating thatsize limit if warranted. Pending theoutcome of that evaluation, ICCAT isexpressly considering discards in theswordfish catch allocation scheme.Under the 1999 ICCATrecommendation, total North Atlanticdiscards of undersized swordfish aresubject to an allowance of 400 mtAtlantic-wide for the 2000 fishingseason; the U.S. receives 80 percent ofthis dead discard allowance (320 mt).The United States is obligated byinternational agreement to addressswordfish discards. The time/areaclosures defined in the final rule willsignificantly reduce swordfish discardsby U.S. pelagic longline vessels.Although some small swordfish willstill be encountered under time/areamanagement, the overall proportion ofthe catch that is discarded will bereduced and may, in fact, provide anopportunity to consider alternatives tominimum sizes in the internationalmanagement of Atlantic swordfish.

Comment 13: The proposed closedareas are expected to increase the catchof mako, thresher, and blue sharks. Thepelagic shark stocks will not be able towithstand the possible increase inpelagic shark mortality (landings anddiscards) associated with pelagiclongline effort redistribution.

Response: Although the status of thepelagic sharks stock is currentlydesignated as unknown, NMFSdisagrees that the final rule will have asignificant adverse impact on pelagicshark mortality. However, this does notmean that NMFS is not concerned aboutthe status of these stocks. In fact, theHMS FMP established a blue sharkquota, including dead discards frompelagic longline gear, that effectivelysets an upper limit to the magnitude ofimpacts from displaced effort. Inanalyzing the impacts of the final closedareas, NMFS predicts only a 4-percentincrease in pelagic shark landings andestimated discard rates increase by 8percent under the effort redistributionmodel, which may overestimate impactson bycatch and target catch. NMFS willclosely monitor all pelagic sharklandings through logbook and observerprograms to follow changes in landingpatterns resulting from effortredistribution.

Comment 14: The proposed time/areaclosures will reduce gear conflictsbetween the growing recreational HMSfisheries and commercial fishingcommunities, but in some areas,particularly the eastern Gulf of Mexicoand Mid-Atlantic Bight, conflicts couldpotentially increase.

Response: NMFS previouslyidentified gear conflicts betweenrecreational and commercial entities inthe 1988 Atlantic Billfish FMP and inthe 1999 Amendment to that FMP.NMFS agrees that conflicts betweenrecreational and commercial fishinggroups could escalate in areas thatremain open as a result of pelagiclongline effort redistribution. Mitigatingpossible user conflicts was one ofseveral reasons that temporal andspatial components of the proposedaction were refined in the final actionand, in the case of the western Gulf ofMexico, replaced by a live baitprohibition. Any management measureleading to a reduction in bycatch ofbillfish from commercial fishing gearmay lead to localized increases in anglersuccess and resultant economic benefitsto associated U.S. recreationalindustries.

Comment 15: NMFS should considerimplementing Individual TransferableQuotas (ITQs) in the future as a bycatchreduction measure, particularly forbluefin tuna in the longline fishery.

Response: Implementation of an ITQscheme, with the sole or even partialpurpose of reducing discards, could beconsidered and would require extensivedetailed analysis before proceeding.However, NMFS is prohibited by theMagnuson-Stevens Act fromimplementing new ITQ programs at this

time. The HMS FMP specificallyaddressed the bycatch of bluefin tuna bythe pelagic longline fishery throughimplementation of a time/area closureduring June off the Mid-Atlantic Bight.Initial results of the efficacy of the firstclosure (June 1999) are preliminary anddo not indicate that the anticipatedreductions were fully achieved. NMFSis currently reviewing whether theresults are due to (1) a limited timeframe for outreach (the final rule waspublished on May 28, 1999, with aneffective date of June 1, 1999, for thebluefin tuna pelagic longline closure);(2) enforcement issues (VMSimplementation was delayed untilSeptember 1, 2000); or, (3) inter-annualvariation in the areas of BFT interaction(increased discards occurred outside ofthe closed area).

Comment 16: Large closed areas willpose significant enforcement challengesto U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) since theareas identified for closure in theproposed rule are not routinelypatrolled by cutters. (This commentreceived from the USCG was followedup by a comment that supports the useof VMS to enforce closed areas.)

Response: NMFS recognizes the needfor effective enforcement of these closedareas and, as such, supports the use ofVMS, which will become effective forall pelagic longline vessels onSeptember 1, 2000 (65 FR 20918; April19, 2000). USCG resources will continueto be utilized, as that Agency is capableof confirming a vessel’s location andwhether it is fishing in the closed area.NMFS has entered into a cooperativeagreement with the USCG to assist inthe monitoring of fishing vessels atUSCG locations.

Comment 17: NMFS should define theclosed area by latitude and longitude inthe regulatory text, including thedesignation for the U.S. EEZ.

Response: Except for a small portionof the East Florida Coast area, NMFSprovides latitude and longitudecoordinates for the boundaries to theclosed areas in the regulatory text of thisfinal rule. Given the curvature of theEEZ boundary between the U.S. and theBahamas, it would be too complicatedto express that segment of the boundaryin latitude and longitude coordinates.NMFS notes that the EEZ boundary isplotted on most NOAA nautical chartsand that vessel operators fishing thatarea must be familiar with the EEZboundary in any case, as they are notauthorized to fish commercially in theBahamas.

Comment 18: NMFS should take theseproposed closed areas to ICCAT andencourage international closed areas.



Response: NMFS supportsconsideration of closed areas and gearmodifications to reduce undersizedswordfish catch and fishing mortalityand to protect spawning and/or nurseryareas for swordfish and billfish on anAtlantic-wide basis, as discussed in theHMS FMP and Billfish FMPAmendment. In 1999, ICCAT adopted aU.S.-sponsored resolution for thedevelopment of possible internationaltime/area closures (and gearmodifications), and the StandingCommittee for Research and Statistics(SCRS) is scheduled to provide a reporton this topic at the ICCAT meeting in2002. The final rule will be included inthe U.S. National Report that will besubmitted to ICCAT in October, 2000.

Comment 19: NMFS should banpelagic longline gear or, at least, ban theuse of this gear inside the U.S. EEZ.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Banningpelagic longline gear in the U.S. EEZ isnot necessary to protect highlymigratory species. Bycatch can beaddressed through time/area closures,education, and gear modifications.Requiring all vessels using pelagiclongline gear to fish only outside the200 mile limit may also be inconsistentwith consideration of safety issues asrequired under national standard 10.

Comment 20: Closures are notnecessary; swordfish are rebuilding.

Response: NMFS agrees that the NorthAtlantic swordfish stock may havestabilized and that an internationalrebuilding program is in place. To theextent that the time/area closures willreduce bycatch and bycatch mortality ofundersized swordfish, pre-adults, andspawning fish, the closures willenhance stock rebuilding. Furthermore,NMFS is required by an ICCATrecommendation and under nationalstandard 9 to minimize bycatch, to theextent practicable. Providing protectionof small swordfish and reproducing fishthough time/area closures is particularlycritical as stocks begin to rebuild. TheUnited States is allocated 29 percent ofthe north Atlantic swordfish quota(1997 through 1999), and approximately80 percent of the reported deaddiscards. Under the 1999 ICCATrecommendation, the total NorthAtlantic dead discard allowance for the2000 fishing season is 400 mt; the U.S.receives 80 percent of the North Atlanticdead discard allowance (320 mt). Thedead discard allowance for the UnitedStates is reduced to 240 mt in 2001, 160mt in 2002, and will be phased out by2004, with any overage of the discardallowance coming off the followingyear’s quota. A total of 443 mt ofswordfish were reported discarded byU.S. fishermen in the North Atlantic

during 1998. Under the time/areastrategy of the final rule, the no effortredistribution model predicts a 41.5-percent reduction in discards; under theeffort redistribution model, discards arereduced by 31.4 percent. The closurescould potentially reduce discards from1998 levels to 259 mt under the no-effort redistribution model and to 304mt under the effort redistributionmodel, thereby meeting at least the year2000 discard allocation levels withoutaffecting the subsequent year’s quota.

Comment 21: NMFS should increaseobserver coverage of all components ofHMS fisheries, including the pelagiclongline fishery.

Response: NMFS agrees that it wouldbe beneficial to increase observercoverage to document bycatch in allHMS fishing sectors. Observer coverageof the pelagic longline averaged between4 and 5 percent between 1992 through1998; a total of 2.9 percent of pelagiclongline sets were observed during1998. However, given current fiscalconstraints, NMFS will not likely beable to significantly increase observercoverage in the pelagic longline fishery.NMFS will investigate additionalfunding mechanisms. Depending onfunding, NMFS may implement aninitial phase of the HMS charter/headboat and voluntary observerprogram in the summer of 2000 that willprovide additional bycatch informationfrom recreational fisheries.

Comment 22: NMFS should develop acomprehensive bycatch strategy,including specific targets for bycatchreduction.

Response: NMFS disagrees thatsetting fixed bycatch targets isnecessary; in fact, such targets may becounterproductive. The multi-speciesapproach followed in the developmentof the proposed and final action toreduce bycatch, bycatch mortality, andincidental catch precludes setting targetreduction for specific species withoutconsidering the impact on the remainingportion of the catch composition. Forexample, if the time/area closures weresimply based on reducing swordfishdiscards by a set percentage, aconcomitant increase in bycatch of otherspecies could occur, or target catchescould be reduced more than necessaryto achieve national standard 9mandates. NMFS agrees that acomprehensive bycatch strategy isnecessary and has outlined a plan thatincorporates data collection, analysis,and measures that minimize bycatch, tothe extent practicable. This strategy isoutlined in the HMS FMP and theBillfish FMP Amendment.

Comment 23: NMFS should conducteducational workshops.

Response: NMFS supports the use ofeducational workshops to disseminateinformation on current researchregarding bycatch reduction and toprovide a forum through whichfishermen can share bycatch reductiontechniques with each other. NMFSscientists periodically hold seminars forfishermen to discuss the benefits ofcircle hooks and other handlingtechniques in the recreational billfishfishery. NMFS will seek input fromrepresentatives of fishing organizationsand from the AP members regardingopportunities for workshops. Dependingupon available funding and staff, NMFSwill hold educational workshops toexamine bycatch reduction activities inHMS fisheries, both for recreational andcommercial fishermen.

Comment 24: NMFS needs to be ableto respond quickly to results ofmonitoring and evaluation of closedareas. NMFS should develop aframework process for adjusting closedareas, if necessary, in a timely manner.

Response: NMFS agrees that a quickresponse to shifting fishing effortpatterns is necessary. NMFS is currentlyable to adjust or develop new closedareas through the framework process(proposed and final rules, includingpublic comment period) withoutamending the HMS FMP in the eventthat closed areas need to be altered tomaximize the benefits to the nation.However, it will take time to collect andanalyze the appropriate information,including data from the mandatorylogbooks, observer program, and VMS.

Comment 25: NMFS should reduceeffort in the longline fishery, not justreduce bycatch.

Response: The intent of thisrulemaking is not to reduce effort in thefishery, but to reduce bycatch whileminimizing the reduction of target catchby shifting effort away from areas withhigh bycatch and incidental catch.NMFS agrees that under a quota system,a time/area closure scheme will notnecessarily reduce effort, although somevessel operators may choose todiscontinue fishing due to economic orsocial factors. The use of time/areaclosures and gear restrictions(prohibition of live bait) was deemed byNMFS to be the best availablemanagement tool to reduce currentlevels of bycatch by the pelagic longlinefishery, as required by national standard9.

Comment 26: NMFS should consideradditional actions to address the impactof the increase in sea turtle interactionsresulting from pelagic longline effortredistribution.

Response: NMFS agrees that sea turtleinteractions with pelagic longline gear



must be minimized as required by theESA for listed species. On November 19,1999, NMFS reinitiated consultationwith NMFS’ Office of ProtectedResources based on preliminaryinformation on the 1999 take levels bythe pelagic longline fishery. The BOissued on June 30, 2000 concluded thatthe continuation of the pelagic longlinefishery could jeopardize the continuedexistence of loggerhead and leatherbacksea turtles. The final time/area closuresalong the southeastern U.S. Atlanticcoast were temporally and spatiallyreconfigured to mitigate, to the extentpracticable, the impact of effortredistribution on sea turtle interactions.Bycatch rates, particularly for seaturtles, may be over-estimated by theeffort redistribution model because themodel estimated bycatch rates byassuming random or constant catch-per-unit-effort in all remaining open areas.This estimation procedure could skewresults for certain species if thosespecies are concentrated in certain areas(such as sea turtles in the Grand Banks),instead of being randomly distributedover the entire open area. Fishingactivities will be monitored using VMS,as well as through logbooks and on-board observers, to determine impacts ofactual effort redistribution, which mayrequire further Agency action to addressincreased turtle takes. NMFS isinitiating efforts to address therequirements of the BO, includingpossible regulatory and non-regulatoryactions.

Comment 27: NMFS is proceedingwith the use of time/area managementstrategies only because of litigation filedagainst NMFS by various environmentalgroups following publication of the finalrules implementing the HMS FMP.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Duringpublic hearings held during the Fall of1998 as part of the scoping process usedto develop management alternatives forthe draft HMS FMP and the BillfishFMP Amendment, NMFS received manycomments regarding the utility of time/area closures to reduce bycatch invarious HMS fisheries, includingpelagic longline gear, and their use inprotecting essential fish habitat (e.g.,spawning and nursery grounds). Thedraft HMS FMP included a closure of aportion of the Florida Straits to reduceswordfish discards. Comments on theproposed action indicated that the areawas spatially and temporally too limitedto accomplish any significant reductionin bycatch, and, consequently, the areawas not included as part of the finalaction. However, the HMS FMP clearlystated that, following publication of afinal rule, an evaluation of wide-rangingtime/area closures would be completed

and implemented, if warranted. NMFShonored that commitment through thepreparation of the Draft TechnicalMemorandum and the proposed andfinal rules, establishing both time/areaand gear modifications to reducebycatch by the U.S. Atlantic HMSpelagic longline fishery.

Comment 28: The comment period forthe DeSoto Canyon area closurealternative is too short. Additional timemust be provided to allow those in theaffected area to adequately respond tothis potentially devastating closure.

Response: NMFS disagrees thatadditional time was warranted forpublic comment on the DeSoto Canyonclosure alternative. During the publichearing period for the proposed rule(December 15, 1999, to March 1, 2000),NMFS received many commentsindicating that an additional closurewas needed in the northeastern Gulf ofMexico because of the historically highswordfish discard rate in the area. Inresponse to this comment, NMFSconducted additional analysis andidentified an area generally around theDeSoto Canyon that in fact did havehigh incidence of discards of swordfishrelative to swordfish kept. Although theDeSoto Canyon is included within areasthat were analyzed in the DSEIS anddraft Technical Memorandum (madeavailable November 1999), NMFSdecided that an additional commentperiod was needed specifically on thepotential utility of this closure becausepelagic longline effort has declined bygreater than 50 percent in this area overthe past 5 years. NMFS notified thepublic of its intentions to consider asub-area of previously analyzed areas inthe Gulf of Mexico (i.e., DeSoto Canyon)through the HMS fax network, which issent to thousands of permit holders,seafood dealers and fish housesthroughout the eastern United States. Inaddition, NMFS mailed the FederalRegister notice with supplementaryinformation summarizing the biological,economic, and social analysis of theDeSoto Canyon closure, and the VMSmaterials to all HMS pelagic longlinepermitees. As a result of the April 26,2000, Federal Register notice (65 FR24440) soliciting comment on thisalternative, NMFS received hundreds ofresponses, indicating that adequate timewas provided for comment.

Comment 29: Fish farming is the onlyanswer to providing fish as a food forour population.

Response: NMFS agrees thataquaculture and mariculture play andhave an important role to play inproviding fishery products, butdisagrees that they are the only answer.

Use of Time/Area Closures to ReduceBycatch

Comment 1: NMFS should use time/area closures to reduce bycatch.

Response: NMFS agrees that closedareas can be an effective way to reducebycatch, both in the U.S. andinternational pelagic longline fisheries,and this final rule implements time/areaclosures for the pelagic longlinefisheries in the Gulf of Mexico andalong the southeastern U.S. Atlanticcoast. Due to efforts of the United States,ICCAT has asked its scientificcommittee to explore the use of closedareas throughout the management unit.Swordfish, marlin, sailfish, and otherHMS are considered overfished and arecurrently experiencing overfishingAtlantic-wide. The rebuilding plansestablished in the HMS FMP and theBillfish FMP Amendment will beenhanced to the extent that reduction ofbycatch will decrease mortality ofjuveniles and reproductive fish. Further,a reduction in swordfish discards isnow critical for the U.S. pelagic longlinefishery as a result of the 1999 ICCATrecommendation setting an NorthAtlantic discard allowance that isincrementally reduced to a zerotolerance level by 2004.

Comment 2: NMFS should change thesize and/or shape of the proposedwestern Gulf of Mexico closed area.

Response: NMFS agrees and is closingthe DeSoto Canyon area year-round topelagic longline fishing to addressundersized swordfish discards and toprevent further increases in swordfishdiscards as a result of possible effortdisplacement to this area in response tothe southeastern U.S. Atlantic coastalclosures. Further, NMFS has attemptedto mitigate the economic effects of theactions specifically aimed at reducingbillfish bycatch, by eliminating theproposed western Gulf closure and byprohibiting use of live bait by pelagiclongline vessels in the Gulf of Mexicoinstead. This gear modification ispotentially as effective in reducingsailfish discards as the western Gulfclosure and is approximately half aseffective in reducing marlin discards.However, in consideration of themagnitude of U.S. billfish discardsrelative to Atlantic-wide levels and theextent of the economic impactsassociated with the proposed westernGulf closure, modifying fishingpractices is a viable alternative thateffectively accomplishes the objectivesof reducing billfish bycatch whileallowing fishing to continue in thewestern Gulf of Mexico.

Comment 3: Several commenterssupported a closure of the Charleston



Bump area. Conversely, othercommenters stated that the level offishing activity in the Charleston Bumparea does not warrant closure of thisarea.

Response: Although pelagic longlineactivity in the Charleston Bump arearesults in bycatch of small swordfishthroughout the year, over 70 percent ofthe swordfish bycatch takes placeduring February through April.Therefore, NMFS is closing theCharleston Bump area for this 3-monthtime frame of the highest discard rates.This partial year closure addresses thebulk of swordfish discards whileminimizing social and economicimpacts of the rule by allowing fishingfor 9 months, rather than the year-roundclosure included in the proposedAgency action. Minimizing the temporalcomponent of the Charleston Bumpclosure also reduces the magnitude ofpotential increases in sea turtlesinteractions and white marlin discardspredicted by the displaced effort modelfor the proposed rule. Nevertheless,NMFS is aware of the overall concernsregarding this area relative to potentialincreases in effort and concomitanteffects on bycatch and incidental catchand will monitor fishing activity todetermine whether a larger/longerclosure is necessary in the CharlestonBump area. If necessary, NMFS wouldpursue further action through the FMPframework process.

Comment 4: NMFS should consideradditional pelagic longline closed areasin a future rulemaking.

Response: NMFS agrees thatadditional closed areas may benecessary to address bycatch, bycatchmortality, and incidental catch,particularly to address sea turtle takes asdiscussed in section 5.8 of the FSEIS.Shifts in fishing effort patterns may alsowarrant future rulemaking to closeaffected areas. NMFS will continue tomonitor the pelagic longline fleetthroughout its range.

Comment 5: NMFS should change theshape, size, and/or timing of the SouthAtlantic proposed closed area.

Response: NMFS agrees. NMFS isclosing the southern part of theproposed Southeast area below 31°Nlatitude (East Florida Coast) year-roundin order to maximize the bycatchreduction benefits. The northern portionof the proposed closed area (CharlestonBump) is closed for the period ofhighest swordfish discards duringFebruary through April. NMFS mayconsider a larger closure in theCharleston Bump area if effort increasessignificantly in this area, resulting inincreased incidental catches or discardsof overfished HMS or protected species.

NMFS would pursue this action throughthe FMP framework process.

Comment 6: NMFS should include aclosure of the Mid-Atlantic Bight and/ora Northeast area to pelagic longline gear.

Response: NMFS disagrees that thisrule should close the Mid-Atlantic Bightand/or Northeast coastal statisticalareas. The areas closed by this rule areconsidered temporal and spatial ‘‘hotspots’’ for HMS bycatch from U.S.pelagic longline effort within the U.S.EEZ, as evaluated by the frequency ofoccurrence and the relationshipbetween total catch and discard rates.NMFS has included a closure in themid-Atlantic area as part of the finalHMS FMP to reduce bluefin tunadiscards from pelagic longline gear.Nevertheless, NMFS recognizes thatpelagic longline effort will likelyincrease in areas that remain open (asanalyzed in the redistribution of effortmodel in FSEIS). By minimizing the sizeof the closure in the Gulf of Mexico andshortening the closed season for theCharleston Bump area, NMFS expectsthat the effects of effort redistributionwould be lessened from those evaluatedin the DSEIS and proposed rule.Considering HMS bycatch, closures ofthe Mid-Atlantic Bight, beyond the Junepelagic longline closure for bluefin tunadiscards, or in the offshore waters in theAtlantic Ocean off the northeasternUnited States are not warranted at thistime. NMFS will continue to monitorthe pelagic longline fleet throughout itsrange and will take appropriate action ifnecessary through the proposed andfinal rule process to reconfigureclosures. In addition, as required by theBO, NMFS will consider measures toreduce and monitor interactions withsea turtles, particularly in the pelagiclongline fishing grounds on the GrandBanks. Such measures may include areaclosures.

Comment 7: NMFS should close areasto both commercial and recreationalpelagic fishing. NMFS should considerclosing areas to recreational rod and reelfishermen, particularly to protect smallbluefin tuna.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Theclosures included in the final ruleaddress the requirements of nationalstandard 9, while minimizing, to theextent practicable, the significanteconomic impacts that will beexperienced by this fishery, as requiredby national standard 8. Monitoringprograms in place do not identify therecreational fishery as a source ofexcessive bycatch. In fact, NMFSestablished a catch-and-release fisherymanagement program in the BillfishAmendment in recognition of theoperational patterns of the recreational

fishery to encourage further catch andrelease of Atlantic billfish. However,NMFS continues to address bothmonitoring of the recreational fisheryand any bycatch mortality that doesoccur. At this time, NMFS encouragesrecreational fishermen to increasesurvival of released fish through the useof dehooking devices, circle hooks, andother gear modifications that mayreduce stress on the hooked fish.Further, depending upon theavailability of funding, NMFS will offereducational workshops in order toreduce bycatch in the recreationalfishery.

Comment 8: NMFS should consider‘‘rolling closures’’ to spread the impactsthroughout the region.

Response: NMFS considered andrejected rolling closures. The HMS andBillfish APs advised NMFS that rollingclosures may not be effective. MFSconducted analyses to consider closureswith varying spatial limitations on aseasonal basis along the southeasternU.S. Atlantic coast; however, none wereas effective as the final action (seesection 7 of the FSEIS). Economicimpacts of the closures were minimized,to the extent practicable, in light of theobjectives of the conservation measures.

Comment 9: NMFS should useoceanographic conditions to define thesize, shape, and timing of area closures.

Response: NMFS agrees that many lifehistory characteristics of HMS aredriven by oceanographic conditions,including the strength of the GulfStream in the Atlantic, the loop currentin the Gulf, and the eddies that spin offthese structures. By following long-termdistributional patterns in establishingthe temporal and spatial components ofthe closures, oceanographic conditionswere indirectly utilized in defining andevaluating the effectiveness of the time/area closures. The sizes of the closuresaround the Charleston Bump andDeSoto Canyon are examples of howNMFS accounted for variations in thecurrent patterns to establish the closedarea boundaries.

Comment 10: NMFS should alter theclosed areas to be consistent withCongressional proposals.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Theobjectives of the legislative proposalsare not identical with those of thisaction. This final rule reflects the fourobjectives stated in the proposed rule:(1) maximize the reduction of finfishbycatch; (2) minimize the reduction intarget catch of swordfish and otherspecies; (3) consider impacts on theincidental catch of other species tominimize or reduce incidental catchlevels; and (4) optimize survival ofbycatch and incidental catch species.



NMFS has reviewed the variouslegislative proposals and provided, intestimony before Congress, an analysisof the relative effectiveness of theclosures following the methods outlinedin the FSEIS. In addition to bycatchreduction, the legislative actions alsoconsider gear interactions and economicmitigation through a buyout program,which are beyond the scope of thisrulemaking.

Comment 11: The closures proposedby NMFS ignore an historically higharea of swordfish discards and nurserygrounds in the DeSoto Canyon in thenortheastern Gulf of Mexico.

Response: NMFS agrees and is closingan area in the northeastern Gulf ofMexico that includes the DeSotoCanyon. In the draft TechnicalMemorandum issued with the proposedrule, NMFS had evaluated the closure ofa larger area in the Gulf of Mexico (areaBill D) that included the DeSotoCanyon. However, the primary objectivefor closures in the Gulf of Mexico in theproposed rule was to reduce billfishdiscards in the western Gulf of Mexico.In responding to comments on the useof live bait, NMFS noted in the FSEIS(see section 7.2) that the higher discardsin the western Gulf were a likely resultof fishing practices rather than areflection of relatively higherabundance. Historically, catches ofsmall swordfish were high in the DeSotoCanyon area; however there has beenconsiderably less effort in this area inrecent years, which is likely a reflectionof the stricter minimum size limit forswordfish with no tolerance. Furtherrationale for the northeastern Gulf ofMexico closure is to prevent additionaleffort in this area by pelagic longlinefishermen displaced from thesoutheastern U.S. Atlantic coastclosures, which could negate theeffectiveness of East Florida Coast andCharleston Bump closures in reducingswordfish discards.

Comment 12: NMFS shouldreconsider the proposed closed areasbecause the increase in the bycatch ofblue marlin, white marlin, and largecoastal sharks is not ‘‘worth’’ thedecrease in swordfish bycatch expectedto result from the proposed closed areas.

Response: The effort redistributionmodel used in the DSEIS and FSEIS isbased on the assumption that all effortin the closed areas is randomlydistributed throughout the remainingopen areas and, as such, offers anestimation of the ‘‘worst-case scenario’’from a biological perspective. Thismodel estimates that discards of bluemarlin could increase by 6.6 percentand white marlin by 10.8 percent. Bluemarlin bycatch rates may be over-

estimated by the effort redistributionmodel because the model estimatedbycatch rates by assuming random orconstant catch-per-unit-effort in allremaining open areas. This estimationprocedure could skew results for certainspecies if those species are concentratedin certain areas, instead of beingrandomly distributed over the entireopen area (see section 7 and appendixC of the FSEIS for full description ofanalytical procedures). Pelagic longlineeffort in the Caribbean (fishing areasbelow 22° N. latitude) representsapproximately 14 percent of the totalU.S. Atlantic-wide fishing effort, butaccounts for over half of the total bluemarlin discards by U.S. pelagic longlinevessels. These areas were notconsidered for closure since they aregenerally located outside U.S. EEZwaters. Therefore, it is likely that theno-effort redistribution model would bemore applicable for blue marlin (12percent reduction in discards). Whitemarlin discards were less concentratedin the Caribbean (32 percent of totalAtlantic-wide levels) and did not showany identifiable patterns, particularlyafter the live bait effects were removedfrom the catch patterns. Therefore, theeffort redistribution model (11 percentincrease in white marlin discards) isprobably more applicable in this case,indicating that white marlin discardsare problematic and will need to beclosely monitored. The prohibition oflive bait in the Gulf will potentiallyfurther reduce Atlantic-wide discardlevels of blue marlin and white marlinby approximately 3 percent and sailfishby 15 percent. Because large coastalsharks are overfished, managementefforts that reduce discards (33.3percent under the effort redistributionmodel) are likely to be beneficial tostock recovery and, in that regard, meetthe objectives of the final rule.

Comment 13: The closures includedin the proposed rule will not beeffective in rebuilding overfished HMSstocks unless huge areas of the AtlanticOcean outside the U.S. EEZ are alsoclosed.

Response: National standard 9requires FMPs to take actions tominimize bycatch to the extentpracticable. The management actionsincluded in the final rule have beenformulated to meet the bycatchreduction directive of national standard9, consistent with the requirements ofother national standards for FMPs. Tothe extent that reducing bycatch andbycatch mortality impacts juvenile andreproductive HMS populations, the finalactions may augment rebuildingprograms for the overfished HMS stocks.While NMFS agrees that unilateral

management action by the United Statescannot rebuild overfished HMS stocks,the United States has been a leader inconservation of HMS resources and hastaken many management actions (e.g.,the time/area closures) to show theinternational forum our willingness totake the critical steps necessary toconserve these stocks. U.S. leadershiphas been used as a primary negotiationtool at ICCAT. The swordfish rebuildingprogram adopted by ICCAT in 1999 wasbased in large part on the rebuildingplan outlined in the HMS FMP. To theextent that the United States can usetime/area closures and other bycatchreduction management strategies toconvince other ICCAT member entitiesthat bycatch can be minimized, theactions contained in the final rule mayhave a significant impact on Atlantic-wide rebuilding of overfished HMSstocks.

Comment 14: The entire Gulf ofMexico should be closed to pelagiclongline fishing.

Response: NMFS disagrees thatclosure of the entire Gulf of Mexico topelagic longline fishing is warranted.The proposed closure of the westernGulf of Mexico was predicated on therelatively higher billfish discardsassociated with the pelagic longlinefishery operating in that area.Additional information and analysesobtained by NMFS subsequent to thepublication of the DSEIS and proposedrule on December 15, 1999, indicate thatprohibition of live bait could reduceblue and white marlin discards in theGulf of Mexico by approximately 10 to20 percent, and sailfish discards by 45percent, depending upon the analyticalprocedure used. Closure of the DeSotoCanyon area in the northeastern Gulf ofMexico, although only a third the sizeof the western Gulf of Mexico closure(32,800 square miles versus 96,500square miles), will provide a greaterbenefit in the reduction of swordfishdiscards (4 percent reduction Atlantic-wide versus a 3.1-percent increaseunder the effort redistribution model)and will prevent vessels displaced fromthe southeastern U.S. Atlantic coastalclosures from fishing in an area with anhistorically high rate of swordfishdiscards. The cumulative benefits of thenortheastern Gulf closure and live baitprohibition meet the objectives of thefinal rule by providing a reasonablealternative to reduce bycatch rates,while minimizing economic and socialimpacts throughout the Gulf of Mexico.

Comment 15: NMFS has alreadyclosed too many areas to commercialfishing. The proposed closures willeventually lead to total closure of the



entire Atlantic region to commercialfishing.

Response: NMFS disagrees that thefinal rule closures will lead toelimination of the commercial pelagiclongline fishery. However, NMFS agreesthat use of time/area closures as afishery management tool must involvecareful consideration of the impact ofAgency action on all components ofboth the commercial and recreationalfisheries. Implementation of practicableconservation measures that meetMagnuson-Stevens Act directives is theoverarching objective of the Agency. Tothat end, NMFS has reduced the spatialand temporal constraints of theproposed closures and included a gearmodification (prohibition of live bait) tohelp mitigate the economic and socialconcerns expected to result from theactions originally proposed.

Comment 16: Closure of the DeSotoCanyon area, in addition to the westernGulf closure, will displace vessels intothe Atlantic and/or Caribbean, whichwill negate the conservation measuresassociated with the closures.

Response: NMFS disagrees becausethe effort redistribution model assumesthat effort is displaced randomlythroughout the remaining open areas.Therefore, the conservation benefitsassociated with the final action closuresaccount for movement of effort into theCaribbean, Mid-Atlantic Bight, or anyother open area. Further, since the finalrule does not close the western Gulf ofMexico, it is likely that the limitedfishing effort currently expended withinthe DeSoto Canyon closure area(approximately one-third the size of theproposed Gulf closure) will be dispersedlargely within the Gulf of Mexico.

Comment 17: The proposed time/areaclosures are unjust, unnecessary, andinequitable and, as such, will result infurther lawsuits against NMFS.

Response: National standard 9 of theMagnuson-Stevens Act requires thatNMFS take action to reduce bycatch tothe extent practicable. The use of time/area closures is a practicable means ofreducing bycatch of HMS resourceswhile considering the economicconcerns of participants in the pelagiclongline fishery who target theseoverfished, international fisheryresources. The IRFA, RIR, and othercomponents of the DSEIS clearlyidentified the significant economic,social, and community impactsassociated with the proposed time/areaclosures. NMFS selected conservationmeasures in the final rule that meet thedirectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,while being mindful of the requirementsof national standard 8 to minimizenegative economic, social, and

community impacts, to the extentpracticable.

Comment 18: The DeSoto Canyonclosure is needed to protect a swordfishnursery area, but it needs to be larger tobe more effective.

Response: NMFS agrees that theDeSoto Canyon area is an area with anhistorically high ratio of swordfishdiscarded to swordfish kept. NMFS doesnot agree that additional closed areasare warranted at this time. The analysisundertaken for the FSEIS included catchhistory from the entire northeastern Gulfof Mexico, east of the Mississippi River,and north of 26° N. latitude (generallocation of the U.S. EEZ). Althougheffort has been declining around DeSotoCanyon in recent years, NMFS hasselected this area for a closure toprevent further effort from beingexpended in this area, either bydisplaced effort from the Atlantic or byvessels shifting operations from otherareas of the Gulf of Mexico.

Comment 19: NMFS should haveconsidered closures in the Caribbean,including the EEZ around Puerto Ricoand the U.S. Virgin Islands, to protectspawning populations of swordfish andbillfish.

Response: Closed areas in theCaribbean were considered. However, asdiscussed in the DSEIS and FSEIS,closures were generally limited to U.S.EEZ waters where they would havemaximum impact on all pelagic longlinefishing effort. NMFS agrees that theCaribbean waters support importantHMS spawning and nursery areas asidentified in the essential fish habitatcomponents of the HMS FMP and theBillfish FMP Amendment. Pelagiclongline effort in the Caribbean (fishingareas below 22° N. latitude) by U.S.flagged vessels is very effective intargeting swordfish with relatively lowdiscard rates (approximately 6.7 fishkept to 1 discarded, as compared to anaverage 0.9 swordfish kept to 1discarded in the DeSoto Canyon area).Conversely, the U.S. pelagic longlineeffort in the Caribbean representsapproximately 14 percent of the totalU.S. Atlantic-wide fishing effort, butaccounts for over half of the total bluemarlin discards by U.S. pelagic longlinevessels. NMFS did not select a closurein the Caribbean area because of theextensive range of the fishing effort inthe Caribbean, which occurs mainly ininternational waters. In addition, theconfiguration of the EEZ around bothPuerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islandswould make closures relativelyineffective.

Comment 20: NMFS should close theDeSoto Canyon area in addition to, not

in place of, the proposed western Gulfof Mexico closure.

Response: NMFS agrees that theDeSoto Canyon should be closed year-round to reduce swordfish discards andprevent an increase in fishing pressurein this area as a result of displaced effortfrom the East Florida Coast closure.However, NMFS does not agree that theproposed western Gulf of Mexicoclosure (March to September) is alsowarranted at this time. The final ruleincludes a prohibition on the use of livebait on pelagic longline gear in the Gulfof Mexico. Analysis of this alternativeindicates that prohibiting the use of livebait is likely to be as effective inreducing sailfish discards as the westernGulf closure, and about half as effectivein reducing marlin discards. However,in consideration of the magnitude ofU.S. billfish discards relative toAtlantic-wide levels and the extent ofthe economic, social, and communityimpacts associated with the proposedwestern Gulf closure, modifying fishingpractices is a reasonable alternative thateffectively accomplishes the objective ofreducing billfish bycatch, to the extentpracticable, while allowing fishing tocontinue in the western Gulf of Mexico.

Comment 21: There is no reason forNMFS to close the DeSoto Canyon areato pelagic longline gear.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Therationale for closing the DeSoto Canyonarea year-round to pelagic longlinefishing is twofold. The first is toprohibit fishing in an area with anhistorically low ratio of swordfish keptto number of undersized swordfishdiscarded, which over the period of1993 to 1998 has averaged less than oneswordfish kept to one swordfishdiscarded. The second is to preventfurther increases in swordfish discardsas a result of effort displacement intothis area from the Florida East Coastyear-round closure.

Comment 22: The closures includedin the proposed rule are more effectivethan the measures contained in variousbills being considered in Congress.

Response: There are several billscurrently before Congress. It is difficultat this time to predict whether any ofthe bills will be enacted and, if a bill isenacted, what measures it will contain.The objectives of the legislativeproposals are also different in somerespects from those of NMFS’ finalaction.

Comment 23: Although the originalproposed rule and the additional DeSotoCanyon closed area may not be contraryto ICCAT recommendations, theyviolate sections of the Magnuson-Stevens and Atlantic Tunas Convention



Acts. The action is not being taken tocomply with ICCAT recommendations.

Response: NMFS disagrees that theproposed and final rules violate theMagnuson-Stevens Act and ATCA. Infact, if NMFS failed to address theissues developed in the final action, theAgency would be in violation ofMagnuson-Stevens Act directivesrelated to national standard 9. Further,the 1999 ICCAT recommendationestablished a dead discard allowancethat will require the United States toreduce swordfish discards by 25 percentfrom 1998 levels (i.e., 443 mt to 320 mt)during the 2000 fishing year; anydiscards in excess of the dead discardallowance will be taken off thefollowing year’s quota. The dead discardallowance is subsequently reduced to240 mt in 2001, 160 mt in 2002, and 0mt by 2004. Thus, consistent with theICCAT recommendation, NMFS musttake action to reduce swordfish deaddiscards.

Gear ModificationsComment 1: NMFS needs to do gear

research specifically for the Atlanticpelagic longline HMS fishery. Resultsfrom gear modification research onother fisheries may not have the sameeffectiveness when applied to theAtlantic pelagic longline fishery.

Response: NMFS agrees that researchon gear modifications would be mosthelpful if conducted in the Atlanticpelagic longline fishery. In fact, severalgear-based data collection and researchprograms have been specificallydirected on the Atlantic HMS pelagiclongline fisheries. One study is lookingat whether gear modifications, such ascircle hooks, can reduce bycatchmortality and whether they are cost-effective. Results are either inconclusiveor too preliminary for application in thisfinal rule. Funding is very limited atthis time, so research results from otherstudy areas are often applied to similarfisheries (e.g., western Pacific tunalongline and Gulf of Mexico tunalongline fishery).

Comment 2: NMFS should provideexempted fishing permits (EFPs) toresearch vessels in closed areas toinvestigate the effectiveness of gearmodifications and fishing practices toreduce bycatch and incidental catchinteraction with pelagic longline gear.

Response: NMFS agrees. Researchersmust obtain a Scientific Research Permit(SRP) or EFP from NMFS to conductresearch in a closed area with pelagiclongline gear. A mechanism existswhereby NMFS can grant an SRP/EFP inorder to obtain data (50 CFR 600.745).If a research team submits the requiredinformation, including a research plan,

NMFS would consider granting an SRP/EFP subject to the terms andrequirements of the existing regulations.

Comment 3: NMFS receivedcomments both supporting andopposing a regulation requiring the useof circle hooks in HMS fisheries.Comments include the following:Require them on commercial and/orrecreational HMS vessels; do not requirethem; they are safer than regular hooks,and better, cheaper, and more effectivethan the DSEIS indicated.

Response: NMFS agrees that circlehooks are a promising tool that can beused in many hook and line fisheries toimprove survival of hooked fish andturtles that must be released. NMFS hasfunded a study, now underway in theAzores, to evaluate the effectiveness ofcircle hooks on sea turtle interactionsand survival. If analyses indicate thatcircle hooks are a cost-effective way toincrease turtle survival, NMFS mayissue regulations requiring the use ofsuch gear. NMFS seeks the cooperationof all fishermen to explore the use ofcircle hooks as a means to reducebycatch mortality, which is lessexpensive and may have less economicimpact than other measures (e.g., moreextensive time/area closures). Manyrecreational anglers have alreadyswitched to circle hooks, particularlywhen fishing with dead bait, withseveral recent articles in sportfishingmagazines reporting on the value ofusing circle hooks to reduce hooking-related mortality levels. In certainfisheries, commercial fishermen havealready adopted circle hooks as well, asthere is evidence of increased catchrates for some target species (e.g.,yellowfin tuna).

Comment 4: Some commenters notedthat NMFS should prohibit the use oflive bait in the pelagic longline fishery.Conversely, other commenters notedthat, if NMFS prohibits live bait,fishermen will switch from targetingtuna to targeting swordfish. Since manypelagic longline fishermen operating inthe Gulf of Mexico have incidentalswordfish permits, this might result inincreased discards of swordfish.

Response: NMFS agrees that live baitshould be prohibited. Live bait is usedfor 13 percent (logbook data) to 21percent (observer data) of all pelagiclongline sets in the Gulf of Mexico.Logbook and observer data indicate thatblue and white marlin discards occurapproximately twice as frequently onhooks with live bait; sailfish arediscarded four to five times morefrequently when live bait is used. Livebait is generally used to target yellowfintuna, although dead bait is used on themajority of pelagic longline sets.

Prohibiting live bait may lead toadditional use of squid or other deadbait, which may be less effective thanlive bait in catching yellowfin tuna, butis a reasonable alternative to a closureof the western Gulf of Mexico as ameans of reducing billfish bycatch.Some fishermen may switch fromtargeting tuna (daytime fishery) totargeting swordfish with dead bait,thereby increasing swordfish discards.However, fishing for swordfish withpelagic longline gear generally takesplace during night-time hours and hasan added expense and complexity withthe use of light sticks. In anticipation offishermen targeting swordfish in theGulf of Mexico in reaction to thisprohibition, NMFS has implemented atime/area closure in a known swordfishnursery area in the eastern Gulf ofMexico (DeSoto Canyon) in an attemptto avoid the increased catch rates ofsmall swordfish there. Further, iflongline fishermen holding anIncidental category swordfish permitexperience increased swordfish catchrates, NMFS may need to reconsider theincidental catch limit and the allocationof swordfish quota to the directedfishery. Prohibiting the use of live baitcould be just as effective in reducingsailfish discards (approximately 15percent reduction from the Atlantic-wide U.S. totals during 1995 through1998) as the western Gulf closure.Although the live bait prohibitionwould be somewhat less effective inreducing marlin bycatch discards thanthe March to September area closure(e.g., blue marlin: 3.3 percent vs. a 7.2-percent reduction under the displacedeffort model), it is less costly and is apractical alternative to the western Gulfclosure.

Comment 5: NMFS should implementother gear modifications (e.g.,decreasing length of longline,decreasing soak time, and timing ofsets).

Response: NMFS agrees that gearmodifications could be effective atreducing bycatch. However, many ofthese measures are difficult to enforce orcould be circumvented by alteringfishing patterns (e.g., additional setsmade or increased soak time to offset ashorter mainline), resulting in nobycatch reduction. NMFS continues tosupport research projects regardingeffectiveness of gear modifications.

Comment 6: NMFS should allow theU.S. Atlantic pelagic longline fishery 1year to voluntarily reduce bycatch withthe use of self-imposed gearmodifications.

Response: As a result of a 1999 ICCATrecommendation setting Atlantic-widediscard quotas, the United States must



immediately reduce swordfish discardsduring the 2000 fishing year to 320 mt.This will have to be a significantreduction from 1998, when a total of443 mt of swordfish discards from theNorth Atlantic were reported by theUnited States. The ICCATrecommendation also incrementallyreduces the dead discard allowance tozero by the 2004 fishing year. Any deaddiscards over the annual allowance willbe taken off the following year’s quota.Therefore, NMFS has determined that itis necessary to initiate mandatorybycatch reduction measures at this time.

Comment 7: NMFS should limit thesoak times of pelagic longline gear toreduce the number of dead discards.

Response: NMFS evaluated analternative in the FSEIS that wouldreduce pelagic longline soak time to 6hours. The strategy would reduce theamount of time that pelagic longlinegear could be deployed and thus reducefishing effort (hours/hook) for eachlongline set. The current range of soaktime for pelagic longline gear is 5 to 13hours. This alternative was rejectedbased on the practicality of enforcementand the likelihood that fishermen wouldmake two sets during a day, orotherwise extend a fishing trip toexecute a similar level of effort/trip.Since most billfish hit a longline hookduring setting or retrieving, requiring ameasure that forced a greater frequencyof hooks moving through the watercolumn could increase billfish discards.However, limiting soak to reduce seaturtle takes will likely be considered indeveloping alternatives to addressconcerns raised in the BO.

Environmental JusticeComment 1: The proposed closed

areas would disproportionately affectAfrican-Americans in South Carolina,Vietnamese-Americans in the statesbordering the Gulf of Mexico, and low-income crew members.

Response: NMFS consideredenvironmental justice concerns asrequired by E.O. 12898 in selecting thepreferred actions of the final rule. Byminimizing the size of the closure in theGulf of Mexico through prohibiting theuse of live bait and by shortening theclosed season for the Charleston Bumparea, NMFS expects that the economicand social effects of the closures onminority groups and all othercomponents of the pelagic longlinefishing community will be minimized tothe extent practicable.

Protected SpeciesComment 1: NMFS should re-

designate the longline fishery from aCategory I to a Category II fishery under

the MMPA because the fishery bycatchmeets the criteria for a Category IIdesignation.

Response: NMFS classifies fisherieson an annual basis. Classificationcriteria consist of a two-tiered, stock-specific approach that first addressesthe total impact of all fisheries on eachmarine mammal stock, and thenaddresses the impact of individualfisheries on each stock. NMFS bases itsclassification of commercial fisheries ona variety of different types ofinformation. The best source ofinformation concerning the level offishery-specific marine mammalincidental serious injury and mortalityis the fishery observer program. Ifobserver data are not available, NMFSmay use fishermen’s reports submittedper the requirements of the MarineMammal Authorization Program since1996 (or the Marine Mammal ExemptionProgram from 1989 to 1995), strandingdata, data from other monitoringprograms, and other sources ofinformation. The Atlantic pelagiclongline fishery has been monitoredwith about 2 to 5 percent observercoverage, in terms of sets observed,since 1992. The 1992–1997 estimatedtake was based on an analysis of theobserved incidental take and self-reported incidental take and effort data.The 1998 stock assessment reports,which were used for the 1999 List ofFisheries, included data which placedthe pelagic longline fishery intoCategory I. NMFS will reevaluatecategories in developing the 2001 List ofFisheries. However, NMFS anticipatesusing serious injury data, which wouldlikely cause the pelagic longline fisheryto remain in Category I.

Comment 2: NMFS should be moreconcerned about fishermen than aboutsea turtles.

Response: NMFS is concerned aboutachieving conservation benefits of thefinal rule while at the same timeminimizing expected economic impactson fishermen and related businesses, tothe extent practicable. However, NMFSalso must be in compliance with theEndangered Species Act, which requiresNMFS to take appropriate actions toprotect endangered or threatenedspecies (e.g., sea turtles). The final ruleincludes reasonable actions that meetrequirements of the Magnuson-StevensAct and ATCA (as it applies toswordfish discards) to reduce bycatchand seek long-term rebuilding ofoverfished HMS stocks, while balancingeconomic and social impacts. Even so,it is clear that the final actions will havesignificant social and economic impactson various components of the pelagiclongline communities. NMFS recognizes

those impacts and has noted possiblesources of economic relief (see section8.0 of FSEIS).

Comment 3: The projected increase inturtle takes as a result of the proposedclosures (under the redistribution ofeffort model) is not likely because manyboats are not capable of redistributingtheir longline effort to the Grand Banks.

Response: NMFS agrees that turtlebycatch rates may be over-estimated bythe effort redistribution model becauseestimation of catch-per-unit-effort in theremaining open areas could be skewedif species are concentrated in one area(such as sea turtles in the Grand Banksor blue marlin in the Caribbean; seeFSEIS for further information), ratherthan randomly distributed over theentire open area. Although fishing in theGrand Banks area requires a relativelylarger vessel than currently utilized insome of the closed areas (e.g., eastFlorida coast) for practical and safetyreasons, it is possible that some boatscould commence fishing on the GrandBanks or increase current effort in thisarea due to the closures in other areas,resulting in potential increases in turtleinteractions. It is not known at this timehow many vessels are expected toredistribute their effort to areas andtimes where turtle interactions arehighest, but fishing activities will becontinually monitored through the VMSprogram, as well as through logbooksand on-board observers. The anticipatedtakes for loggerheads and leatherbacksea turtles for pelagic longline gearestablished by the incidental takestatement were exceeded during 1999,as discussed in section 5.8 of the FSEIS.The June 30, 2000 BO containedjeopardy findings for both loggerheadand leatherback sea turtles. NMFS isinitiating efforts to address this issue,including possible regulatory and non-regulatory actions.

Dolphin/Wahoo IssueComment 1: Comments were received

that the mahi ‘‘loophole’’ underminesthe effectiveness of the HMS time/arearule; Vessels using longline gear totarget dolphin (mahi) should beprohibited from the HMS pelagiclongline closed areas; NMFS shouldcontinue to work with the Councils tocoordinate closed areas to reducebycatch; If an exception is made for theclosed area, HMS longline fishermenmay move into the dolphin fishery.

Response: NMFS has notified therespective fishery management councilsof the jurisdictional issues presented byvessels fishing with pelagic longlinegear for species that are not directlymanaged by the Secretary of Commerce(e.g., dolphin). The South Atlantic



Fishery Management Council hasprepared a Draft Dolphin and WahooFishery Management Plan with apreferred alternative that would prohibitthe use of pelagic longline gear fordolphin and wahoo in areas closed tosuch gear under HMS regulations.NMFS cannot predict whether HMSlongline fishermen will move into thedolphin fishery, but it is unlikely thatthere would be a major shift in effort.Vessel operators may not fish withpelagic longline gear in closed areas ifthey hold an HMS permit; therefore,they would have to relinquish all HMSpermits in order to do so. NMFS doesnot expect that longline fishermenwould sell their swordfish and tunapermits in order to target dolphin for aseasonal fishery of limited size andduration.

Comment 2: NMFS should implementemergency regulations until therespective Councils can close thepotential loophole posed by the longlinefishery for dolphin.

Response: If the level of fishing efforttargeting dolphin increases, it will mostlikely be due to factors other than thetime/area closures implemented forbycatch reduction in the tuna/swordfishlongline fisheries. It is unlikely thatvessels affected by the HMS closureswould give up HMS permits specificallyto conduct a dolphin fishery. NMFS andthe respective Councils can monitoreffort, catch, and bycatch of non-HMSpermitted longline fishermen targetingdolphin in the HMS closed areas anddetermine whether further action isrequired. The South Atlantic FisheryManagement Council has alreadyundertaken preliminary steps inpreparing a proposed Dolphin andWahoo FMP that includes parallelclosures.

Comment 3: No billfish or swordfishare caught in the mahi fishery; NMFSshould not shut down the mahi longlinefishery; it has virtually no discards andthe stock is healthy; NMFS needs toanalyze the dolphin fishery moreclosely in evaluating the impacts of thepelagic longline time/area closure.

Response: Recognizing thejurisdictional issues, NMFS has askedthe appropriate fishery managementcouncils to examine managementoptions guiding the use of pelagiclongline gear to target dolphin. In theFSEIS, NMFS has included a moredetailed discussion of the potentialbycatch issues in the pelagic longlinefishery for dolphin. Logbook reportsfrom 1998 were examined for all setsmade in the area from Key West, FL, toWilmington Beach, NC. It was notpossible to identify effort in the dolphinfishery with certainty, but sets were

separated into those targetingswordfish/tunas/sharks and those listinga target as ‘‘other.’’ It was presumed thatsets listing a target as ‘‘other’’ arepredominantly targeting dolphin, andthis was reflected in the nearly tenfoldhigher catch per set of dolphin. Whileswordfish and bluefin tuna discardswere generally lower for the presumeddolphin sets, bycatch of billfish, sharksand bigeye, albacore, yellowfin, andskipjack (BAYS) tunas seems to be aconcern. More specific information oncatch occurring when pelagic longlinesare set to target dolphin would beneeded to confirm or refute the bycatchconcerns. In the interim, to facilitateenforcement and to take a precautionaryapproach, NMFS has decided that HMS-permitted vessels should be prohibitedfrom setting all pelagic longline gear inthe closed areas, regardless of targetspecies. It is possible that an operator ofan HMS-permitted vessel who wishes totarget dolphin could apply for anexempted fishing permit (EFP). If EFPsare issued, the data collected (e.g.,logbook or observer reports) can be usedto determine whether a dolphin fisherycould be undertaken that would beconsistent with the bycatch reductionobjectives of the HMS FMP. However,such authorization for EFPs would haveto be considered in consultation withthe councils having managementauthority for dolphin.

Redistribution of EffortComment 1: More pelagic longline

fishermen will relocate to open fishingareas than exit the fishery as a result ofthe time/area closures.

Response: To estimate the range ofpotential ecological impacts of the time/area closures, NMFS examined twoscenarios for effort reallocation: (1) alleffort in the closed area is removed fromthe system (worst-case alternative fromthe economic, social and communitystandpoint) and (2) all effort israndomly moved to available open areas(which may overestimate impact ofeffort if a species is not relativelyuniformly distributed throughout thearea—see discussion of sea turtle andblue marlin distribution in the FSEIS).Available information is insufficient forNMFS to estimate the number of vesselsthat may decide to discontinue fishingor to determine where the remainingvessels will relocate. However, if totalU.S. pelagic longline effort is reducedby vessels leaving this fishery, theestimates of the effectiveness of thetime/area closures will beunderestimated.

Comment 2: The NMFS western Gulfof Mexico proposed closure would forcedisplacement of pelagic longline effort

into known bycatch areas, particularlythe DeSoto Canyon area in the easternGulf of Mexico, resulting in net lossesin conservation effectiveness of thetime/area closures.

Response: NMFS agrees that this is apossibility. The areas selected in theproposed rule were based on areas andtimes when discard rates were relativelyhigher than those in other temporal/spatial alternatives (‘‘hot spots’’). Theoverriding objective for the proposedclosure in the Gulf of Mexico was toreduce billfish discards. A relativelyhigher discard-per-unit-effort was notedfor marlin and sailfish in the westernGulf of Mexico. In conducting theanalyses for the proposed rule, NMFSalso recognized that there were discardsof swordfish in the eastern Gulf;however, there was a relatively loweroccurrence of billfish discards,particularly blue and white marlin, inthis eastern area. Therefore, inconsideration of the fact that thewestern Gulf area also had discards ofundersized swordfish, NMFS selectedthis area for closure in the proposedrule. Information that became availablesubsequent to the preparation of theproposed rule and consistent withpublic comments received has providedadditional insight into the differentialbycatch of billfish from pelagic longlinesets using live bait, a fishing practicewhich has occurred mainly in thewestern Gulf of Mexico. NMFSanticipated that this fishing techniquewould be moved to the eastern Gulf ofMexico if the proposed closure wereimplemented, resulting in an increase inbillfish bycatch in this area. The finalrule incorporates a prohibition on theuse of live bait on pelagic longline gearwhich will reduce billfish bycatchwithout the need for a closure in thewestern Gulf of Mexico. As a result,NMFS re-examined other areas in theGulf of Mexico and is closing theDeSoto Canyon and a portion of thewest Florida shelf based on thehistorically high ratio of swordfishdiscards to swordfish kept in theseareas. Further, this action will preventan expansion of displaced fishing effortinto this area following closures alongthe southeastern U.S. Atlantic coast.

Comment 3: Displaced boats will re-flag to another country or sell theirvessel and gear to ICCAT non-membercountries in the Caribbean, or otherareas, which will negate any gain in thereduction of billfish and undersizedswordfish discards by U.S. commercialpelagic longline effort.

Response: It is possible that U.S.owners will decide to sell their vessel(s)to citizens of one of the Caribbeancountries. NMFS has information that



indicates that many Caribbean nations(some which may not be members ofICCAT) are interested in expandingtheir fishing fleets for HMS. NMFS isinvolved with many United Statesinitiatives regarding issues of illegal,unregulated and unreported (IUU)fishing, including those developedthrough ICCAT and FAO. The recentICCAT restrictions on swordfish importsfrom Honduras and Belize are evidenceof this international effort. ICCAT alsocontinues to work with Caribbeannations to discuss allocation criteria forthese nations, as well as adherence toICCAT recommendations, which hasbeen a source of concern.

Comment 4: The time/area closureswill increase competition in the sharkfishery because pelagic longline vesselswill re-rig to undertake bottom longlinefishing.

Response: NMFS disagrees. The sharkfishery operates under a limited accesspermit system. Most pelagic longlinevessels have qualified for limited accessshark permits. The level of retentionallowable under an incidental permit isnot sufficient to support profitableoperations focusing on shark resources.While some pelagic longliners havedirected permits and it is possible thatsome fishermen could purchase adirected shark permit, the total numberof directed permits is capped, and theshark fishery operates under a quotasystem; therefore total effort and relativecompetition between vessels shouldremain unchanged.

Comment 5: NMFS will force pelagiclongline fishermen with small vessels tofish farther from shore, which could beunsafe during inclement weather. NMFSshould consider safety-at-seaimplications of the proposed closedareas.

Response: NMFS agrees that vesselsafety is an important component to beconsidered in developing reasonablemanagement measures, as required bynational standard 10 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Some pelagic longlinevessels historically operating in theareas being closed are not capable ofsafely fishing farther out to sea in theopen areas due to their size. However,the vast majority of pelagic longlineeffort targeting swordfish and tunaoccurs in deep waters, generally inwaters with depths in excess of 500fathoms (3000 feet), requiring a vessel ofsufficient size to safely handle openocean conditions. The final ruleclosures should not adversely impactmost of these vessels in regard to sea-worthiness, particularly with theremoval of the western Gulf of Mexicoclosure and reducing the temporalrestrictions of the Charleston Bump

closure. However, there is a fleet ofsmall pelagic longline vessels that fishthe deep waters found relatively close toshore along the east Florida coast. Thisarea will be closed year-round becauseof the magnitude of reported swordfishand billfish discards. If these vessels aremoved to open areas that require fishingat a greater distance from shore, NMFSencourages vessel operators to followU.S. Coast Guard-approved operatingprocedures and to exercise caution indetermining the safe operating range fortheir sizes and types of vessels.

Comment 6: Directed shark fishermenshould be allowed to catch more sharkssince bycatch of large coastal sharks inthe pelagic longline fishery would bereduced with the time/area closures.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Sharkresources in the United States are eitheroverfished (large coastal sharks), fullyfished (small coastal) or unknown(pelagic sharks). Each shark category hasa set harvest level that encompassescatch from all fishing sources. Time/area closures may result in an increasein pelagic shark discards and landingsof approximately 8 and 4 percent,respectively, under complete effortredistribution. Conversely, the numberof large coastal sharks discarded andlanded from pelagic longline gear willlikely decrease by 33 and 18 percent,respectively, which may increase theduration of the large coastal sharkfishing season. However, furtherincreases in shark quotas are notwarranted at this time.

Comment 7: The effort redistributionmodel included in the DSEIS predictsan increase in BAYS tuna landings, butthe United States has agreed to limiteffort in the yellowfin tuna fisheryunder an ICCAT agreement.

Response: While NMFS agrees that,under the effort redistribution model,BAYS tuna landings may increase(mainly as a result of increasedyellowfin tuna catches), the ICCATagreement limits U.S. yellowfin effort to1993 levels. The catch levels predictedby the effort redistribution model arebased on total effort redistribution and,as such, are likely to be an over-estimation of actual effort and catchesunder the final rule time/area closures.As a result of the HMS FMP, a limitedaccess system is now in place for thetuna pelagic longline fishery, and arecreational limit of three yellowfintuna per person per trip was alsoimplemented. Commercial yellowfintuna landings in 1993 were 4,386 mt,while more recently (1996 to 1998),landings have averaged approximately3,525 mt. The nearly 10 percent increasein BAYS landings predicted by thedisplaced effort model would increase

average annual landings to only 3,700 to3,800 mt, without an overall increase ineffort.

Comment 8: Fishermen can and willfish in closed areas with other types offishing gear.

Response: In the FSEIS, NMFSanalyzed the potential impacts offishermen changing target speciesthrough redistributing effort to otherfisheries in which the vessel alreadymay be active, or pursuing new fisheriesby purchasing permits, as necessary.The South Atlantic Fishery ManagementCouncil is currently holding publichearings on a proposed dolphin/wahooFMP that includes a preferredalternative that would prohibit pelagiclongline fishing for dolphin and wahoowithin the spatial and temporalconstraints of closures for the HMSpelagic longline fishery. This couldreduce effort redistribution from HMS tothe dolphin and wahoo fisheries.

Comment 9: If Agency actions forcefishermen to fish in areas with highturtle interactions, then the Agency isresponsible for any increase in take, notfishermen.

Response: NMFS disagrees. The finaltime/area closures along thesoutheastern U.S. Atlantic coast weretemporally and spatially reconfigured tomitigate, to the extent practicable, theimpact of effort redistribution on seaturtle interactions. Turtle bycatch ratesmay be over-estimated by the effortredistribution model because estimationof catch-per-unit-effort in the remainingopen areas could be skewed if speciesare concentrated more in one area (likesea turtles in the Grand Banks) ratherthan randomly distributed over theentire open area. NMFS will continue tomonitor the fishery afterimplementation of the final rule. As aresult of the jeopardy findings forloggerhead and leatherback sea turtles,NMFS will issue additional regulationsthat may include further modificationsto gear and/or fishing methods, closedor limited fishing areas, and expandedmonitoring (see section 5.8 of theFSEIS).

Comment 10: The majority of directedswordfish and tuna pelagic longlinefishermen are not active in othercommercial fisheries.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Of the 329fishermen with swordfish limited accesspermits who held valid permits as ofMay 9, 2000, approximately half heldonly HMS limited access permits. Theother fishermen held a range of permitsincluding king mackerel, Spanishmackerel, golden crab, reef fish, redsnapper (both Class 1 and Class 2licences), rock shrimp, snapper-grouper,and spiny lobster. In addition, some of



the vessel permit holders held permitsin fisheries that are managed by theNortheast Regional Office.

Comment 11: The closure will haveunknown benefits because reallocationof effort will change the catchcomposition.

Response: NMFS examined a range ofimpacts of effort reallocation, includingremoval of all effort from closed areas toredistributing all effort to available openareas. While the models used by NMFSprovide estimates of potential increasesor decreases in catch and discards,NMFS agrees that a full, quantitativeassessment of effort reallocation cannotbe made until the closures areimplemented and fishermen developnew fishing patterns. However, theclosures implemented through the finalrule will significantly reduce impacts onthe level of discards from the U.S.pelagic longline fishery in the U.S. EEZ,which was the goal of the action. NMFSwill monitor vessel activity through theuse of VMS, observers, logbooks, anddealer reports.

Comment 12: The time/area closureswill force vessels to increase effort and/or move into other South Atlanticfisheries for which they hold permits.Boats will move into the bottomlongline fishery and catch grouper,snapper, and tilefish or shift to otherpelagic longline fisheries, like dolphinand wahoo, in either the impactedclosed areas or other locations along theAtlantic coast.

Response: NMFS agrees that somevessels will likely expend effort in otherfisheries. Although some pelagiclongline fishermen who homeport theirvessels in the closed areas have otherpermits (e.g., coastal migratory pelagics,snapper-grouper, charter vessels), manyhave only directed or incidentalswordfish, shark and tuna permits. Mostof the southeastern fisheries requireFederal permits, some of which areissued under limited access programs.Limited access permits may not beavailable, which may limit the ability ofdisplaced pelagic longline fishermen totarget other species. Other vessels maymove into other activities consistentwith their fishing experience (e.g.,recreational charter fishing). Thedolphin and wahoo fishery resourcesare not under the direct managementjurisdiction of the Secretary ofCommerce. However, the Agency agreesthat some pelagic longline effort may bedirected toward dolphin and wahoo.The South Atlantic Fishery ManagementCouncil has prepared a proposeddolphin/wahoo FMP that includes apreferred alternative prohibiting pelagiclongline fishing for dolphin and wahoowithin the spatial and temporal

constraints of closures for the HMSpelagic longline fishery. The FSEISprovides an analysis of potentialimpacts of alternative fishing activity bydisplaced HMS pelagic longline vessels.

Analysis of Ecological Benefits ofClosures

Comment 1: The DSEIS indicated thatthe proposed time/area closures wouldhave a huge reduction in bluefin tunadiscards, but reducing bluefin tunabycatch is not listed as an objective ofthe Agency action.

Response: NMFS disagrees thatreduction of bluefin tuna discards wasnot included as an objective of theproposed Agency action, which hadfour clear objectives: Maximize thereduction of finfish bycatch (whichincludes bluefin tuna); minimize thereduction in the target catch ofswordfish and other species; ensure theincidental catch of other speciesremains unchanged or is reduced; andoptimize the survival of releasedanimals. Analysis of time/area closureeffectiveness used for the proposed ruleencompassed all closures for HMS,including the annual northeastern U.S.pelagic longline closure during Junedeveloped specifically to reduce bluefintuna discards that was part of the finalrule implementing the HMS FMP.Closures included in the final rule arelisted by species and area to clarify thecumulative impacts for each spatialcomponent. Bluefin tuna discardsincreased by 11 percent when pelagiclongline effort was randomlyredistributed throughout the operationalrange of the U.S. Atlantic pelagiclongline fishery as a result of the EastFlorida Coast and Charleston Bumpclosures; however, when combined withthe June closure already in place, thenet effect on bluefin tuna is a 39-percentreduction in discards.

Comment 2: The Agency should haveconsidered a more expansive scientificinformation baseline for evaluation ofpotential closures, includingscientifically peer-reviewed literatureprior to the 1995 to 1997 informationincluded in the DSEIS, as well as moreupdated and/or near real-time datasources (e.g., satellite data).

Response: In preparing the FSEIS, theAgency expanded the data analyses toinclude logbook information from 1993to 1998. These data provide furthersupport for the temporal and spatialcomponents of the time/area closures ofthe final rule. Historical scientificstudies describing movement behaviorof HMS, as well as oceanographicstudies of current and water masspatterns were also reviewed inpreparing the FSEIS. Setting closures or

other fishing activities based on nearreal-time satellite information on wateror current patterns may be considered infuture management actions, particularlyin conjunction with the communicationcapabilities of the VMS systemsrequired for all pelagic longline fishingvessels beginning September 1, 2000.Recent scientific studies on therelationship between billfish discardrates relative to use of live and dead baiton pelagic longline gear were also used.

Comment 3: The evaluation of closedareas should be based on the ratio ofcatch to bycatch instead of absolutenumbers of bycatch.

Response: NMFS agrees that the ratioof catch to bycatch should be used inevaluating which areas to close, butdisagrees that the absolute numbers ofbycatch should not be considered. Indeveloping the final area closures,NMFS examined, where appropriate,the temporal and spatial variations ofthe ratio of bycatch to target catch, theabsolute numbers of bycatch and targetcatch, and relative fishing effort. Forexample, an area that has a high discardto number kept ratio may be indicativeof a problem area, depending upon therelative volume of fishing effort that iscurrently or historically conducted inthe area. Conversely, an area that has arelatively high absolute number ofdiscards but a low ratio of discards tonumber of fish kept would be evaluatedbased on the relative fishing effort in thearea. The analytical methods are fullydescribed in the DSEIS, and clarified,where appropriate, in the FSEIS.

Comment 4: A target bycatchthreshold should be developed to allowfor a tracking of the success of Agencyactions.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Thedevelopment of the proposed and finalrules clearly follows a multispeciesmanagement approach, and’ as such, itis inappropriate to set target reductionsfor specific species without consideringthe impact on the remaining portion ofthe catch composition. For example, ifthe time/area closures were simplybased on reducing swordfish discardsby a set percentage, this coulddisproportionally increase the level ofbycatch, bycatch mortality, and/orincidental catch of other species. Thefour overarching objectives discussed inthe DSEIS and FSEIS guided the Agencythroughout the development of theproposed and final actions.

Comment 5: NMFS should investigatethe effectiveness of the pelagic longlineclosure in the Pacific Ocean to evaluatepotential impacts of closures along theU.S. Atlantic coast.

Response: NMFS agrees that allsimilar closures should be evaluated to



determine potential biological, social,and economic impacts of final Agencyactions. The closure of nearly 1 millionsquare miles of Pacific Ocean nearHawaii to pelagic longline fishingvessels has been in effect sinceDecember 23, 1999; therefore,information on the impacts is limited atthis time.

Comment 6: Observer data should beused to evaluate accuracy of the logbookreports used in the NMFS time/areaanalyses.

Response: NMFS agrees that observercoverage is needed to ground-truthinformation provided in the mandatorylogbook program. The Draft TechnicalMemorandum, included as part of theDSEIS, provides a discussion of thelimitations of logbook data and explainsthe rationale for using these data. TheAtlantic pelagic longline fishery hasbeen monitored with about 2 to 5percent observer coverage, in terms ofsets observed since 1992, and is used toground-truth the mandatory logbookdata, and to provide specific biologicalinformation (e.g., tagging, obtainingtissue samples for genetic work). Theobserver information was used indeveloping the prohibition on the use oflive bait.

Comment 7: The analyses of the time/area closures are flawed because of thedependence upon mis-reportedinformation in the mandatory logbooks.

Response: NMFS disagrees that theanalyses are flawed. While NMFSrecognizes that there are limitations andconstraints in the use of logbookinformation as discussed in the DraftTechnical Memorandum and HMS FMP,these data undergo thorough review byNMFS scientists and can be used toidentify catch trends and patterns overtime. Also, if logbooks under-reportbycatch as indicated in public comment,then the benefits of the time/areaclosures are even greater than predictedin the FSEIS.

Comment 8: Use of percentages in theanalyses make it difficult to assessbenefits of the time/area closures.

Response: To allow for valid analysisof temporal and spatial variations inclosure effectiveness on a suite of targetspecies and bycatch, it was necessary tohave a common denominator for allcomparisons. The total U.S. Atlanticcatch, by year and species, was used forthis purpose, and was provided intabular form in the DSEIS. Thepercentages provided in the analysescan easily be converted to number bymultiplying the percentage value by theappropriate annual total (landings anddiscards were considered as separategroups). In the FSEIS, NMFS furtherclarifies the use of percentages,

numerical values, and ratios of numberscaught to numbers discarded.

Comment 9: NMFS should not lumpall BAYS together in the analysis of thetime/area closures. Each tuna speciesshould be separately analyzed,particularly for yellowfin tuna.

Response: NMFS agrees that it isimportant to separate out the impact ofthe time/area closures on the variousspecies of the BAYS tuna complex.Atlantic-wide, yellowfin tuna andbigeye tuna represent over 91 percent ofthe U.S. pelagic longline fleet catch ofBAYS tunas (YFT—70.4 percent andbigeye tuna—20.8 percent). In the Gulfof Mexico, the 99.1 percent of the BAYSharvested from the proposed westernGulf closed area consisted of yellowfintuna; in the final rule closure of DeSotoCanyon, yellowfin make up 98.4 percentof the BAYS complex. The BAYS tunasin the closure of the southeastern U.S.Atlantic coast consist of 89.5 percentyellowfin tuna and 7.5 percent bigeyetuna. The potential changes in landingsof yellowfin tuna, bigeye tuna, theaggregate BAYS complex, and bluefintuna are summarized for each finalaction under the effort redistributionand no effort redistribution modelsdescribed in the FSEIS.

Comment 10: NMFS shouldsummarize the impacts of the time/areaclosures separately for the Gulf ofMexico and southeastern U.S. Atlanticcoastal closures.

Response: NMFS agrees. Ecologicaland economic impacts may be betterunderstood if summarized bothseparately and in combination, and, tothat end, this presentation approach istaken in the FSEIS. Although the DSEIScombined the ecological impacts for theGulf of Mexico and southeastern U.S.Atlantic coastal closures under thediscussion of each alternative, the draftTechnical Memorandum providedresults of the no effort redistributionand effort redistribution modelsseparately for each closure area.

Comment 11: NMFS should considerincorporating tagging data into the time/area analysis procedures.

Response: NMFS agrees thatinformation from tagging studies ofbillfish, tunas, sharks, and other speciesreleased by recreational and commercialfishermen provides valuable data on therange and movement patterns of thesespecies and, as such were included inthe qualitative procedures used toidentify general areas for potentialclosure.

Comment 12: The proposed Agencyaction is focused only on reducingswordfish discards, and does notconsider the impacts on vessels.

Response: NMFS disagrees. Theevaluation of the time/area closurefishery management strategy in theDSEIS and FSEIS followed a multi-species approach. Consistent with theobjectives, patterns in the discards,bycatch and incidental catches ofbillfish, sea turtles, bluefin tuna, pelagicand large coastal sharks, and otheroverfished HMS were used to definetime/area closures. The areas selectedfor closure in the final rule also seek tominimize the target catch of swordfish,tuna, dolphin, and other species and,thus, minimize the economic impactson vessel owners. The evaluation of theimpacts of the closures included allcomponents of the pelagic longlinecatch, as well as those of dealers withinthe time/area closure locations.

Mitigation of Economic ImpactsComment 1: NMFS should provide

economic compensation for thedisplaced vessels and dealers who arenegatively impacted from the closedareas (various vessel buyout schemeswere suggested ranging fromrecreational permit fees to having theremaining commercial fishermencompensate those who go out ofbusiness; other schemes includedemploying all displaced longlinefishermen in fish hatcheries). Whilevessel owners can sell their permits andreceive some compensation, dealerscannot. NMFS should provide resourcesfor retraining or education of displacedlongline fishermen.

Response: NMFS recognizes that thetime/area closures will adversely affectmany vessels and dealers, and that theripple effects of the closures will gobeyond the immediate community offishermen, and affect fishing families,associated businesses, and the largercoastal economy. NMFS also recognizesthat the Magnuson-Stevens Actrequirements to rebuild overfishedfisheries and reduce bycatch are goingto result in economic hardships—evenclosure of some businesses. Once thestocks are rebuilt, it may still not bepossible for all the affected individualsto make a living because many fisheriesare currently overcapitalized. NMFS hasmade a concerted effort to identifypossible sources of economic relief forindividuals and businesses affected bythe regulatory measures in this rule.Some government agencies, such as theSmall Business Administration, theEconomic Development Administration,the Farm Credit System, the U.S.Department of Labor’s EconomicDislocation and Worker AdjustmentAssistance Act, may provide fishingindustry participants with loans,training for new jobs, and/or grants for



economically stressed communities, andthe Fisheries Finance Program couldsupport an industry-sponsored vesselbuyback. A summary of the types ofbuyback programs, loans, andgovernment agencies that may be able tohelp are listed in section 3 of the FSEIS.

Comment 2: NMFS needs to considerother alternatives that might have fewerand lesser adverse economic impacts.

Response: In developing this finalrule, NMFS considered and adopted avariety of options that minimize bycatchand bycatch mortality, achieve the sameconservation goals, and mitigate therule’s economic impact. These option’sinclude smaller closed areas and/orshorter closed periods than wereproposed. In addition, the final rulesubstitutes a prohibition on the use oflive bait in the Gulf of Mexico for theproposed closed area in the westernGulf. These alternatives are likely tohave less of an adverse economic impacton fishermen and communities than thealternatives in the proposed rule.

Comment 3: NMFS received a numberof comments regarding permit buyouts,including the following: NMFS shouldbuy out displaced longline vessels;NMFS should not buy out displacedlongline vessels; thousands ofbusinesses fail every day and thosebusinesses do not ask tax payers to buythem out; NMFS should destroy anylongline vessels that are bought out;and, without a buyout, many companieswill go out of business.

Response: This rule does not includea fishing capacity reduction program(buyback program); however, NMFSmay implement a buyback program forthis fishery if circumstances warrant.Any buyback program will beimplemented in accordance with theMagnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS fishingcapacity reduction regulations, andother applicable law. Under section 312of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFSmay implement buyback programs thatpurchase fishing permits from permitholders or, alternatively, it mayimplement buyback programs thatrestrict vessels from participating inother fisheries by requiring that they bescrapped or be subject to titlerestrictions. The buyback methodselected will depend on particularcircumstances present when suchbuyback program, if any, isimplemented. Furthermore, NMFS hasconcluded that it does have theauthority to initiate and implementbuyback programs for fisheries underthe direct management authority of theSecretary of Commerce. Regulationsimplementing section 312, publishedMay 18, 2000 (65 FR 31444), providethat ‘‘for a fishery under the direct

management authority of the Secretary,NMFS may conduct a program onNMFS’ own motion by fulfilling therequirements * * * that reasonably applyto a program not initiated by a request.’’Because of the significant negativeeconomic impacts expected with thisfinal rule, NMFS has made a concertedeffort to identify possible sources ofeconomic relief for individuals andbusinesses affected by regulatorymeasures in fishery management. Asummary of the types of buybackprograms, loans, and governmentagencies that may be able to help arelisted in Section 3 of the FSEIS.

Comment 4: This proposed rule maycause Congress to abandon thelegislative buyout that has been underconsideration.

Response: NMFS announced in the1999 HMS FMP that the Agency wascommitted to reducing bycatch andbycatch mortality, as required in theMagnuson-Stevens Act, and wouldproceed with rulemaking to addressbycatch concerns. NMFS cannot predictwhat this rulemaking may have onCongressional action.

Comment 5: NMFS should recognizethat there are economic and competitivedisadvantages to businessesgeographically close to the proposedclosed areas.

Response: NMFS agrees and is awareof the potentially significant economicimpacts to related businesses, not just tofishermen. However, these areas werenot chosen with respect to the impactson a specific region but rather to target‘‘hot spots’’ for pelagic longline bycatch.Because of the anticipated significanteconomic impacts, NMFS has selectedalternatives that minimize those impactswhile still maintaining conservationbenefits similar to those in the proposedrule. In the Gulf of Mexico, NMFS choseto prohibit live bait in lieu of the largeWestern Gulf closure and has alsoimplemented a smaller closed area thatfocuses on swordfish bycatch reduction.Although this area has a year-roundclosure, it is also located offshore so thatsmaller fishing vessels may still be ableto fish. Thus, businesses near thisclosure may not be affected to the sameextent as they would be if the areaextended to the coast. In addition, asdiscussed earlier, NMFS has made aconcerted effort to identify possiblesources of economic relief forindividuals and businesses affected byregulatory measures in fisherymanagement.

Comment 6: NMFS should reconsiderlimiting the capacity of the Atlanticpelagic longline fleet. NMFS should notimplement further regulations andinstead should monitor the fishery

while giving the limited access programa chance to ‘‘settle.’’ Limited access wasan important first step that has not beengiven a chance to provide benefits.

Response: NMFS agrees that limitingaccess to the fishery is an importantstep. In July 1999, NMFS implementedlimited access in the pelagic longlinefleet. While it is true that limiting accessto this fishery could provide anincentive for fishermen to reducebycatch because they have aninvestment in the future of the fishery,NMFS has a mandate under theMagnuson-Stevens Act to minimizebycatch, to the extent practicable. Inaddition, the limited access program inplace now was designed to reduce latenteffort, not to reduce fishing effort. As aresult, there is still excess capacity inthis fishery. For example, of the 450permit holders who qualified for adirected or incidental swordfish limitedaccess permit, only 208 reportedlandings in the pelagic logbook in 1998.While other permit holders may bereporting landings in other logbooks,NMFS believes that many permitholders who do not fish regularly canstill be bought out by fishermen whomay be more active. Therefore, asannounced in the HMS FMP and the2000 SAFE report and in addition tothis rule to reduce bycatch and bycatchmortality in the pelagic longline fishery,NMFS continues to monitor the status ofthis fishery and, if necessary, will workwith the APs to consider additionalsteps to reduce fishing effort.

Comment 7: NMFS should makefishermen pay for an observer instead ofVMS.

Response: NMFS agrees that a user feesystem for funding observer coveragecould be beneficial. However, a VMSprogram to track vessels in areas wherebycatch is a concern has someadvantages in that it costs less, is lessintrusive, and has some vessel safetybenefits. NMFS will continue toexamine means of applying user fees infisheries subject to observer coverage. Inthe interim, the Atlantic pelagiclongline fishery VMS requirement iseffective beginning September 1, 2000.

Comment 8: Minimizing bycatchthrough large area closures will result ingreater overall economic benefits for allfishing industry sectors.

Response: NMFS agrees thatminimizing bycatch enhancesrebuilding of overfished stocks and,over the long term, should increase theeconomic benefits for all fishing sectors.However, in the short term, large areaclosures will force many small entities,such as fishermen and dealers, out ofbusiness. NMFS has chosen to close theareas that will provide the greatest



conservation and economic benefits inboth the short and long terms. Becauseof the jeopardy finding for loggerheadand leatherback sea turtles, NMFS willpropose additional measures to reducethe level of turtle takes. This couldinclude a closure of the Grand Banks forthe months of September throughDecember, modifications in fishingmethods, gear modifications, andincreased monitoring activities.

Comment 9: Every effort should bemade to mitigate the economic loss tocommercial fishermen; however, giventhe current strong economy, there isample opportunity for thosedisadvantaged by the closures to makea financial recovery.

Response: NMFS agrees that theeconomic loss to the commercialfishermen must be minimized as long asthe conservation goals can still beachieved. Fishermen and others wholose their job or go out of business as aresult of this rule may be able to relocateto either a different job altogether, or toa different job within the fishingindustry. To aid displaced individuals,NMFS identified possible sources ofeconomic relief for individuals andbusinesses affected by regulatorymeasures in fishery management. Asummary of the types of loans andgovernment agencies that may be able tohelp are listed in 3 of the FSEIS.

Comment 10: NMFS needs to consideractions to minimize economic impactsassociated with moving families to areasthat remain open to pelagic longlinefishing.

Response: NMFS is aware that somefamilies will need to move as a result ofthese regulations and that the cost ofmoving may be high. To examine morefully these impacts, NMFS published aFederal Register document (65 FR24440) on April 26, 2000, askingspecifically for comments on the impactof delaying the effective date to providesufficient time to relocate. Thecomments received are discussed here.Also, as a result of these concerns,NMFS is delaying implementation ofsome of these regulations for differentlengths of time.

Comment 11: The DeSoto Canyonclosure is keyed to reducing swordfishdiscards and the analysis focuses on thesocial and economic impacts on theswordfish longline fishermen and theirassociated fishing communities. Otherfisheries and fishing communities arelikely to be affected by this closures andshould be considered in the analysis.

Response: NMFS agrees that a varietyof fisheries and fishing communitiesshould be considered in undertakingefforts to minimize bycatch and bycatchmortality. As this final rule is directed

at the activities of only pelagic longlinefishermen, the analyses focus on theimpacts to the pelagic longline fisheryand communities. As NMFS collectsadditional information on otherfisheries (e.g., recreational, bottomlongline), NMFS may determine thatadditional rulemakings are needed toreduce bycatch and bycatch mortality inthose fisheries. If NMFS undertakessuch rulemakings, it will conductanalyses to determine the impact ofthose rules.

Comment 12: Many comments werereceived about the effective date. Thesecomments included the following:NMFS should do the right thing andinsist that the closures not be reducedand that they be implemented no laterthan 30 days after publication of thefinal rule expected on August 1; Theclosures must be enacted immediatelywithout any delay; Fishermen andrelated businesses would need at leastone full year prior to implementation tomove and resettle into other regions; IfNMFS is not going to providecompensation, NMFS needs to delayimplementation by at least 6 months torelocate entire businesses, find a newdocking facility, relocate staff, find anew church, find new schools forchildren, and find a new house; Theswordfish rebuilding measuresimplemented last November at ICCATare risk-prone and have less than a 50-percent chance of rebuilding in 10years. Given this, NMFS needs toimplement these closures immediatelyto reduce pressure on the stock andincrease the chance of sticking to therebuilding schedule.

Response: NMFS agrees thatfishermen and related businesses willneed time to relocate in response to theclosures in this final rule. NMFSdisagrees that even a short delay ofthese regulations would hinderrebuilding or cause irreparable harm tothe resource. Any dead swordfishdiscards that happen between thepublication of the final rule andimplementation will be taken off theU.S. swordfish dead discard allowanceincluded in the rebuilding plan. Thus,NMFS has decided to delay theimplementation of the closures: 90 daysfor the DeSoto Canyon area (November1, 2000) and 180 days (February 1, 2001)for the East Florida Coast closure, whichcoincides with the annual date that theseasonal Charleston Bump closurebegins. Thus, the closures in theSoutheast Atlantic would begin at thesame time, making the regulations lessconfusing and allow fishermen andrelated businesses approximately 6months to relocate if they so decide. Theimplementation of the DeSoto Canyon

closure is not delayed for as long,because this closure is not as large anarea as is the one the Atlantic and it isfurther offshore. Thus, fishermen whohave fished pelagic longlines in theDeSoto Canyon area may be able to findalternative fishing sites within the Gulfof Mexico without having to relocate thehome port of the vessel, and less timeis necessary to prepare.

Comment 13: Unless NMFSundertook a detailed analysis of thebehavior of longline fishermen andprocessing industry to investigate theimpacts of delaying the effective date(costs, vessel’s choice, etc.), anydecision to delay implementation wouldbe essentially arbitrary.

Response: NMFS disagrees. NMFSbelieves that commercial fishermen,dealers, and processors providedenough information in their commentson how long and why delayedimplementation is needed for NMFS tomake an informed decision.

Comment 14: NMFS asked the wrongquestion in regard to delayedimplementation. The correct question iswhat approach would produce thehighest net economic benefits, not whatare the short-term gains.

Response: NMFS believes that askingthe commercial fishing industry whythey need delayed implementation andhow long a delay it should be providesinformation needed for NMFS to decidethe optimal approach. NMFS does notbelieve the highest net economic benefitwould be achieved if all of thecommercial fishermen were asked tomove within 30 days. Instead, NMFSbelieves it could be more beneficial tothe fishermen and the consumer ifcommercial industries were given timeto relocate while still giving them timeto fish during this season.

Comment 15: NMFS’ entire approachon this rulemaking is fundamentallyflawed because the Agency does nothave the ability nor the authority toinitiate an effort buyout program forAtlantic HMS.

Response: NMFS disagrees. NMFSannounced in the HMS FMP that it wascommitted to reducing bycatch andbycatch mortality and would initiaterulemaking for time/area closures basedon comments received during thatrulemaking. NMFS has previouslyconcluded (65 FR 31444, May 18, 2000)that section 312 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides authorization forthe Atlantic HMS buyout ‘‘on NMFS’own motion by fulfilling therequirements * * * that reasonably applyto a program not initiated by a request.’’While NMFS recognizes that a buyoutprogram may provide somecompensation for vessel owners, a



buyout program would not provide anycompensation for other businessowners. Instead, NMFS has exploredother ways of minimizing economicimpacts including smaller time/areaclosures, a prohibition on live bait, anddelayed implementation.

Comment 16: Closing the DeSotoCanyon in addition to the western Gulfof Mexico would only increase anysocial and economic impacts to vesselsand their support and suppliercommunity-based infrastructures.

Response: NMFS agrees that closingboth the proposed Gulf B area and theDeSoto Canyon would have even greatereconomic impacts than closing eitherone alone. In addition, preliminaryanalyses indicate that prohibiting livebait may have similar conservationbenefits for billfish as closing thewestern Gulf of Mexico. For this reason,NMFS decided to close the DeSotoCanyon to minimize bycatch,particularly small swordfish, andprohibit live bait to minimize billfishbycatch.

Comment 17: The VietnameseAmericans who have settled in statesbordering the Gulf of Mexico areespecially vulnerable to social andcultural disruption since they aredependent upon commercial fishing asa traditional livelihood that providesstability.

Response: NMFS agrees that theVietnamese American fishermen may beaffected by the social and economicimpacts of these regulations. However,NMFS mitigated impacts to thefishermen in these final regulations bydeciding against closing the WesternGulf of Mexico and choosing to prohibitlive bait. Thus, although thesefishermen may need to alter the currentmethod of fishing, they should not needto relocate.

Comment 18: NMFS failed to factor inthe economic benefits from decreasedswordfish discards which would beadded to the United States’ totalallowable landings under the ICCATswordfish rebuilding program ifswordfish discards are reduced belowICCAT targets.

Response: NMFS disagrees that theAgency failed to factor in the economicbenefits from decreased swordfishdiscards in relation to the 1999 ICCATswordfish rebuilding program. NMFSrecognizes that reducing dead discardsis crucial in order for U.S. fishermen tocontinue to land the full swordfishquota allocated to the United States (seesection 7 of the FSEIS). For a fullanalysis of the social, economic, andconservation benefits of the 1999swordfish rebuilding program, see the

preamble to the proposed rule (64 FR33519, December 15, 1999).

Comment 19: Adding the DeSotoCanyon area closure to the Western Gulfof Mexico closure still would not savethat many blue and white marlins.NMFS must weigh that against theeconomic devastation the closures willcause.

Response: NMFS agrees thateconomic impacts must be considered.However, NMFS does not believe thatAgency needs to ‘‘balance’’ theeconomic impacts against theconservation benefits. The Magnuson-Stevens Act mandates NMFS to rebuildoverfished stocks, prevent overfishing,and minimize bycatch and bycatchmortality for all stocks, not just billfish.Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals forthe District of Columbia Circuit ruledthat the Magnuson-Stevens Act requiresNMFS to give priority to conservationbenefits and to consider adverseeconomic impacts if two alternativesachieve the same conservation benefits.NMFS recognizes that some regulationsthat meet this mandate will causeeconomic harm and has provided asummary of alternatives that may helpaffected fishermen and communities inSection 3 of the FSEIS. In addition,NMFS has analyzed many differentareas and seasons in order to determinewhether time/area closures will beeffective at meeting the goals of thisFSEIS, which time/area closures are themost effective, and which time/areaclosures are effective but have the leasteconomic impacts. NMFS believes thatthe management measures chosen willmeet all of the goals of this action andminimize the economic impacts, to theextent practicable.

Social and Economic AnalysesComment 1: NMFS received

comments on the extent of the impactsof the proposed closed areas on thefishing fleet, including: One-third of thefleet would go out of business; hundredsof coastal communities would benegatively impacted; many fishermenwould need to relocate; and the closuresfall disproportionately on minority andlow-income communities.

Response: Comments received on theproposed rule helped NMFS to developfinal regulations that would minimizethe impacts of the potential closed areaswhile yielding similar (or better)conservation benefits. For example,many comments suggested that NMFSconsider the DeSoto Canyon area bothinstead of and in addition to theproposed western Gulf closure (areaGulf B). NMFS found that the proposedGulf B closure could reduce the totalgross revenues from the entire pelagic

longline fleet by 6.4 percent while theDeSoto Canyon closure might reducethe total gross revenues from the entirefleet by 2.2 percent. In addition, whileanalyses indicate the Gulf B closurecould increase swordfish discards by 3.9percent, the DeSoto Canyon closurecould decrease swordfish discards by4.1 percent. In the South Atlantic, theproposed closure could reduceswordfish discards by 27.7 percent andreduce total gross revenues to the fleetby 19.2 percent while the final closurecould reduce swordfish discards by 27.3percent and reduce total gross revenuesfor the fleet by only 9.0 percent.

Comment 2: The closures will havealmost no adverse impact on any groupincluding commercial longlinefishermen, as shown by NMFS’analyses. The economic and biologicalbenefits of these zone closures faroutstrip any commercial interests.

Response: NMFS disagrees that thisrule will not have any adverse impacts.NMFS’ analyses, as supported bynumerous comments received, indicatethat many fishermen, dealers, andrelated industries could go out ofbusiness as a result of this rule. Inaddition, this rule will have rippleeffects throughout the entire fishingcommunity, commercial andrecreational, and into other jobs andindustries such as mechanics, engineers,and fishing supply markets. Theanalyses conducted for this rule indicatethat the closed areas and times will havepositive biological impacts andsignificant negative economic impactsfor some businesses. NMFS has tried toachieve the conservation goal ofminimizing bycatch while minimizingthe economic impacts.

Comment 3: Restrictions oncommercial fishermen have economicimpact not just on dealers andwholesalers but also on local grocerystores, welders, truckers, electricaltechnicians, mechanics, food banks, andother people in all communities.

Response: NMFS agrees that this rulewill have indirect impacts beyond theimmediate fishing industry. However,non-fishing industries are alreadydependent on a range of businesses andindustries. Although some initialadverse impacts may occur, theseindirectly affected industries should beable to adjust through increasedbusiness in other non-fishing sectors.

Comment 4: The economics of thepelagic longline fishery are integratedwith other fisheries from a dealer’sperspective.

Response: NMFS agrees. In both theinitial and final regulatory flexibilityanalyses and the regulatory impactreview, NMFS analyzed the impact of



this rule on dealers. NMFS stated that,as a result of this rule, some dealers maylose a substantial amount of fishpreviously supplied from fishermenwho have been issued a directed orincidental swordfish permit. However,the actual amount of gross revenuesdealers lose will depend on the type offish and the amount of fish dealers canobtain from other fishermen and otherfisheries. Although NMFS believes thisregulation will have a significanteconomic impact on HMS dealers whoare located in coastal ports adjacent tothe closed areas, most dealers are not asspecialized as fishermen are, and theymay be in a position to developalternative business opportunities (e.g.,purchases of other domestic fishproducts, import/export, value-addedprocessing).

Comment 5: Closing the DeSotocanyon area will force some businessesto close.

Response: NMFS agrees; assuming noeffort redistribution, the economicanalyses for the DeSoto Canyon closureindicate that approximately eightvessels (4 percent) would lose half oftheir gross revenues and seven dealerswho received fish from limited accesspermit holders (5.6 percent) would losebusiness volume equal to about half ofthe fish now handled. However, theeconomic impacts of the DeSoto Canyonare smaller than the anticipatedeconomic impacts of the proposed GulfB closure (12 vessels and 3 dealerslosing half of their business). Inaddition, the closure of the DeSotoCanyon area has greater biologicalbenefits for undersized swordfish thanthe proposed Gulf B closure. Thus,although some vessels may still go outof business as a result of this closure,the DeSoto Canyon area closureminimizes the economic impacts formost individuals. Also, the DeSotoCanyon area is located offshore, sosmaller fishing vessels may still be ableto fish adjacent open areas withoutrelocating. This is not true of the GulfB closure, which would have forcedsmall vessels owners who wished tocontinue to fish to relocate.

Comment 6: With the closures,pelagic longline fishermen are likely tomove into other areas. Many existingfishermen and countless others workingin those areas will be devastated by theconcentration of boats. NMFS has failedto analyze the impact of displacedfishermen on communities in the openareas.

Response: NMFS agrees that with thisrule, many pelagic longline fishermenare likely to move into other areas.While this rule may increase userconflicts in some areas, NMFS feels that

this relocation will increase the socialand economic benefits in manycommunities by increasing the level ofeconomic activity in the area, includingemployment. It is likely that somedealers and marinas in the open areas oralong the edges of the closed areas willsee an increase in business as fishermenmove. Other support businesses near theopen areas will likely be similarlyinfluenced. Also, communities in theclosed areas may have some economicrelief if they transfer effort fromcommercial fishing to recreationalfishing. This may have the addedbenefits of lessening user conflicts inother areas and enhancing therecreational experience. In addition, dueto the shorter Charleston Bump closureand the smaller DeSoto Canyon closurefurther off the coast, some fishermen inthose areas may decide not to relocate.

Comment 7: Even though the quantityof swordfish available to consumersmay not decrease due to imports, thequality of fresh swordfish will. Freshfish should be available to everyone, notjust to those who have the economicmeans to get it themselves or live acrossa line on a map. Even with a buyout, thelevel of economic activity will bediminished and consumers will loseaccess to the freshest product.

Response: NMFS agrees that it isadvantageous when fresh fish isavailable to everyone, and futuregenerations are considered in efforts todevelop sustainable fisheries. For thatreason, NMFS is working to rebuildoverfished fisheries and to reducebycatch and bycatch mortality whileminimizing the economic impacts withmethods such as time/area closures andgear modifications, without banningpelagic longline gear. These methodswill allow the fishery to continue toprovide as much fresh fish as possible.

Comment 8: This proposed ruleshould be considered as significantunder Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.

Response: Both NMFS and the Officeof Management and Budget(OMB)concluded that this rule does not meetthe criteria for classification as‘‘significant’’ for purposes of E.O. 12866review. However, NMFS has preparedinitial and final regulatory flexibilityanalyses as required by the RegulatoryFlexibility Act (RFA). It should be notedthat a rule could have a significanteconomic impact for purposes of theRFA without the rule being consideredsignificant under the criteria of E.O.12866.

Comment 9: The costs of the time/areaclosures have been overestimated whilethe benefits have been underestimated.NMFS has overestimated the man-hourcost of circle hooks. Many economic

benefits have been underestimated oromitted from the analysis of theeconomic impact of the proposedclosures.

Response: NMFS agrees that some ofthe costs have been overestimated andsome of the benefits have beenunderestimated. In both the initial andfinal regulatory flexibility analyses andthe regulatory impact review, NMFSestimated the maximum economicimpact of each alternative andunderstated many of the benefits. Thisis different than the analyses NMFSconducted to analyze the conservationimpacts. Those analyses estimated theconservation impacts under no effortredistribution and effort redistributionmodels. The no effort redistributionmodel allowed NMFS to estimate themaximum biological benefits. The effortredistribution model allowed NMFS toestimate the minimum biologicalbenefits. For the economic analyses,NMFS assumed no effort redistribution.This model allowed NMFS to estimatethe maximum economic impact of thefinal regulations. If NMFS had assumedeffort redistribution, the economicanalyses would have indicated nochange from the status quo or, perhaps,an increase in gross revenues (seesection 7 of the FSEIS). While NMFSbelieves that the actual costs andbenefits of the regulations will besomewhere between status quo and thecosts described in the analyses, NMFSused the estimates from the mostconservative models to make itsdecisions. This means that, for thebiological estimates, NMFS used theeffort redistribution model, and for theeconomic estimates, NMFS used the no-effort redistribution model. However,NMFS believes that many fishermenand related industries will adapt to theregulations and will continue to work ineither the HMS fisheries or in others.However, because NMFS cannot predictthe behavior of individuals, NMFScannot estimate the exact cost or benefitany regulation will have. In addition,NMFS recognizes that the ripple effectof the closures will impact otherbusiness that provide goods andservices to the pelagic longline fishery(e.g., tackle manufactures and suppliers;dock-side services, including ice, bait,fuel, dockage, labor; and vesselmanufacture and repair). Although thefinal regulatory flexibility analysis andregulatory impact review provide amore thorough discussion of economicfactors associated with the final Agencyactions, NMFS does not have thenecessary detailed economicinformation to make a quantitative



assessment of the impacts on fisherysupport businesses.

Comment 10: The use of grossrevenues to quantify impacts does notprovide an accurate assessment of theeconomic impacts of the proposed rule;approximating loss changes by usingaverage vessel costs would be a moreappropriate technique.

Response: NMFS agrees that using netrevenues instead of gross revenueswould provide a more accurateassessment of the economic impacts.However, as described in the HMS FMP,NMFS has only one estimate of theaverage variable costs for vessels in thepelagic longline fishery. Removing thisestimate from every estimate of grossrevenues would be the same asremoving a constant and would result inthe same estimates as those from grossrevenues in terms of percent change innet revenues. Thus, NMFS prefers, atthis time, to discuss the impact inregard to gross revenues and variablecosts separately. However, NMFS isworking on expanding its collection ofsocial and economic data. NMFS isseeking approval to make the economicadd-on to the pelagic logbook datacollection mandatory for selectedvessels. This information could be usedin future rulemakings to estimate the netrevenues for each vessel.

Comment 11: The documents do nothave enough data on people and thelives this rule will affect. Because ofthis, the rule fails to fully assess thesocial and economic impacts. NMFSneeds to expand the social impactassessment.

Response: The data used to examinethe alternatives considered in therulemaking constitute the best availabledata. However, NMFS agrees thatadditional data will be beneficial tofuture analyses. Therefore, NMFS isincreasing efforts to collect social andeconomic data for use in futureanalyses, such as through the cost-earnings add-on to the pelagic logbookand charter/headboat logbook, andsocial and economic data surveys to beadministered to tournamentparticipants.

Comment 12: NMFS needs additionalinformation regarding any social andeconomic impacts from the proposedrule on the recreational fishing industry.

Response: The proposed rule andFSEIS included a discussion of thevalue of recreational HMS fisheries andthe potential increases in fishingsuccess as a result of the closure ofcommercial pelagic longline fishingalong the U.S. Atlantic coast. Given thepotential benefits of the rule on therecreational fishing industry and thecomments received, NMFS expanded

the discussion of the impacts onrecreational fishermen in the final ruledocuments.

Comment 13: If the closures aid in therecovery of billfish, sharks, tunas, andswordfish, there will be tremendouseconomic gain in the recreationalfishing sector. Healthy fish populationsproduce more economic benefit whenthey are used for recreational fishingfirst. The economic benefits ofrecreational angling have beendemonstrated many times.

Response: NMFS agrees that therecreational fishing industry providesmany economic benefits andemployment. The 1988 Billfish FisheryManagement Plan, which prohibitedcommercial vessels from possessingbillfish, recognizes the importance ofthe recreational billfish fishery.Although increasing the recreationalfishery benefits and decreasing userconflicts are not an objective of the rule,NMFS realizes that such benefits couldoccur as a result of the regulations.

Comment 14: NMFS needs to evaluatethe economic impacts on recreationalfishermen in the mid- Atlantic Bightthat may result from increasedinteractions with displaced pelagiclongline fishing activity.

Response: NMFS agrees thatdisplacement of pelagic longline effortmay have an impact on the remainingopen areas in the Atlantic. Accordingly,NMFS includes a discussion ofadditional management measuresspecifically for the mid-Atlantic Bight toreduce potential interactions withendangered/threatened species and withrecreational anglers. In addition, thereduced time/area closures will not onlyminimize economic impacts on thecommercial fishing industry, but alsoreduce user conflicts that may haveoccurred under the proposed rule ifeffort had been concentrated intosmaller remaining open areas. Forexample, NMFS reduced the closurealong the Atlantic coast, particularly theCharleston Bump area. This should helpto minimize any user conflicts that mayhave occurred as a result of theproposed rule because some commercialfishermen in the Charleston Bump areamay decide not to relocate north.However, the goal of this regulation isto reduce bycatch and bycatch mortalityin the pelagic longline fishery,consistent with the Magnuson-StevensAct, not to reduce user conflicts. NMFSwill continue to monitor the impacts ofthis regulation on the environment andfishing interests. If necessary, NMFSwill work with the APs and may issueadditional regulations in order to reduceuser conflicts.

Comment 15: If one compares the1997 summary economic statistics inthe IRFA with the DSEIS and the 1998summary statistics in the supplementalinformation about DeSoto Canyon, itappears that the fishery is collapsing.

Response: NMFS disagrees. The levelof participation in the fishery mayappear to have declined because theIRFA undertaken for the proposed ruleand the DSEIS used data from thenortheast logbooks, whereas the analysisfor the supplemental DeSoto Canyonalternative did not. The use of thesenortheast logbooks in the DeSotoCanyon analysis would increase thenumber of vessels that reported landingsin 1998; however, most of these vesselsreported few, if any, landings from areasin or near the final time/area closures,and would not be directly affected bythe DeSoto closure. In addition, theaverage gross revenue per permit holderincreases by 21 percent whencomparing the 1997 data with the 1998data ($113,173 versus $137,126).

Comment 16: While smaller areaswould minimize the economic impactson commercial fishermen, the District ofColumbia Circuit Court of Appealsrecently held that conservation concernsoutweigh concerns about the potentialeconomic impacts of fishery regulations.

Response: NMFS agrees thatconservation concerns are important.However, NMFS also recognizes that theproposed rule would have significanteconomic impacts. For this reason,NMFS re-examined the data and revisedthe final actions to achieve similar, orbetter, conservation impacts whilereducing the economic impacts. NMFSfeels that the suite of final actions (therevised time/area closures and the livebait prohibition) will have greaterconservation benefits than the proposedregulations and serves to better mitigateeconomic impacts.

Comment 17: The proposal violatesthe Regulatory Flexibility Act andwould create social and economicdevastation to fishing families andcommunities.

Response: NMFS disagrees that theproposed or final regulations violate theRFA. The RFA imposes an analyticalrequirement and specifies proceduresfor assessing the impacts of proposedregulations on small entities. FederalAgencies must determine the economicimpact, explore feasible alternatives forreducing the economic impact, andexplain the reason for the regulatorychoice. Further, the RFA requires thatthe Federal Agency obtain publiccomment on the analysis, and thatcomments be addressed in ajustification of the final action. NMFSbelieves that the analyses in the



proposed rule and supplementalinformation meet all the requirements ofthe RFA. NMFS recognizes that the finalregulations will have large impacts onmany fishing families and communitiesbut notes that the RFA does notpreclude an Agency from implementingregulations having such impacts. NMFSchose final actions that meet theconservation goals and minimized theeconomic impacts, to the extentpracticable.

Comment 18: Regional market gluts,especially associated with bad weatherevents and/or quota closures, should beexpected to reduce ex-vessel prices.

Response: NMFS agrees that the time/area closures may have some impact onex-vessel price particularly if closures orbad weather keep commercial fishermenfrom fishing in the open areas. However,given the extent of the remaining openareas in the Gulf and along the Atlanticcoast, NMFS does not believe that thetime/area closures would change the ex-vessel price significantly or causesignificant market gluts.

Comment 19: NMFS should omitdealers who only import foreign fishfrom the analysis; in reality, domesticdealers who primarily offload andpurchase ‘‘trip-fish’’ are few and farbetween and those in the closed areaswill be impacted far greater than NMFShas analyzed.

Response: NMFS agrees that dealerswho purchase most of their fish fromvessels that now fish the designatedclosed areas will be greatly affected bythese regulations. However, neither theIRFA nor FRFA considered importedfish. Instead, these analyses onlyconsidered fish sold to dealers byswordfish limited access permit holders.

Comment 20: Pelagic longline vesselsneed to gross at least $500,000 year tobe profitable; NMFS’ estimate for grossex-vessel revenues is too low.

Response: NMFS disagrees that theestimate for average ex-vessel grossrevenues used in the IRFA and FRFA istoo low. A number of studies performedon the voluntary economic add-on ofthe pelagic logbook indicate that manyfishermen are operating on the marginand are not profitable. One study foundthat the average gross revenue per vesselwas $118,804. This is similar to theaverage of $113,173 used in the IRFAand $137,126 used in the FRFA. Thus,while some vessels may gross over$500,000, the majority of vessels do not.

Changes From the Proposed RuleFor reasons explained in the

responses to comments listed in thepreceding text, NMFS has modified theproposed rule to balance bycatchreduction objectives with the need to

mitigate economic impacts. Theproposed western Gulf of Mexicoclosure has been changed to a Gulf-wideprohibition on the use of live bait withpelagic longline gear. Also, the year-round DeSoto Canyon closed area hasbeen added to further reduce deaddiscards of small swordfish. Theproposed southeastern United Statesclosed area has been split into northernand southern components: a seasonal(February 1– April 30) closure for theCharleston Bump area and a year-roundclosure for the Florida East Coast area.

To facilitate enforcement, several newdefinitions and prohibitions wereadded, and the proposed descriptions offishing gear and the conditions fortransit of the closed areas were revised.These revisions prohibit fishing activityof any type, regardless of gear actuallydeployed or target species, when avessel issued an HMS permit is in aclosed area with pelagic longline gearon board. Additionally, this final ruleestablishes a rebuttable presumptionthat fish on board a vessel in a closedarea were taken in the closed area witha pelagic longline if that gear is onboard. This imposes a burden on thevessel operator to demonstrate that suchfish were taken outside the closed area(e.g., logbook entries, VMS signature).

ConclusionsIn this final rule, NMFS prohibits

pelagic longline fishing in areas withrelatively higher bycatch rates becausethis alternative would best address theconservation and managementobjectives embodied in the FMP asrequired by the Magnuson-Stevens Actand ICCAT recommendations. Underthe effort redistribution model, the finaltime/area closures, in conjunction withthe live bait prohibition, are expected toreduce swordfish discards by 31 percentand sailfish discards by 29 percent; bluemarlin and white marlin discards couldincrease by 3 percent and 7 percent,respectively. The final action time/areaclosures in the DeSoto Canyon, EastFlorida Coast and Charleston Bumpcould reduce the number of swordfishkept by 13 percent and the number ofdolphin kept by 18 percent, while BAYStunas landings would increase by nearly10 percent.

The final area closures, together withthe ban on live bait longlining in theGulf of Mexico, appropriately meet theobjectives of the Billfish and HMS FMPsand have the greatest likelihood ofreducing bycatch while minimizing, tothe extent possible, adverse impacts onfishing revenues and costs. Shouldfuture research indicate that practicablegear modifications could further reducebycatch of managed HMS and/or

protected resources, NMFS willconsider those gear modifications inconjunction with, or as an alternative to,time-area closures. In addition, NMFSwill address turtle bycatch in thepelagic longline fishery in a separaterulemaking (see the following ESAdiscussion). Future regulatory measuresto reduce sea turtle bycatch may involveadditional area closures and/or furthermodifications to fishing gear andmethods in defined areas of highinteraction rates.

NMFS notes that there are similaritiesand differences between the time-areaclosures for pelagic longline gearcontained in this final rule and thosecontained in legislation pending beforeCongress. Should any of theCongressional bills become law, NMFSwill modify the measures contained inthis final rule as necessary.

Compliance Guide

Under the Small Business RegulatoryEnforcement Fairness Act of 1996,Federal Agencies are required toprovide small business entities with aplain-language summary of how tocomply with new regulations. Copies ofthe compliance guide for this final ruleare available from Rebecca Lent (seeADDRESSES). To facilitate distribution,the compliance guide is also included inthis document:

Q1: I am a recreational fisherman.Will these regulations affect me?

A: No. These regulations only affectcommercial fishermen who use pelagiclongline gear in the Atlantic ocean andhave a Federal permit for Atlantic HMS.

Q2: I use pelagic longline gear. Willthese regulations affect me?

A: Yes, if you have a Federal permitfor Atlantic HMS. These regulations willprohibit you from fishing with pelagiclongline gear in certain areas and timesand from using live bait in the Gulf ofMexico. The Gulf of Mexico is the areaof the U.S. EEZ west of 83° W. longitudeas defined in 50 CFR 600.105 (c).

Q3: What is longline gear?A: A longline is fishing gear that is set

horizontally, either anchored, floating,or attached to a vessel, and that consistsof a mainline with three or more leaders(gangions) and hooks, whether retrievedby hand or mechanical means.

Q4: What is pelagic longline gear?A: Pelagic longline gear is defined as

a longline that is suspended by floats inthe water column and that is not fixedto or in contact with the ocean bottom.Your vessel has pelagic longline onboard when:

1. A power-operated longline hauler,2. A mainline,3. High-flyers,



4. Floats capable of supporting themainline, and

5. Leaders (gangions) with hooks areon board. Removal from the vessel ofany one of these five elementsconstitutes removal of pelagic longlinegear.

Q5: What are the areas where I can’tfish using pelagic longline gear?

A: As of November 1, 2000, you willnot be able to fish at any time usingpelagic longline gear in the DeSotoCanyon area. This area, composed oftwo squares offshore of the west coast ofFlorida, is defined as the area within thefollowing coordinates: 30°00’ N. lat.,88°00’ W. long.; 30°00’ N. lat., 86°00’ W.long.; 28°00’ N. lat., 86°00’ W. long.;28°00’ N. lat., 84°00’ W. long.; 26°00’ N.lat., 84°00’ W. long.; 26°00’ N. lat.,86°00’ W. long.; 28°00’ N. lat., 86°00’ W.long.; 28°00’ N. lat., 88°00’ W. long.;30°00’ N. lat., 88°00’ W. long.

As of February 1, 2001, you will notbe able to fish at any time using pelagiclongline gear in the East Florida Coastarea. This area, located along the eastcoast of Florida through Georgia, isdefined as the seaward area within thefollowing coordinates: starting at 31°00’N. lat. near Jekyll Island, Georgia, andproceeding due east to 31°00’ N. lat.,78°00’ W. long.; 28°17’ N. lat., 79°00’ W.long.; then proceeding along theboundary of the Economic ExclusiveZone (EEZ) to 24°00’ N. lat., 79°30’ W.long.; then connecting by straight linesthe following coordinates in the orderstated: 24°00’ N. lat., 79°30’ W. long.;24°00’ N. lat., 81°00’ W. long.; 24°00’ N.lat., 81°47’ W. long.; then proceedingdue north to intersect the coast at 81°47’W. long. near Key West, Florida.

Also, as of February 1, 2001, you willnot be able to fish using pelagic longlinegear from February through April eachyear in the Charleston Bump area. Thisarea, located off of North Carolina, isdefined as 34°00’ N. lat. nearWilmington Beach, North Carolina, andproceeding due east to connect bystraight lines the following coordinates:34°00’ N. lat., 76°00’ W. long.; 31°00’ N.lat., 76°00’ W. long.; then proceedingdue west to intersect the coast at 31°00’N. lat. near Jekyll Island, Georgia.

Q6: Are all three areas closed year-round?

A: No. The Charleston Bump area isclosed only February 1 through April 30of each year. The other two areas,DeSoto Canyon and East Florida Coast,are closed year-round.

Q7: Are there any gear or fishingmethod restrictions in this rule?

A: Yes. As of September 1, 2000, inthe Gulf of Mexico, pelagic longlinefishermen are not allowed to use livebait. Setting up a live well or

maintaining live baitfish on board isprohibited. You may not have a tank orwell attached to an aeration or watercirculation device or have live baitfishif a pelagic longline is on board.

Q8: I am a recreational fisherman. CanI use live bait?

A: Yes. These regulations do not affectrecreational fishermen.

Q9: I am a commercial fisherman butI don’t use pelagic longline. Will theseregulations affect me?

A: As long as you do not have apelagic longline on board your vessel,you will be able to fish in the closedareas. See question number 4 above foran explanation of the five elements ofpelagic longline gear.

Q10: I use pelagic longline gear but donot have a limited access permit to fishfor highly migratory species. Will theseregulations affect me?

A: These closed areas and gearrestrictions apply only to commercialfishermen who hold Federal permits forAtlantic HMS. While unpermittedvessels may fish for other species withpelagic longline gear in these areas, notunas, swordfish, billfish, or sharks maybe retained on board those vessels.However, NMFS is working with theRegional Councils to ensure consistencybetween regulations for all pelagiclongline fisheries.

Q11: Will I need to buy a vesselmonitoring system (VMS)?

A: If you are a commercial fishermanwith Federal permits for Atlantic HMSand you have pelagic longline gear onboard, you will need to have a VMSoperational by September 1, 2000.

Q12: Can I transit the closed areas orwill I need to go around them?

A: If you have pelagic longline gear onboard and possess a Federal AtlanticHMS permit, you will be allowed totransit the area if your vessel has aworking VMS unit, but you will not beallowed to fish with any gear type. Ifyou have pelagic longline gear on board,it is assumed that any fish on boardwere caught with pelagic longline in theclosed area and you will have todemonstrate that the fish were harvestedoutside the closed area. If you do nothave pelagic longline on board, you mayfish in the area.

Q13: Is there a vessel buybackprogram associated with this rule?

A: No. This rule does not have abuyback program associated with it.Legislation pending before Congressmay address vessel buybacks.

Q14: I have the Federal swordfish,shark, and tuna limited access permits.If I decide to leave the pelagic longlinefishery, can I sell my permits?

A: Yes. You can sell your limitedaccess permits individually, as a group,

with the vessel, or without the vessel. Ifyou have directed permits, upgradingrestrictions for horsepower, lengthoverall, and net and gross tonnageapply. For more information ontransferring or renewing limited accesspermits, please contact the NOAAFisheries Southeast region permit officein St. Petersburg, FL, at (727) 570–5326.

ClassificationThis final rule is published under the

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., and ATCA, 16U.S.C. 971 et seq.

NMFS prepared an initial regulatoryflexibility analysis for the proposedrule. Based on comments received onthe proposed rule and on the IRFA (seeComments and Responses section),NMFS has amended the final actionsand has revised the regulatory flexibilityanalysis accordingly. The finalregulatory flexibility analysis FRFAassumes that fishermen, during the timethey would otherwise be pelagiclongline fishing in the designated areaswould instead (1) make longline sets inother areas, (2) participate in othercommercial fisheries, or (3) exitcommercial fishing. As of March 23,2000, 450 vessel owners had beenissued for limited access permits forswordfish, sharks, and the Atlantictunas Longline category. With thesethree permits, these 450 fishermen mayuse a pelagic longline to target Atlanticswordfish (if they have a directedswordfish permit), Atlantic tunas, orAtlantic sharks (if they have a directedshark permit). If they have an incidentalswordfish or incidental shark permit,these fishermen could still targetAtlantic tunas. Thus, the number ofsmall entities directly affected by thisregulation consists of at least these 450fishermen. In addition, other sectors ofthe commercial fishery might beaffected by this regulation, includingdealers, processors, bait houses, andhook manufacturers. Using the weighoutslips submitted by fishermen reportingin the pelagic longline logbook, NMFSestimates that 125 dealers received fishin 1998 from the 450 fishermen whoqualified under the limited accessprogram. NMFS also received commentsthat the businesses associated with therecreational and charter/headboatsectors of the HMS fisheries may alsoexperience economic impacts as a resultof the commercial fishing effortdisplacement which would result fromthe time/area closures. On balance,though, these impacts are likely to bepositive as gear conflicts will bereduced in some areas and theavailability of target species willincrease for the recreational sector.



Under this final action, a decrease ingross revenues will result for someproportion of the affected small entitiesin the commercial fishing sector. Underthe final time/area closure actions,NMFS estimates that, assuming theworst case scenario, the average annualgross revenues per permit holder coulddecrease by nearly 5 percent to about$130,000. Additionally, NMFS estimatesthat under the final closure actionsapproximately 43 percent of the vesselsthat reported landings in 1998 willexperience at least a 5-percent decreasein gross revenues and approximately 14percent of the vessels will experience atleast a 50-percent decrease in grossrevenues (i.e., be forced out of business).The final rule closures will also have aneconomic impact on dealers. About 15percent of the permitted dealers couldexperience at least a 5-percent reductionin the amount of fish handled due to theDeSoto Canyon area closure, while 28percent could experience at least fivepercent reduction in the amount of fishhandled due to the Charleston Bumpand East Florida Coast closures.However, to the extent that landings ofHMS are likely to increase in otherareas, gains will accrue to certain othervessel operators and dealers.

Based on comments received on theproposed rule and the IRFA, NMFS hasadopted a ban on live bait sets in lieuof the western Gulf of Mexico closedarea. While a prohibition on live baitmay reduce the landings of some pelagiclongline fishermen, particularlyyellowfin tuna landings, it is not likelythat this final action will have a largeimpact on the gross revenues of anypermit holder. More likely, this finalaction may have an impact on the netrevenues of some permit holders sinceit will change the method of fishing.Requiring the use of frozen bait mightincrease costs by up to 22 percent forfishermen who currently use live bait.However, the use of dead bait mightdecrease the time at sea (since a numberof days are used up fishing for live bait)and a decrease in the time spent at seamight decrease the cost of fuel,groceries, or the costs associated withcatching the bait and keeping it alive.Thus, even though fishermen mightneed to spend additional money upfront in order to leave for a fishing trip,this alternative might be beneficial ifmore sea time is available to fish fortarget species. In any event, theeconomic impacts of a live baitprohibition are expected to be lesssignificant than under the proposedclosure.

The alternatives considered includethe status quo, gear modifications, anda ban on pelagic longline fishing by U.S.

vessels in the Atlantic Ocean. Althoughthe status quo and gear modificationalternatives might have lesser economicimpacts on participants in the pelagiclongline fishery, those alternativeseither do not reduce bycatch to theextent that NMFS expects to beachieved by the time-area closures orpresent enforcement difficulties. Whilea complete ban on longline fishingwould reduce bycatch to a greater extentthan the time-area closures, the lostvalue of commercial seafood productsand the adverse impacts on fisheryparticipants and fishing communitieswould impose greater costs than thefinal action.

In addition to changes from theproposed rule, NMFS has decided todelay implementation of some of thefinal regulations to help mitigate someof the economic impacts fishermen mayexperience as a result of the time/areaclosures and to give fishermen andrelated industries a chance to relocateboth business interests and families.The RIR/FRFA provides furtherdiscussion of the economic effects of thefinal actions and all the alternativesconsidered.

This final action will not impose anyadditional reporting or recordkeepingrequirements on vessel operators ordealers. Vessel logbooks, dealer reports,observer notification, and VMSrequirements applicable to the HMSfisheries are all currently approved bythe Office of Management and Budgetunder existing regulations.

In preparing the draft HMS FMP andBillfish Amendment, NMFS reinitiatedformal consultation for all HighlyMigratory Species commercial fisherieson May 12, 1998, under section 7 of theESA. In a BO issued on April 23, 1999,NMFS concluded that operation of theAtlantic pelagic longline fishery mayadversely affect, but is not likely tojeopardize, the continued existence ofany endangered or threatened speciesunder NMFS’ jurisdiction. Certainprovisions of the BO were incorporatedinto the final rule that implemented theFMPs and consolidated the HMSregulations (e.g., moving afterencounters and limiting the mainlinelength). Other provisions of the BOrequired non-regulatory programmaticactions (e.g., research and monitoring).

The Incidental Take Statement (ITS)of the April 23, 1999, BO authorized thefollowing levels of incidental take in thepelagic longline fisheries: 690leatherback sea turtles (Dermochelyscoriacea), entangled or hooked (annualestimated number) of which no morethan 11 are observed hooked byingestion or moribund when released;1541 loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta

caretta) entangled or hooked (annualestimated number) of which no morethan 23 may be hooked by ingestion orobserved moribund when released.

Observed take levels documented in1999 indicate that, of all the turtlestaken, up to 50 loggerheads and 19leatherbacks were observed ‘‘hooked byingestion’’ or moribund upon release.However, only about 3 percent observercoverage was obtained and theanticipated take levels were based on 5percent observer coverage. Thus, theobserved levels of take would likelyhave been considerably higher had therequired 5 percent coverage level beenachieved. If the target observer coveragelevel had been achieved, NMFSpreliminarily projects that up to 83loggerheads and 32 leatherbacks wouldhave been observed ‘‘hooked byingestion’’ or moribund in 1999.

On November 19, 1999, NMFSreinitiated consultation under Section 7of the ESA because observed take ofloggerhead sea turtles by the Atlanticpelagic longline fishery had exceededlevels anticipated in the ITS. Theconsultation included this pelagiclongline management rulemakingbecause the time/area closures, ifimplemented, could affect the overallinteraction rates with sea turtlesdepending on fishermen’s responses interms of shifting pelagic longline effortor fishing for other species with othergear. The consultation also addressedthe shark drift gillnet fishery and theAtlantic tunas purse seine fisheries;however, the following discussionaddresses only issues in the BO thatapply specifically to the pelagic longlinefishery which is the subject of this finalrule.

After reviewing the current status ofthe northern right whale, the humpback,fin and sperm whales, and leatherback,loggerhead, green, hawksbill, andKemp’s ridley sea turtles, theenvironmental baseline for the actionarea, the effects of implementation ofthe proposed Amendment to theAtlantic HMS FMP, the record ofcompliance with requirements ofprevious BOs on HMS fisheries, andprobable cumulative effects, it is NMFS’BO that continued operation of theAtlantic pelagic longline fishery islikely to jeopardize the continuedexistence of loggerhead and leatherbacksea turtles.

According to the BO, to avoid thelikelihood of jeopardizing the continuedexistence of loggerhead and leatherbacksea turtles, NMFS must implementfishery management measures to reducethe number of these turtles that areincidentally captured, injured, killed bygear associated with federally-managed



fisheries by at least 75 percent fromcurrent levels; that is, a reduction in thenumber of loggerhead and leatherbacksea turtles captured, injured, or killedcompared with a running average of thenumber captured, injured, or killedduring the period 1993 to 1999. Thereduction can be accomplished directlyby gear modifications or it can beaccomplished indirectly by changingthe method by which gear is deployed.

Indirect modifications could includemanaging fisheries that use harmful gearover time and space to eliminate thelikelihood of interactions betweenloggerhead sea turtles and gear(proportional to the threat posed byspecific gear); managing fisheries toeliminate the likelihood that loggerheadsea turtles captured by gear woulddrown before they can be released (suchas keeping soak times to less than 30 to45 minutes); excluding gear from areasthat, based on available data, appear tobe important for loggerhead sea turtles;or, any combination of these changesthat reduce the number of loggerheadsea turtles that are incidentallycaptured, injured, and killed by gearassociated with federally-managedfisheries by at least 75 percent fromcurrent levels.

The BO identified the Reasonable andPrudent Alternatives (RPAs) necessaryto avoid jeopardy, and listed theReasonable and Prudent Measures(RPMs) and Terms and Conditions (TCs)necessary to authorized continued takes.According to the BO, if NMFS cannotdevelop and implement direct orindirect management measures thatreduce the number of loggerhead seaturtles that are incidentally captured,injured, and killed by gear associatedwith federally managed fisheries by atleast 75 percent from current levels, thefollowing RPAs must be implemented:modifications in fishing gear or method(e.g., requirement for corrodible hooksor limiting fishing activity to certaintemperature and time of day regimes); orexclusion zones (e.g., temporally andspatially restricting pelagic longlineeffort in the Grand Banks area); andenhanced monitoring.

Section 9 of ESA and Federalregulations issued pursuant to section4(d) of ESA prohibit the take ofendangered and threatened species,respectively, without special exemption.Incidental take is defined as take that isincidental to, and not the purpose of,the carrying out of an otherwise lawfulactivity. Under sections 7(b)(4) and7(o)(2) of the ESA, taking that isincidental to and not intended as part ofthe Agency action is not a prohibitedtaking, provided that such taking is incompliance with the RPMs and TCs of

the ITS. Section 7(b)(4)(c) of the ESAspecifies that in order to provide an ITSfor an endangered or threatened speciesof marine mammal, the taking must beauthorized under section 101(a)(5) ofthe Marine Mammal Protection Act of1972 (MMPA). Since no incidental takehas been authorized under section101(a)(5) of the MMPA, no statement onincidental take of endangered whales isprovided and no take is authorized.

Regarding anticipated incidental takeof sea turtles in the pelagic longlinefishery for swordfish, tunas, and sharks,it is hoped that this final rule to reducebycatch in the pelagic longline fishery,which may slightly increase take levelsof sea turtles, will be more than offsetby the additional requirements toimplement the RPMs according to theterms and conditions of the ITS. The BOstates that the RPMs that are necessaryand appropriate to minimize take oflisted species include an effectivemonitoring and reporting system todocument take, educating fishermen toreduce the potential for serious injury ormortality of hooked turtles, andassessments of current data to look fortrends that may indicate managementmeasures to reduce the number ofprotected species interactions.

In order to be exempt from the takeprohibitions of section 9 of ESA, theJune 30, 2000, BO requires NMFS tocomply with certain terms andconditions which would implement theRPMs described earlier and outlinerequired reporting/monitoringrequirements. The terms and conditionsare non-discretionary and require: at-seaobserver coverage; informationcollection on the condition of sea turtlesand marine mammals when released;the presence and use of dipnets andcutting devices on all longline vessels;review of turtle bycatch and releasemortality studies; financial support forgenetic research to identify sea turtlesubpopulations; examination of theinfluence of gear and fishing techniquemodifications such as light sticks andlength of mainline on protected speciesinteraction rates.

NMFS will address the requirementsof the BO in a subsequent rulemakingand by certain non-regulatory actions. Inthe interim, this final rule will not resultin any irreversible and irretrievablecommitment of resources that will havethe effect of foreclosing the formulationor implementation of any RPAsnecessary to reduce impacts onprotected species.

This final rule has been determined tobe not significant for purposes of E.O.12866.


Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels,Foreign relations, Intergovernmentalrelations, Penalties, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements, Statistics,Treaties.

Dated: July 26, 2000.Penelope D. Dalton,Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in thepreamble, 50 CFR part 635, is amendedas follows:

PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLYMIGRATORY SPECIES


Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C.1801 et seq.

2. In § 635.2, the definition of ‘‘High-flyer’’ is revised and new definitions for‘‘Charleston Bump closed area,’’‘‘DeSoto Canyon closed area,’’ ‘‘EastFlorida Coast closed area,’’ ‘‘Handline,’’‘‘Longline,’’ and ‘‘Pelagic longline’’ areadded in alphabetical order to read asfollows:

§ 635.2 Definitions.

* * * * *Charleston Bump closed area means

the Atlantic Ocean area seaward of thebaseline from which the territorial sea ismeasured from a point intersecting theU.S. coast at 34°00’ N. lat. nearWilmington Beach, North Carolina, andproceeding due east to connect bystraight lines the following coordinatesin the order stated: 34°00’ N. lat., 76°00’W. long.; 31°00’ N. lat., 76°00’ W. long.;then proceeding due west to intersectthe coast at 31°00’ N. lat. near JekyllIsland, Georgia.* * * * *

DeSoto Canyon closed area means thearea within the Gulf of Mexico boundedby straight lines connecting thefollowing coordinates in the orderstated: 30°00’ N. lat., 88°00’ W. long.;30°00’ N. lat., 86°00’ W. long.; 28°00’ N.lat., 86°00’ W. long.; 28°00’ N. lat.,84°00’ W. long.; 26°00’ N. lat., 84°00’ W.long.; 26°00’ N. lat., 86°00’ W. long.;28°00’ N. lat., 86°00’ W. long.; 28°00’ N.lat., 88°00’ W. long.; 30°00’ N. lat.,88°00’ W. long.* * * * *

East Florida Coast closed area meansthe Atlantic Ocean area seaward of thebaseline from which the territorial sea ismeasured from a point intersecting theU.S. coast at 31°00’ N. lat. near JekyllIsland, Georgia, and proceeding due eastto connect by straight lines thefollowing coordinates in the order



stated: 31°00’ N. lat., 78°00’ W. long.;28°17’ N. lat., 79°00’ W. long.; thenproceeding along the boundary of theEEZ to 24°00’ N. lat., 79°30’ W. long.;then connecting by straight lines thefollowing coordinates in the orderstated: 24°00’ N. lat., 79°30’ W. long.;24°00’ N. lat., 81°00’ W. long.; 24°00’ N.lat., 81°47’ W. long.; then proceedingdue north to intersect the coast at 81°47’W. long. near Key West, Florida.* * * * *

Handline means fishing gear thatconsists of a mainline to which no morethan two leaders (gangions) with hooksare attached, and that is released andretrieved by hand, rather than bymechanical means.

High-flyer means a flag, radar reflectoror radio beacon transmitter, suitable forattachment to a longline to facilitate itslocation and retrieval.* * * * *

Longline means fishing gear that is sethorizontally, either anchored, floating,or attached to a vessel, and that consistsof a mainline or groundline with threeor more leaders (gangions) and hooks,whether retrieved by hand ormechanical means.* * * * *

Pelagic longline means a longline thatis suspended by floats in the watercolumn and that is not fixed to or incontact with the ocean bottom.* * * * *

3. In § 635.4, paragraph (a)(10) isadded, and paragraph (e)(4) is removed,to read as follows:

§ 635.4 Permits and fees.* * * * *

(a) * * *(10) Permit condition. An owner

issued a swordfish or shark permitpursuant to this part must agree, as acondition of such permit, that thevessel’s swordfish or shark fishing,catch and gear are subject to therequirements of this part during theperiod of validity of the permit, withoutregard to whether such fishing occurs inthe EEZ, or outside the EEZ, and

without regard to where such swordfishor shark, or gear are possessed, taken orlanded. However, when a vessel fisheswithin the waters of a state that hasmore restrictive regulations onswordfish or shark fishing, personsaboard the vessel must abide by thestate’s more restrictive regulations.* * * * *

4. In § 635.21, paragraph (c)introductory paragraph and paragraph(c)(2) are revised, and paragraph (c)(4) isadded to read as follows:

§ 635.21 Gear operation and deploymentrestrictions.

* * * * *(c) Pelagic longlines. For purposes of

this part, a vessel is considered to havepelagic longline gear on board when apower-operated longline hauler, amainline, high-flyers, floats capable ofsupporting the mainline, and leaders(gangions) with hooks are on board.Removal of any one of these elementsconstitutes removal of pelagic longlinegear. If a vessel issued a permit underthis part is in a closed area designatedunder paragraph (c)(2) of this sectionwith pelagic longline gear on board, itis a rebuttable presumption that fish onboard such vessel were taken withpelagic longline gear in the closed area.* * * * *

(2) If pelagic longline gear is on boarda vessel issued a permit under this part,persons aboard that vessel may not fishor deploy any type of fishing gear in:

(i) The Northeastern United Statesclosed area from June 1 through June 30each calendar year;

(ii) In the Charleston Bump closedarea from February 1 through April 30each calendar year;

(iii) In the Florida East Coast closedarea at any time beginning at 12:01 a.m.on February 1, 2001; and,

(iv) In the DeSoto Canyon closed areaat any time beginning at 12:01 a.m. onNovember 1, 2000.* * * * *

(4) In the Gulf of Mexico: pelagiclongline gear may not be fished or

deployed from a vessel issued a permitunder this part with live bait affixed tothe hooks; and, a person aboard a vesselissued a permit under this part that haspelagic longline gear on board shall notmaintain live baitfish in any tank orwell on board the vessel and shall notpossess live baitfish, and shall not setup or attach an aeration or watercirculation device in or to any such tankor well. For the purposes of this section,the Gulf of Mexico includes all watersof the U.S. EEZ west and north of theboundary stipulated at 50 CFR600.105(c).* * * * *

5. In § 635.69, paragraph (a) is revisedby adding a second sentence to read asfollows:

§ 635.69 Vessel monitoring systems.

(a) Applicability. * * * A vessel isconsidered to have pelagic longline gearon board for the purposes of thissection, when gear as specified at§ 635.21(c) is on board.* * * * *

6. In § 635.71, paragraphs (a)(30), (31),and (32) are added to read as follows:

§ 635.71 Prohibitions.

* * * * *(a) * * *(30) Deploy or fish with a pelagic

longline greater than the maximumlength authorized for any area specifiedat § 635.21(c)(1).

(31) Deploy or fish with any fishinggear from a vessel with a pelagiclongline on board in any closed areaduring the time periods specified at§ 635.21(c)(2).

(32) In the Gulf of Mexico, deploy orfish a pelagic longline with live baitaffixed to the hooks or to possess livebait, or set up a well or tank to maintainlive bait, aboard a vessel with pelagiclongline gear on board as specified at§ 635.21(c)(4).* * * * *[FR Doc. 00–19272 Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510–22–F


Tuesday,

August 1, 2000

Part IV

The PresidentNotice of July 28, 2000—Continuation ofIraqi Emergency

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 20:20 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01AUO0.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 01AUO0

Presidential Documents

47241

Federal Register

Vol. 65, No. 148


Title 3—

The President

Notice of July 28, 2000

Continuation of Iraqi Emergency

On August 2, 1990, by Executive Order 12722, President Bush declareda national emergency to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threatto the national security and foreign policy of the United States constitutedby the actions and policies of the Government of Iraq. By Executive Orders12722 of August 2, 1990, and 12724 of August 9, 1990, the President imposedtrade sanctions on Iraq and blocked Iraqi government assets. Because theGovernment of Iraq has continued its activities hostile to United Statesinterests in the Middle East, the national emergency declared on August2, 1990, and the measures adopted on August 2 and August 9, 1990, todeal with that emergency must continue in effect beyond August 2, 2000.Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National EmergenciesAct (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing the national emergency with respectto Iraq.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmittedto the Congress.

œ–THE WHITE HOUSE,July 28, 2000.

[FR Doc. 00–19587

Filed 7–31–00; 8:45 am]

Billing code 3195–01–P


i

Reader Aids Federal Register

Vol. 65, No. 148


CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION

Federal Register/Code of Federal RegulationsGeneral Information, indexes and other finding

aids202–523–5227

Laws 523–5227

Presidential DocumentsExecutive orders and proclamations 523–5227The United States Government Manual 523–5227

Other ServicesElectronic and on-line services (voice) 523–4534Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523–5229

ELECTRONIC RESEARCH

World Wide Web

Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and otherpublications:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara

Federal Register information and research tools, including PublicInspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access:

http://www.nara.gov/fedreg

E-mail

PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an E-mailservice for notification of recently enacted Public Laws. Tosubscribe, send E-mail to

[email protected]

with the text message:

subscribe PUBLAWS-L your name

Use [email protected] only to subscribe or unsubscribe toPENS. We cannot respond to specific inquiries.

Reference questions. Send questions and comments about theFederal Register system to:

[email protected]

The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents orregulations.

FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, AUGUST

46859–47242......................... 1

CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING AUGUST

At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Registerpublishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), whichlists parts and sections affected by documents published sincethe revision date of each title.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:59 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\01AUCU.LOC pfrm02 PsN: 01AUCU

ii Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Reader Aids

REMINDERSThe items in this list wereeditorially compiled as an aidto Federal Register users.Inclusion or exclusion fromthis list has no legalsignificance.

RULES GOING INTOEFFECT AUGUST 1, 2000

AGRICULTUREDEPARTMENTAgricultural MarketingServiceKiwifruit grown in—

California; published 6-14-00Prunes (dried) produced in

California; published 5-10-00Raisins produced from grapes

grown in—California; published 3-22-00

Walnuts grown in—California; published 6-26-00

COMMERCE DEPARTMENTNational Oceanic andAtmospheric AdministrationFishery conservation and

management:Northeastern United States

fisheries—Scup; published 8-1-00Spiny dogfish; published

8-1-00

HEALTH AND HUMANSERVICES DEPARTMENTHealth Care FinancingAdministrationMedicare:

Hospital inpatient paymentsand graduate medicaleducation rates and costs;Balanced BudgetRefinement Act provisions;published 8-1-00

Hospital outpatient services;prospective paymentsystem; published 6-30-00

HEALTH AND HUMANSERVICES DEPARTMENTInspector General Office,Health and Human ServicesDepartmentMedicare:

Hospital outpatient services;prospective paymentsystem; published 6-30-00

LIBRARY OF CONGRESSCopyright Office, Library ofCongressUruguay Round Agreements

Act (URAA):Copyright restoration of

certain Berne Conventionand World TradeOrganization works—Restored copyrights,

notices of intent to

enforce; correctionsprocedure; correction;published 8-1-00

NATIONAL AERONAUTICSAND SPACEADMINISTRATIONAcquisition regulations:

Contract bundling; published8-1-00

PENSION BENEFITGUARANTY CORPORATIONSingle employer plans:

Allocation of assets—Interest assumptions for

valuing benefits;published 7-14-00

TRANSPORTATIONDEPARTMENTFederal AviationAdministrationAdministrative regulations:

Air traffic and relatedservices for aircraft thattransit U.S.-controlledairspace but neither takeoff from, nor land in, U.S.;fees; published 6-6-00

Airworthiness directives:McDonnell Douglas;

published 6-27-00

COMMENTS DUE NEXTWEEK

ADVISORY COUNCIL ONHISTORIC PRESERVATIONHistoric Preservation,Advisory CouncilProtection of historic and

cultural properties;comments due by 8-10-00;published 7-11-00

AGRICULTUREDEPARTMENTAgricultural MarketingServiceMeats, prepared meats, and

meat products; grading,certification, and standards:Livestock and poultry

products; equipment usedin slaughter, processing,and packaging;certification of sanitarydesign and fabrication;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-6-00

Oranges, grapefruit,tangerines, and tangelosgrown in—Florida; comments due by

8-7-00; published 7-6-00AGRICULTUREDEPARTMENTAnimal and Plant HealthInspection ServicePlant-related quarantine,

foreign:Mexican Hass avocados;

comments due by 8-9-00;published 5-11-00

AGRICULTUREDEPARTMENTFood and Nutrition ServiceChild nutrition programs:

National school lunch andschool breakfastprograms—Blended beef, pork,

poultry, or seafoodproducts; identification;comments due by 8-7-00; published 6-8-00

COMMERCE DEPARTMENTNational Oceanic andAtmospheric AdministrationFishery conservation and

management:Alaska; fisheries of

Exclusive EconomicZone—Gulf of Alaska groundfish;

comments due by 8-10-00; published 6-26-00

Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico,and South Atlanticfisheries—Gulf of Mexico reef fish;


Marine mammals:Humpback whales in

Alaska; approachprohibition; comments dueby 8-10-00; published 6-26-00

COMMERCE DEPARTMENTPatent and Trademark OfficeFreedom of Information Act

and Privacy Act;implementation; commentsdue by 8-7-00; published 7-7-00

Patent cases:Treatment of unlocatable

application and patentfiles; comments due by 8-9-00; published 7-10-00

COMMODITY FUTURESTRADING COMMISSIONCommodity Exchange Act:

Clearing organizations;regulatory framework;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-22-00

Exemption for bilateraltranscations; regulatoryframework; comments dueby 8-7-00; published 6-22-00

Intermediaries of commodityinterest transactions;regulatory framework;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-22-00

Multilateral transactionexecution facilities,intermediaries andclearing organizations;regulatory framework;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-22-00

EDUCATION DEPARTMENTSpecial education and

rehabilitative services:Assistance to States for

education of children withdisabilities; comments dueby 8-8-00; published 5-10-00

ENERGY DEPARTMENTFederal Energy RegulatoryCommissionNatural Gas Policy Act:

Interstate natural gaspipelines—Business practice

standards; commentsdue by 8-7-00;published 7-7-00

ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION AGENCYAir quality implementation

plans; approval andpromulgation; variousStates:Arizona; comments due by

8-10-00; published 7-11-00

Connecticut; comments dueby 8-11-00; published 7-12-00

Massachusetts; commentsdue by 8-11-00; published7-12-00

Minnesota; comments dueby 8-11-00; published 7-12-00

New Hampshire, RhodeIsland, and Vermont;comments due by 8-9-00;published 7-10-00

Air quality implementationplans; approval andpromulgation; various states:Ohio; comments due by 8-

9-00; published 7-10-00Air quality implementation

plans; approval andpromulgation; variousStates:Rhode Island; comments

due by 8-11-00; published7-12-00

Hazardous waste programauthorizations:Delaware; comments due by

8-11-00; published 7-12-00

Solid wastes:Alternative liner

performance, leachaterecirculation, andbioreactor landfills;information and datarequest; comments dueby 8-7-00; published 4-6-00

Water supply:National primary drinking

water regulations—Ground water systems;

waterborne pathogens


iiiFederal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Reader Aids

from fecalcontamination; publichealth risk education;comments due by 8-9-00; published 6-14-00

Radon-222; maximumcontainment level goal;public health protection;comments due by 8-7-00; published 6-23-00

HEALTH AND HUMANSERVICES DEPARTMENTCenters for Disease Controland PreventionCoal mine safety and health:

Respirable coal mine dust;concentrationdetermination; hearings;comments due by 8-7-00;published 7-7-00

HOUSING AND URBANDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENTPublic and Indian housing:

Operating fund formula;operating subsidies;comments due by 8-9-00;published 7-10-00

INTERIOR DEPARTMENTLand Management BureauMinerals management:

Oil and gas leasing—Alaska; National

Petroleum Reserveunitization; commentsdue by 8-10-00;published 6-26-00

INTERIOR DEPARTMENTFish and Wildlife ServiceEndangered and threatened

species:Critical habitat

designations—Arroyo southwestern toad;


Zayante band-wingedgrasshopper; commentsdue by 8-7-00; published7-7-00

Endangered SpeciesConvention:Regulations revised

Correction; comments dueby 8-7-00; published 5-8-00

Correction; comments dueby 8-7-00; published 6-29-00

Fish and wildlife restoration;Federal aid to States:Sport fish program;

participation by District ofColumbia and U.S. insularterritories andcommonwealths;comments due by 8-8-00;published 6-9-00

Hunting and fishing:Refuge-specific regulations;


Migratory bird hunting:Seasons, limits, and

shooting hours;establishment, etc.Meetings; comments due

by 8-10-00; published7-31-00

JUSTICE DEPARTMENTImmigration andNaturalization ServiceImmigration:

Aliens—Detention of aliens

ordered removed;comments due by 8-11-00; published 8-1-00

LABOR DEPARTMENTMine Safety and HealthAdministrationCoal mine safety and health:

Respirable coal mine dust;concentrationdetermination; hearings;comments due by 8-7-00;published 7-7-00

Samples used to determinerespirable dust level;procedures revocation;comments due by 8-7-00;published 7-7-00

NATIONAL CREDIT UNIONADMINISTRATIONPrivacy Act; implementation;


TRANSPORTATIONDEPARTMENTFederal AviationAdministrationAircraft products and parts;

certification procedures:

Changed products; typecertification procedures;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-7-00

Airworthiness directives:Boeing; comments due by

8-11-00; published 6-27-00

Learjet; comments due by8-11-00; published 6-27-00

MD Helicopters, Inc.;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-6-00

Raytheon; comments due by8-11-00; published 6-14-00

Airworthiness standards:Transport category

airplanes—Powerplant installations;

fire protectionrequirements; commentsdue by 8-11-00;published 6-12-00

TREASURY DEPARTMENTAlcohol, Tobacco andFirearms BureauAlcohol; viticultural area

designations:Walla Walla Valley and

Columbia Valley, WA;boundary revision;comments due by 8-7-00;published 6-6-00

LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS

This is a continuing list ofpublic bills from the currentsession of Congress whichhave become Federal laws. Itmay be used in conjunctionwith ‘‘P L U S’’ (Public LawsUpdate Service) on 202–523–6641. This list is alsoavailable online at http://www.nara.gov/fedreg.

The text of laws is notpublished in the FederalRegister but may be orderedin ‘‘slip law’’ (individualpamphlet) form from theSuperintendent of Documents,U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, DC 20402

(phone, 202–512–1808). Thetext will also be madeavailable on the Internet fromGPO Access at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html. Some laws maynot yet be available.

H.R. 3544/P.L. 106–250

Pope John Paul IICongressional Gold MedalCongressional Gold Medal Act(July 27, 2000; 114 Stat. 622)

H.R. 3591/P.L. 106–251

To provide for the award of agold medal on behalf of theCongress to former PresidentRonald Reagan and his wifeNancy Reagan in recognitionof their service to the Nation.(July 27, 2000; 114 Stat. 624)

H.R. 4391/P.L. 106–252

Mobile TelecommunicationsSourcing Act (July 28, 2000;114 Stat. 626)

H.R. 4437/P.L. 106–253

Semipostal Authorization Act(July 28, 2000; 114 Stat. 634)

Last List July 28, 2000

Public Laws ElectronicNotification Service(PENS)

PENS is a free electronic mailnotification service of newlyenacted public laws. Tosubscribe, go to www.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html orsend E-mail [email protected] withthe following text message:

SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-LYour Name.

Note: This service is strictlyfor E-mail notification of newlaws. The text of laws is notavailable through this service.PENS cannot respond tospecific inquiries sent to thisaddress.


iv Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 1, 2000 / Reader Aids

TABLE OF EFFECTIVE DATES AND TIME PERIODS—AUGUST 2000

This table is used by the Office of theFederal Register to compute certaindates, such as effective dates andcomment deadlines, which appear inagency documents. In computing these

dates, the day after publication iscounted as the first day.

When a date falls on a weekend orholiday, the next Federal business dayis used. (See 1 CFR 18.17)

A new table will be published in thefirst issue of each month.

DATE OF FRPUBLICATION

15 DAYS AFTERPUBLICATION





August 1 August 16 August 31 Sept 15 Oct 2 Oct 30

August 2 August 17 Sept 1 Sept 18 Oct 2 Oct 31

August 3 August 18 Sept 5 Sept 18 Oct 2 Nov 1









August 16 August 31 Sept 15 Oct 2 Oct 16 Nov 14

August 17 Sept 1 Sept 18 Oct 2 Oct 16 Nov 15










August 31 Sept 15 Oct 2 Oct 16 Oct 30 Nov 29

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:59 Jul 31, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4201 Sfmt 4701 E:\FR\FM\01AUEF.LOC pfrm02 PsN: 01AUEF

8–1–00 Vol. 65 No. 148 Tuesday August 1, 2000 Pages ...

Documents

Transcript of 8–1–00 Vol. 65 No. 148 Tuesday August 1, 2000 Pages ...