### 58204 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules

requires that each Federal agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis when the agency issues a regulation which would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule is not an economically significant regulatory action, and it has been certified that it will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, this proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of the RFA. Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

This rule does not contain a ‘‘collection of information’’ requirement, and will not impose additional information collection requirements on the public under Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’

E.O. 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ requires that an impact analysis be performed to determine whether the rule has federalism implications that would have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. It has been certified that this proposed rule does not have federalism implications, as set forth in E.O. 13132. List of Subjects in 32 CFR part 199

Claims, Dental health, Health care, Health insurance, Individuals with disabilities, Military personnel.

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 199 is proposed to be amended as follows:

**PART 199—[AMENDED]**

1. The authority citation for Part 199 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 U.S.C. chapter

55.

2. Section 199.2 is amended by adding to paragraph (b), to appear in alphabetical order, a definition of ‘‘Third-party billing agent,’’ to read as follows:

**§ 199.2 Definitions.**
* * * * *

(b) * * * Third-party billing agent. Any entity that acts on behalf of a provider to prepare, submit and monitor claims, excluding those entities that act solely as a collection agency.

* * * * *

3. Section 199.9 is amended by adding paragraph (n) to read as follows: **§ 199.9 Administrative Remedies for Fraud, Abuse, and Conflict of Interest.** 
* * * * *

(n) * * * Third-party billing agents as defined in § 199.2(b) of this part, while not considered providers, are subject to the provisions of this section to the same extent as such provisions apply to providers.

* * * * *

Dated: August 24, 2011. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2011–23763 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 5001–06–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Office of the Secretary**

**32 CFR Part 199**

**[DOD–2011–HA–0058; RIN 0720–AB51]**

**TRICARE; Changes Included in the National Defense Authorization Act for**  **Fiscal Year 2010; Constructive Eligibility for TRICARE Benefits of**  **Certain Persons Otherwise Ineligible Under Retroactive Determination of**  **Entitlement to Medicare Part A Hospital Insurance Benefits** 

**AGENCY :**  Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department is publishing this proposed rule to implement section 706 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2010, Public Law 111–84. Specifically section 706 exempts TRICARE beneficiaries under the age of 65 who become disabled from the requirement to enroll in Medicare Part B for the retroactive months of entitlement to Medicare Part A in order to maintain TRICARE coverage. This statutory amendment and proposed rule only impact eligibility for the period in which the beneficiary’s disability determination is pending before the Social Security Administration. Eligible beneficiaries would still be required to enroll in Medicare Part B in order to maintain their TRICARE coverage for future months, but would be considered to have coverage under the TRICARE program for the months retroactive to their entitlement to Medicare Part A. This proposed rule also amends the eligibility section of the TRICARE regulation to more clearly address reinstatement of TRICARE eligibility following a gap in coverage due to lack of enrollment in Medicare Part B. **DATES :**  Written comments received at the address indicated below by November 21, 2011 will be accepted.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) and title, by any of the following methods:

The Web site http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 2nd Floor, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or RIN for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ms. Anne Breslin, TRICARE Management Activity (TMA), TRICARE Operations Branch, telephone (703) 681–0039.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Prior to the enactment of section 706 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. 111–84), 10 U.S.C. 1086(d) provided that a person who would otherwise receive benefits under section 1086 who is entitled to Medicare Part A hospital insurance is not eligible for TRICARE unless the individual is enrolled in Medicare Part B. When a TRICARE beneficiary becomes eligible for Medicare, Medicare becomes the primary payer and TRICARE is the secondary payer. Retroactive Medicare eligibility determinations therefore caused DoD and Medicare to reprocess claims. Section 706 of the Fiscal Year 2010 National Defense Authorization Act amended 10 U.S.C. 1086(d) to exempt TRICARE beneficiaries under the age of 65 who became Medicare eligible due to a retroactive disability determination from the requirement to enroll in Medicare Part B for the retroactive months of entitlement to Medicare Part A in order to maintain TRICARE coverage. This statutory amendment became effective upon enactment of the Fiscal Year 2010 National Defense Authorization Act on October 28, 2009. Prior to this amendment, beneficiaries who did not purchase Medicare Part B to cover the retroactive period lost their TRICARE eligibility during that period of time. As a result, beneficiaries and providers were then subject to TRICARE


### 58205 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules

recoupment action for care provided during the period of retroactive disability. Pursuant to this amendment, TRICARE remains first payer for any claims filed during the retroactive months and disabled TRICARE beneficiaries are relieved of the financial burden of making retroactive payments to avoid a gap in coverage. This proposed rule will amend the Code of Federal Regulations to conform to current statury authority regarding TRICARE eligibility.

Additionally, due to an earlier administrative omission, this proposed rule also amends 32 CFR 199.3 to more clearly address reinstatement of TRICARE eligibility following a gap in coverage due to lack of enrollment in Part B. While most TRICARE beneficiaries who become eligible for Medicare Part A maintain TRICARE coverage through prompt acceptance of Part B coverage, there are a number of beneficiaries that for one reason or another decline Part B and lose their TRICARE eligibility. For those individuals, they can have that eligibility reinstated at a later date if they re-enroll in Part B. This proposed rule amends the section on reinstatement of TRICARE eligibility to include beneficiaries who elect to enroll in Medicare Part B following a gap in TRICARE coverage.

All comments will be carefully considered. A discussion of the major issues received by public comments will be included with the issuance of the final rule. Regulatory Procedures Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’; Executive Order 13563. ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review’’; and Public Law 96– 354, ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. 601)

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 require that a comprehensive regulatory impact analysis be performed on any economically significant regulatory action, defined as one that would result in an annual effect of $100 million or more on the national economy or which would have other substantial impacts. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that each Federal agency prepare, and make available for public comment, a regulatory flexibility analysis when the agency issues a regulation which would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule is not an economically significant regulatory action and will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities for purposes of the RFA, thus this rule is not subject to any of these requirements. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3511)

This rule will not impose additional information collection requirements on the public. OMB previously cleared the collection requirements under OMB Control Number 0704–0364.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’

We have examined the impact(s) of the rule under Executive Order 13132, and it does not have policies that have federalism implications that would have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, therefore, consultation with State and local officials is not required. Sec. 202, Public Law 104–4, ‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’

This rule does not contain unfunded mandates. It does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 199

Claims, Dental health, Health care, Health insurance, Individuals with disabilities, Military personnel.

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 199 is proposed to be amended as follows:

**PART 199—[AMENDED]**

1. The authority citation for part 199 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; chapter 55 of 10 U.S.C.

2. Section 199.3 is amended by: a. Adding paragraph (f)(2)(iii); b. Revising paragraph (f)(3)(ix)(C); and c. Adding paragraph (g)(3) to read as follows:

**§ 199.3 Eligibility.**
* * * * *

(f) * * * (2) * * * (iii) Attainment of entitlement to hospital insurance benefits (Part A) under Medicare except as provided in paragraphs (b)(3), (f)(3)(vii), (f)(3)(viii) and (f)(3)(ix) of this section.

(3) * * * (ix) * * * (C) The individual is enrolled in Part B of Medicare except that in the case of a retroactive determination of entitlement to Medicare Part A hospital insurance benefits for a person under 65 years of age there is no requirement to enroll in Medicare Part B from the Medicare Part A entitlement date until the issuance of such retroactive determination; and

* * * * *

(g) * * * (3) Enrollment in Medicare Part B. For individuals whose CHAMPUS eligibility has terminated pursuant to paragraph (f)(2)(iii) or (f)(3)(vi) of this section due to beneficiary action to decline Part B of Medicare, CHAMPUS eligibility resumes, effective on the date Medicare Part B coverage begins, if the person subsequently enrolls in Medicare Part B and the person is otherwise still eligible.

3. Section 199.8 is amended as follows:

a. Revise paragraph (d)(1)(i); b. Redesignate (d)(1)(vi), (d)(1)(vii) and (d)(1)(viii) as (d)(1)(vii), (d)(1)(viii), and (d)(1)(ix) respectively; and

c. Add the following new paragraph (d)(1)(vi).

**§ 199.8 Double Coverage.**
* * * * *

(d) * * * (1) * * * (i) General rule. In any case in which a beneficiary is eligible for both Medicare and CHAMPUS received medical or dental care for which payment may be made under Medicare and CHAMPUS, Medicare is always the primary payer except in the case of retroactive determinations of disability as provided in paragraph (d)(1)(v) of this section. For dependents of active duty members, payment will be determined in accordance to paragraph (c) of this section. For all other beneficiaries eligible for Medicare, the amount payable under CHAMPUS shall be the amount of actual out-of-pocket costs incurred by the beneficiary for that care over the sum of the amount paid for that care under Medicare and the total of all amounts paid or payable by third party payers other than Medicare.

* * * * *

(vi) Retroactive determinations of disability. In circumstances involving determinations of retroactive Medicare Part A entitlement for persons under 65 years of age, Medicare becomes the primary payer effective as of the date of issuance of the retroactive determination by the Social Security Administration. For care and services rendered prior to issuance of the retroactive determination, the CHAMPUS payment will be determined consistent with paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(B) of this section notwithstanding the beneficiary’s retroactive entitlement for Medicare Part A during that period.


### 58206 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules

4. Section 199.11 is amended as follows:

a. Revising paragraph (f)(3) to read as follows:

**§ 199.11 Overpayments Recovery.**

* * * * *

(f) * * * (3) Claims arising from erroneous TRICARE payments in situations where the beneficiary has entitlement to an insurance, medical service, health and medical plan, including any plan offered by a third party payer as defined in 10 U.S.C. 1095(h)(1) or other government program, except in the case of a plan administered under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396, et seq.) through employment, by law, through membership in an organization, or as a student, or through the purchase of a private insurance or health plan, shall be recouped following the procedures in paragraph (f) of this section. If the other plan has not made payment to the beneficiary or provider, the contractor shall first attempt to recover the overpayment from the other plan through the contractor’s coordination of benefits procedures. If the overpayment cannot be recovered from the other plan, or if the other plan has made payment, the overpayment will be recovered from the party that received the erroneous payment from TRICARE. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require recoupment from any sponsor, beneficiary, provider, supplier and/or the Medicare Program under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act in the event of a retroactive determination of entitlement to SSDI and Medicare Part A coverage made by the Social Security Administration as discussed in section 199.8(d) of this part.

Dated: August 24, 2011. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2011–23765 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 5001–06–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**  **AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0986; FRL–9468–3]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; District**  **of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; Determinations of Attainment of the**  **1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the**  **Washington, DC–MD–VA 8-Hour Ozone Moderate Nonattainment Area** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to make two determinations regarding the Washington, DC–MD–VA moderate 8- hour ozone nonattainment area (the Washington Area). First, EPA is proposing to make a determination that the Washington Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This proposed determination is based upon complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data that show the area has monitored attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 2007–2009 and 2008–2010 monitoring periods. If this proposal becomes final, the requirement for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, and contingency measures related to attainment of the 1997 8- hours ozone NAAQS shall be suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Although these requirements are suspended, EPA is not precluded from acting upon these elements at any time if submitted to EPA for review and approval. Second, EPA is also proposing to determine that the Washington Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its attainment date of June 15, 2010. These actions are being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before October 20, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2010–0986 by one of the following methods:

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0986, Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2010– 0986. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.