HR 735 IH
project would be appropriate under the
plan.
‘‘(ii) the determinations of the review
must be made in public meetings.
‘‘(iii) If local review agencies are es-
tablished under subsection (a)(2), the
State review agency must take the results
of reviews by such agencies into account.
‘‘(iv) The State review agency must
make provision for access by the general
public to all applications for review and for
written findings of its reviews that state
the basis for agency determinations.
‘‘(v) The State review agency must
hold at least one public hearing if re-
quested by persons directly affected by the
review.
‘‘(vi) Any decision of the State review
agency to approve or not to approve a pro-
posed capital expenditure must be based
solely on the agency’s review and the
record created by the review.
‘‘(vii) An application for a proposed
capital expenditure must include a time-
table for completing the project for which
HR 735 IH
the expenditure is proposed, and any ap-
proval of such an expenditure shall be
withdrawn if the State review agency finds
that the applicant was not making a good
faith effort to meet the timetable or to oth-
erwise meet any applicable condition for
approval.
‘‘(viii) The allocation plan must pro-
vide either for an appeals mechanism (con-
sistent with the State’s administrative pro-
cedures act) or for an appeal before an en-
tity (other than the State review agency)
designated by the Governor.
‘‘(d) FUNDING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall make,
in each fiscal year beginning with fiscal year 1998
from the allotment under paragraph (2) for the
State, a grant to each State with an approved cap-
ital allocation plan under this section in an amount
equal to 75 percent of the operating costs of carry-
ing out the plan in the State in the fiscal year.
Grants under this paragraph shall be payable from
the Capital Financing Trust Fund under section
2104.
HR 735 IH
‘‘(2) AMOUNT OF ALLOTMENT.—The amount of
an allotment to each State is equal to the sum of—
‘‘(A) the product of $0.70 and the number
of individuals residing in the State who do not
reside in an area under the jurisdiction of a re-
gional review agency (as established by the
State under subsection (b)(2)); and
‘‘(B) the product of $1.00 and the number
of individuals residing in the State who reside
in an area under the jurisdiction of a regional
review agency.
‘‘(e) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:
‘‘(1) The term ‘Governor’ means the chief exec-
utive officer of a State, or his designee.
‘‘(2) The term ‘capital expenditure’ means an
expenditure which—
‘‘(A) under generally accepted accounting
principles, is not properly chargeable as an ex-
pense of operation and maintenance; or
‘‘(B) is made to obtain by lease or com-
parable arrangement any facility thereof or any
equipment for a facility or part.
‘‘(3) the term ‘rural area’ has the meaning
given such term in section 1886(d)(2)(D).’’.
(c) EFFECT ON ANTITRUST LAWS.—
HR 735 IH
(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of the anti-
trust laws—
(A) the establishment by a State of a cap-
ital allocation plan under section 1890 of the
Social Security Act (as added by subsection (b))
shall be considered as affirmative State policy
with respect to individuals and entities in the
State providing health care services subject to
the plan; and
(B) the enforcement by a State of such a
plan shall be considered as active State super-
vision with respect to such individuals and enti-
ties.
(2) ANTITRUST LAWS DEFINED.—In paragraph
(1), the term ‘‘antitrust laws’’ has the meaning
given it in subsection (a) of the first sections of the
Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)), except that such
term includes—
(A) section 5 of the Federal Trade Com-
mission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) to the extent such
section applies to unfair methods of competi-
tion; and
(B) any State law similar to the antitrust
laws.
Æ