You are on page 1of 50

26331

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules
rate and elects rebasing, 25 percent of its
updated hospital-specific rate based on
FY 1996 cost per discharge plus 75
percent of the updated FY 1982 or FY
1987 hospital-specific rate.
Section 1886(d)(5)(G) of the Act, as
amended by section 404 of Public Law
106–113, provides that Medicaredependent, small rural hospitals are
paid based on whichever of the
following rates yields the greatest
aggregate payment: the Federal rate or
the Federal rate plus 50 percent of the
difference between the Federal rate and
the greater of the updated hospitalspecific rate based on FY 1982 and FY
1987 cost per discharge.
Hospital-specific rates have been
determined for each of these hospitals
based on either the FY 1982 cost per
discharge, the FY 1987 cost per
discharge or, for qualifying sole
community hospitals, the FY 1996 cost
per discharge. For a more detailed
discussion of the calculation of the
hospital-specific rates, we refer the
reader to the September 1, 1983 interim
final rule (48 FR 39772); the April 20,
1990 final rule with comment (55 FR
15150); and the September 4, 1990 final
rule (55 FR 35994).
a. Updating the FY 1982 and FY 1987
Hospital-Specific Rates for FY 2001
We are proposing to increase the
hospital-specific rates by 3.1 percent
(the hospital market basket rate of
increase) for sole community hospitals
and by 2.0 percent (the hospital market
basket percentage increase minus 1.1
percentage points) for Medicaredependent, small rural hospitals for FY
2001. Section 1886(b)(3)(C)(iv) of the
Act provides that the update factor
applicable to the hospital-specific rates
for sole community hospitals equal the
update factor provided under section
1886(b)(3)(B)(iv) of the Act, which, for
sole community hospitals in FY 2001, is
the market basket rate of increase.
Section 1886(b)(3)(D) of the Act
provides that the update factor
applicable to the hospital-specific rates
for Medicare-dependent, small rural
hospitals equal the update factor
provided under section 1886(b)(3)(B)(iv)
of the Act, which, for FY 2001, is the
market basket rate of increase minus 1.1
percentage points.
b. Calculation of Hospital-Specific Rate
For sole community hospitals, the
applicable FY 2001 hospital-specific
rate would be the greater of the
following: the hospital-specific rate for
the preceding fiscal year, increased by
the applicable update factor (3.1
percent); or, if the hospital qualifies to
rebase its hospital-specific rate based on

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

cost per case in FY 1996 and elects
rebasing, 75 percent of the hospitalspecific rate for the preceding fiscal
year, increased by the applicable update
factor, plus 25 percent of its rebased FY
1996 hospital-specific rate updated
through FY 2001. For Medicaredependent, small rural hospitals, the
applicable FY 2001 hospital-specific
rate would be calculated by increasing
the hospital’s hospital-specific rate for
the preceding fiscal year by the
applicable update factor (2.0 percent),
which is the same as the update for all
prospective payment hospitals, except
sole community hospitals. In addition,
the hospital-specific rate would be
adjusted by the budget neutrality
adjustment factor (that is, 0.996506) as
discussed in section II.A.4.a. of this
Addendum. The resulting rate is used in
determining under which rate a sole
community hospital or Medicaredependent, small rural hospital is paid
for its discharges beginning on or after
October 1, 2000, based on the formula
set forth above.
3. General Formula for Calculation of
Prospective Payment Rates for Hospitals
Located in Puerto Rico Beginning On or
After October 1, 2000 and Before
October 1, 2001
a. Puerto Rico Rate
The Puerto Rico prospective payment
rate is determined as follows:
Step 1—Select the appropriate
adjusted average standardized amount
considering the large urban or other
designation of the hospital (see Table 1C
of section VI of the Addendum).
Step 2—Multiply the labor-related
portion of the standardized amount by
the appropriate Puerto Rico-specific
wage index (see Table 4F of section VI
of the Addendum).
Step 3—Add the amount from Step 2
and the nonlabor-related portion of the
standardized amount.
Step 4—Multiply the result in Step 3
by 50 percent.
Step 5—Multiply the amount from
Step 4 by the appropriate DRG relative
weight (see Table 5 of section VI of the
Addendum).
b. National Rate
The national prospective payment
rate is determined as follows:
Step 1—Multiply the labor-related
portion of the national average
standardized amount (see Table 1C of
section VI of the Addendum) by the
appropriate national wage index (see
Tables 4A and 4B of section VI of the
Addendum).
Step 2—Add the amount from Step 1
and the nonlabor-related portion of the
national average standardized amount.

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00051

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Step 3—Multiply the result in Step 2
by 50 percent.
Step 4—Multiply the amount from
Step 3 by the appropriate DRG relative
weight (see Table 5 of section VI of the
Addendum).
The sum of the Puerto Rico rate and
the national rate computed above equals
the prospective payment for a given
discharge for a hospital located in
Puerto Rico.
III. Changes to the Payment Rates for
Blood Clotting Factor for Hemophilia
Inpatients
For the past 2 years in the Federal
Register (63 FR 41010 and 64 FR
41549), we have discussed section 4452
of Public Law 105–33, which amended
section 6011(d) of Public Law 101–239
to reinstate the add-on payment for the
costs of administering blood clotting
factor to Medicare beneficiaries who
have hemophilia and who are hospital
inpatients for discharges occurring on or
after October 1, 1997. In these prior
rules, we have described the payment
policy and specifically listed the
updated add-on payment amounts for
each clotting factor, as described by
HCFA’s Common Procedure Coding
System (HCPCS). Because we are not
changing the policy established 2 years
ago, we are proposing to discontinue
listing these amounts in the annual
proposed and final rules. Instead, the
program manuals will instruct fiscal
intermediaries to follow this policy and
obtain the average wholesale price
(AWP) for each relevant HCPCS from
either their corresponding local carrier
or the Medicare durable medical
equipment regional carrier (DMERC)
that has jurisdiction in their area.
Carriers already calculate the AWP
based on the median AWP of the several
products available in each category of
factor. The payment amount for clotting
factors covered by this inpatient benefit
is equal to 85 percent of the AWP,
subject to the Part A deductible and
coinsurance requirements.
The payment amounts will be
determined using the most recent AWP
data available to the carrier at the time
the intermediary performs these annual
update calculations. These amounts are
updated annually and are effective for
discharges beginning on or after October
1 of the current year through September
30 of the following year. Payment will
be made for blood clotting factor only if
there is an ICD–9–CM diagnosis code for
hemophilia included on the bill.

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26332

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

IV. Proposed Changes to Payment Rates
for Inpatient Capital-Related Costs for
FY 2001
The prospective payment system for
hospital inpatient capital-related costs
was implemented for cost reporting
periods beginning on or after October 1,
1991. Effective with that cost reporting
period and during a 10-year transition
period extending through FY 2001,
hospital inpatient capital-related costs
are paid on the basis of an increasing
proportion of the capital prospective
payment system Federal rate and a
decreasing proportion of a hospital’s
historical costs for capital.
The basic methodology for
determining Federal capital prospective
rates is set forth at §§ 412.308 through
412.352. Below we discuss the factors
that we used to determine the proposed
Federal rate and the hospital-specific
rates for FY 2001. The rates will be
effective for discharges occurring on or
after October 1, 2000.
For FY 1992, we computed the
standard Federal payment rate for
capital-related costs under the
prospective payment system by
updating the FY 1989 Medicare
inpatient capital cost per case by an
actuarial estimate of the increase in
Medicare inpatient capital costs per
case. Each year after FY 1992, we
update the standard Federal rate, as
provided in § 412.308(c)(1), to account
for capital input price increases and
other factors. Also, § 412.308(c)(2)
provides that the Federal rate is
adjusted annually by a factor equal to
the estimated proportion of outlier
payments under the Federal rate to total
capital payments under the Federal rate.
In addition, § 412.308(c)(3) requires that
the Federal rate be reduced by an
adjustment factor equal to the estimated
proportion of payments for exceptions
under § 412.348. Furthermore,
§ 412.308(c)(4)(ii) requires that the
Federal rate be adjusted so that the
annual DRG reclassification and the
recalibration of DRG weights and
changes in the geographic adjustment
factor are budget neutral. For FYs 1992
through 1995, § 412.352 required that
the Federal rate also be adjusted by a
budget neutrality factor so that aggregate
payments for inpatient hospital capital
costs were projected to equal 90 percent
of the payments that would have been
made for capital-related costs on a
reasonable cost basis during the fiscal
year. That provision expired in FY 1996.
Section 412.308(b)(2) describes the 7.4
percent reduction to the rate that was
made in FY 1994, and § 412.308(b)(3)
describes the 0.28 percent reduction to
the rate made in FY 1996 as a result of

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

the revised policy of paying for
transfers. In the FY 1998 final rule with
comment period (62 FR 45966), we
implemented section 4402 of Public
Law 105–33, which requires that for
discharges occurring on or after October
1, 1997, and before October 1, 2002, the
unadjusted standard Federal rate is
reduced by 17.78 percent. A small part
of that reduction will be restored
effective October 1, 2002.
For each hospital, the hospitalspecific rate was calculated by dividing
the hospital’s Medicare inpatient
capital-related costs for a specified base
year by its Medicare discharges
(adjusted for transfers), and dividing the
result by the hospital’s case mix index
(also adjusted for transfers). The
resulting case-mix adjusted average cost
per discharge was then updated to FY
1992 based on the national average
increase in Medicare’s inpatient capital
cost per discharge and adjusted by the
exceptions payment adjustment factor
and the budget neutrality adjustment
factor to yield the FY 1992 hospitalspecific rate. Since FY 1992, the
hospital-specific rate has been updated
annually for inflation and for changes in
the exceptions payment adjustment
factor. For FYs 1992 through 1995, the
hospital-specific rate was also adjusted
by a budget neutrality adjustment factor.
For discharges occurring on or after
October 1, 1997, and before October 1,
2002, the unadjusted hospital-specific
rate is reduced by 17.78 percent. A
small part of this reduction will be
restored effective October 1, 2002.
To determine the appropriate budget
neutrality adjustment factor and the
exceptions payment adjustment factor,
we developed a dynamic model of
Medicare inpatient capital-related costs,
that is, a model that projects changes in
Medicare inpatient capital-related costs
over time. With the expiration of the
budget neutrality provision, the model
is still used to estimate the exceptions
payment adjustment and other factors.
The model and its application are
described in greater detail in Appendix
B of this proposed rule.
In accordance with section
1886(d)(9)(A) of the Act, under the
prospective payment system for
inpatient operating costs, hospitals
located in Puerto Rico are paid for
operating costs under a special payment
formula. Prior to FY 1998, hospitals in
Puerto Rico were paid a blended rate
that consisted of 75 percent of the
applicable standardized amount specific
to Puerto Rico hospitals and 25 percent
of the applicable national average
standardized amount. However,
effective October 1, 1997, as a result of
section 4406 of Public Law 105–33,

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

operating payments to hospitals in
Puerto Rico are based on a blend of 50
percent of the applicable standardized
amount specific to Puerto Rico hospitals
and 50 percent of the applicable
national average standardized amount.
In conjunction with this change to the
operating blend percentage, effective
with discharges on or after October 1,
1997, we compute capital payments to
hospitals in Puerto Rico based on a
blend of 50 percent of the Puerto Rico
rate and 50 percent of the Federal rate.
Section 412.374 provides for the use
of this blended payment system for
payments to Puerto Rico hospitals under
the prospective payment system for
inpatient capital-related costs.
Accordingly, for capital-related costs,
we compute a separate payment rate
specific to Puerto Rico hospitals using
the same methodology used to compute
the national Federal rate for capital.
A. Determination of Federal Inpatient
Capital-Related Prospective Payment
Rate Update
In the July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR
41551), we established a Federal rate of
$377.03 for FY 2000. As a result of the
changes we are proposing to the factors
used to establish the Federal rate in this
addendum, the proposed FY 2001
Federal rate is $383.06.
In the discussion that follows, we
explain the factors that were used to
determine the proposed FY 2001
Federal rate. In particular, we explain
why the proposed FY 2001 Federal rate
has increased 1.60 percent compared to
the FY 2000 Federal rate. We also
estimate aggregate capital payments will
increase by 5.89 percent during this
same period. This increase is primarily
due to the increase in the number of
hospital admissions, the increase in
case-mix, and the increase in the
Federal blend percentage from 90 to 100
percent for fully prospective payment
hospitals.
Total payments to hospitals under the
prospective payment system are
relatively unaffected by changes in the
capital prospective payments. Since
capital payments constitute about 10
percent of hospital payments, a 1
percent change in the capital Federal
rate yields only about 0.1 percent
change in actual payments to hospitals.
Aggregate payments under the capital
prospective payment transition system
are estimated to increase in FY 2001
compared to FY 2000.
1. Standard Federal Rate Update
a. Description of the Update Framework
Under § 412.308(c)(1), the standard
Federal rate is updated on the basis of

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26333

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules
an analytical framework that takes into
account changes in a capital input price
index and other factors. The update
framework consists of a capital input
price index (CIPI) and several policy
adjustment factors. Specifically, we
have adjusted the projected CIPI rate of
increase as appropriate each year for
case-mix index-related changes, for
intensity, and for errors in previous CIPI
forecasts. The proposed update factor
for FY 2001 under that framework is 0.9
percent. This proposal is based on a
projected 0.9 percent increase in the
CIPI, a 0.0 percent adjustment for
intensity, a 0.0 percent adjustment for
case-mix, a 0.0 percent adjustment for
the FY 1999 DRG reclassification and
recalibration, and a forecast error
correction of 0.0 percent. We explain
the basis for the FY 2001 CIPI projection
in section II.D of this Addendum. In this
section IV of the Addendum, we
describe the policy adjustments that
have been applied.
The case-mix index is the measure of
the average DRG weight for cases paid
under the prospective payment system.
Because the DRG weight determines the
prospective payment for each case, any
percentage increase in the case-mix
index corresponds to an equal
percentage increase in hospital
payments.
The case-mix index can change for
any of several reasons:
• The average resource use of
Medicare patients changes (‘‘real’’ casemix change);
• Changes in hospital coding of
patient records result in higher weight
DRG assignments (‘‘coding effects’’); and
• The annual DRG reclassification
and recalibration changes may not be
budget neutral (‘‘reclassification
effect’’).
We define real case-mix change as
actual changes in the mix (and resource
requirements) of Medicare patients as
opposed to changes in coding behavior
that result in assignment of cases to
higher weighted DRGs but do not reflect
higher resource requirements. In the
update framework for the prospective
payment system for operating costs, we
adjust the update upwards to allow for
real case-mix change, but remove the
effects of coding changes on the casemix index. We also remove the effect on
total payments of prior changes to the
DRG classifications and relative
weights, in order to retain budget
neutrality for all case-mix index-related
changes other than patient severity. (For
example, we adjusted for the effects of
the FY 1999 DRG reclassification and
recalibration as part of our FY 2001
update recommendation.) We have

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

adopted this case-mix index adjustment
in the capital update framework as well.
For FY 2001, we are projecting a 0.5
percent increase in the case-mix index.
We estimate that real case-mix increase
will equal 0.5 percent in FY 2001.
Therefore, the proposed net adjustment
for case-mix change in FY 2001 is 0.0
percentage points.
We estimate that FY 1999 DRG
reclassification and recalibration will
result in a 0.0 percent change in the
case-mix when compared with the casemix index that would have resulted if
we had not made the reclassification
and recalibration changes to the DRGs.
Therefore, we are making a 0.0 percent
adjustment for DRG reclassification and
recalibration in the update
recommendation for FY 2001.
The capital update framework
contains an adjustment for forecast
error. The input price index forecast is
based on historical trends and
relationships ascertainable at the time
the update factor is established for the
upcoming year. In any given year there
may be unanticipated price fluctuations
that may result in differences between
the actual increase in prices and the
forecast used in calculating the update
factors. In setting a prospective payment
rate under the framework, we make an
adjustment for forecast error only if our
estimate of the change in the capital
input price index for any year is off by
0.25 percentage points or more. There is
a 2-year lag between the forecast and the
measurement of the forecast error. A
forecast error of 0.0 percentage points
was calculated for the FY 1999 update.
That is, current historical data indicate
that the FY 1999 CIPI used in
calculating the forecasted FY 1999
update factor did not overstate or
understate realized price increases.
Therefore, we are making a 0.0 percent
adjustment for forecast error in the
update for FY 2001.
Under the capital prospective
payment system framework, we also
make an adjustment for changes in
intensity. We calculate this adjustment
using the same methodology and data as
in the framework for the operating
prospective payment system. The
intensity factor for the operating update
framework reflects how hospital
services are utilized to produce the final
product, that is, the discharge. This
component accounts for changes in the
use of quality-enhancing services,
changes in within-DRG severity, and
expected modification of practice
patterns to remove cost-ineffective
services.
We calculate case-mix constant
intensity as the change in total charges
per admission, adjusted for price level

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00053

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

changes (the CPI for hospital and related
services), and changes in real case-mix.
The use of total charges in the
calculation of the proposed intensity
factor makes it a total intensity factor,
that is, charges for capital services are
already built into the calculation of the
factor. Therefore, we have incorporated
the intensity adjustment from the
operating update framework into the
capital update framework. Without
reliable estimates of the proportions of
the overall annual intensity increases
that are due, respectively, to ineffective
practice patterns and to the combination
of quality-enhancing new technologies
and within-DRG complexity, we
assume, as in the revised operating
update framework, that one-half of the
annual increase is due to each of these
factors. The capital update framework
thus provides an add-on to the input
price index rate of increase of one-half
of the estimated annual increase in
intensity to allow for within-DRG
severity increases and the adoption of
quality-enhancing technology.
For FY 2001, we have developed a
Medicare-specific intensity measure
based on a 5-year average using FY 1995
through 1999 data. In determining casemix constant intensity, we found that
observed case-mix increase was 1.7
percent in FY 1995, 1.6 percent in FY
1996, 0.3 percent in FY 1997,¥0.4
percent in FY 1998, and ¥0.3 in FY
1999. For FY 1995 and FY 1996, we
estimate that real case-mix increase was
1.0 to 1.4 percent each year. The
estimate for those years is supported by
past studies of case-mix change by the
RAND Corporation. The most recent
study was ‘‘Has DRG Creep Crept Up?
Decomposing the Case Mix Index
Change 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-mix
change was not dependent on total
change, but was usually a fairly steady
1.0 to 1.5 percent per year. We use 1.4
percent as the upper bound because the
RAND study did not take into account
that hospitals may have induced doctors
to document medical records more
completely in order to improve
payment. Following that study, we
consider up to 1.4 percent of observed
case-mix change as real for FY 1995
through FY 1999. Based on this
analysis, we believe that all of the
observed case-mix increase for FY 1997,
FY 1998, and FY 1999 is real. The
increases for FY 1995 and FY 1996 were
in excess of our estimate of real casemix increase.
We calculate case-mix constant
intensity as the change in total charges
per admission, adjusted for price level

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26334

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

changes (the CPI for hospital and related
services), and changes in real case-mix.
Given estimates of real case-mix of 1.0
percent for FY 1995, 1.0 percent for FY
1996, 0.3 percent for FY 1997, ¥0.4 for
FY 1998, and ¥0.3 for FY 1999, we
estimate that case-mix constant
intensity declined by an average 0.7
percent during FYs 1995 through 1999,
for a cumulative decrease of 3.6 percent.
If we assume that real case-mix increase
was 1.4 percent for FY 1995, 1.4 percent
for FY 1996, 0.3 percent for FY 1997,
¥0.4 for FY 1998, and ¥0.3 for FY
1999, we estimate that case-mix
constant intensity declined by an
average 0.9 percent during FYs 1995
through 1999, for a cumulative decrease
of 4.5 percent. Since we estimate that
intensity has declined during that
period, we are recommending a 0.0
percent intensity adjustment for FY
2001. We note that the operating
recommendation addressed in
Appendix D of this proposed rule
reflects the possible range that a
negative adjustment could span (¥0.6
percent to 0.0 percent adjustment) based
on our analyses that intensity has
declined during that 5-year period.
While the calculation of the adjustment
for intensity is identical in both the
capital and the operating update
frameworks, consistent with past capital
update recommendations and the FY
2001 proposed operating
recommendation, we are not making a
negative adjustment for intensity in the
FY 2001 proposed capital update.
b. Comparison of HCFA and MedPAC
Update Recommendations
MedPAC’s FY 2001 update
recommendation for capital prospective
payments was not included in its March
2000 Report to Congress. However,
MedPAC did announce at its April 13,
2000 public meeting that it was
recommending a combined update of
between 3.5 percent and 4.0 percent for
operating and capital-related payments
for FY 2001. This recommendation is
higher than the current law amount as
prescribed by Public Law 105–33.
Because of the timing of the
announcement and our need for ample
time to perform a proper analysis of the
recommendation, we will address the
comparison of HCFA’s update
recommendation and MedPAC’s update
recommendation in the FY 2001 final
rule in August 2000 when we will have
had the opportunity to review the data
analyses that substantiate MedPAC’s
recommendation.
In section IV.A.l.a. of this Addendum,
we describe the basis of the components
used to develop our proposed 0.9

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

percent FY 2001 capital update factor as
shown in Table 1 below.

equal 5.84 percent of inpatient capitalrelated payments based on the Federal
rate in FY 2001. Therefore, we are
proposing an outlier adjustment factor
TABLE 1.—HCFA’S PROPOSED FY
of 0.9416 to the Federal rate. Thus, the
2001 CAPITAL UPDATE FACTOR
projected percentage of capital outlier
Capital Input Price Index ..............
0.9 payments to total capital standard
Intensity ........................................
0.0 payments for FY 2001 is lower than the
Case-Mix Adjustment Factors:
percentage for FY 2000.
Projected Case-Mix Change
¥0.5
The outlier reduction factors are not
Real Across DRG Change ....
0.5 built permanently into the rates; that is,
they are not applied cumulatively in
Subtotal ..........................
0.0
determining the Federal rate. Therefore,
Effect of FY 1999 Reclassification
and Recalibration ......................
0.0 the proposed net change in the outlier
Forecast Error Correction .............
0.0 adjustment to the Federal rate for FY
Total Update .................................
0.9 2001 is 1.0015 (0.9416/0.9402). The
outlier adjustment increases the FY
2001 Federal rate by 0.15 percent
2. Outlier Payment Adjustment Factor
compared with the FY 2000 outlier
Section 412.312(c) establishes a
adjustment.
unified outlier methodology for
3. Budget Neutrality Adjustment Factor
inpatient operating and inpatient
for Changes in DRG Classifications and
capital-related costs. A single set of
Weights and the Geographic Adjustment
thresholds is used to identify outlier
Factor
cases for both inpatient operating and
inpatient capital-related payments.
Section 412.308(c)(4)(ii) requires that
Outlier payments are made only on the
the Federal rate be adjusted so that
portion of the Federal rate that is used
aggregate payments for the fiscal year
to calculate the hospital’s inpatient
based on the Federal rate after any
capital-related payments (for example,
changes resulting from the annual DRG
100 percent for cost reporting periods
reclassification and recalibration and
beginning in FY 2001 for hospitals paid changes in the GAF are projected to
under the fully prospective payment
equal aggregate payments that would
methodology). Section 412.308(c)(2)
have been made on the basis of the
provides that the standard Federal rate
Federal rate without such changes. We
for inpatient capital-related costs be
use the actuarial model, described in
reduced by an adjustment factor equal
Appendix B of this proposed rule, to
to the estimated proportion of outlier
estimate the aggregate payments that
payments under the Federal rate to total would have been made on the basis of
inpatient capital-related payments
the Federal rate without changes in the
under the Federal rate. The outlier
DRG classifications and weights and in
thresholds are set so that operating
the GAF. We also use the model to
outlier payments are projected to be 5.1
estimate aggregate payments that would
percent of total operating DRG
be made on the basis of the Federal rate
payments. The inpatient capital-related
as a result of those changes. We then use
outlier reduction factor reflects the
these figures to compute the adjustment
inpatient capital-related outlier
required to maintain budget neutrality
payments that would be made if all
for changes in DRG weights and in the
hospitals were paid 100 percent of the
GAF.
For FY 2000, we calculated a GAF/
Federal rate. For purposes of calculating
DRG budget neutrality factor of 0.9985.
the outlier thresholds and the outlier
reduction factor, we model payments as For FY 2001, we are proposing a GAF/
if all hospitals were paid 100 percent of DRG budget neutrality factor of 0.9986.
The GAF/DRG budget neutrality factors
the Federal rate because, as explained
are built permanently into the rates; that
above, outlier payments are made only
is, they are applied cumulatively in
on the portion of the Federal rate that
determining the Federal rate. This
is included in the hospital’s inpatient
follows from the requirement that
capital-related payments.
In the July 30, 1999 final rule, we
estimated aggregate payments each year
estimated that outlier payments for
be no more than they would have been
capital in FY 2000 would equal 5.98
in the absence of the annual DRG
percent of inpatient capital-related
reclassification and recalibration and
payments based on the Federal rate (64
changes in the GAF. The proposed
FR 41553). Accordingly, we applied an
incremental change in the adjustment
outlier adjustment factor of 0.9402 to
from FY 2000 to FY 2001 is 0.9986. The
the Federal rate. Based on the
proposed cumulative change in the rate
thresholds as set forth in section
due to this adjustment is 1.0060 (the
II.A.4.d. of this Addendum, we estimate product of the incremental factors for
that outlier payments for capital will
FY 1993, FY 1994, FY 1995, FY 1996,

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00054

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26335

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules
FY 1997, FY 1998, FY 1999, FY 2000,
and the proposed incremental factor for
FY 2001:
0.9980 × 1.0053 × 0.9998
× 0.9994 × 0.9987 × 0.9989
× 1.0028 × 0.9985 × 0.9986 = 1.0000).
This proposed factor accounts for
DRG reclassifications and recalibration
and for changes in the GAF. It also
incorporates the effects on the GAF of
FY 2001 geographic reclassification
decisions made by the MGCRB
compared to FY 2000 decisions.
However, it does not account for
changes in payments due to changes in
the DSH and IME adjustment factors or
in the large urban add-on.
4. Exceptions Payment Adjustment
Factor
Section 412.308(c)(3) requires that the
standard Federal rate for inpatient
capital-related costs be reduced by an
adjustment factor equal to the estimated
proportion of additional payments for
exceptions under § 412.348 relative to
total payments under the hospitalspecific rate and Federal rate. We use
the model originally developed for
determining the budget neutrality
adjustment factor to determine the
exceptions payment adjustment factor.
We describe that model in Appendix B
to this proposed rule.
For FY 2000, we estimated that
exceptions payments would equal 2.70
percent of aggregate payments based on
the Federal rate and the hospitalspecific rate. Therefore, we applied an

exceptions reduction factor of 0.9730
(1¥0.0270) in determining the Federal
rate. For this proposed rule, we estimate
that exceptions payments for FY 2001
will equal 2.04 percent of aggregate
payments based on the Federal rate and
the hospital-specific rate. Therefore, we
are proposing an exceptions payment
reduction factor of 0.9796 to the Federal
rate for FY 2001. The proposed
exceptions reduction factor for FY 2001
is 0.68 percent higher than the factor for
FY 2000.
The exceptions reduction factors are
not built permanently into the rates; that
is, the factors are not applied
cumulatively in determining the Federal
rate. Therefore, the proposed net
adjustment to the FY 2001 Federal rate
is 0.9796/0.9730, or 1.0068.
5. Standard Capital Federal Rate for FY
2001
For FY 2000, the capital Federal rate
was $377.03. As a result of changes we
are proposing to the factors used to
establish the Federal rate, the proposed
FY 2001 Federal rate is $383.06. The
proposed Federal rate for FY 2001 was
calculated as follows:
• The proposed FY 2001 update
factor is 1.0090; that is, the proposed
update is 0.90 percent.
• The proposed FY 2001 budget
neutrality adjustment factor that is
applied to the standard Federal payment
rate for changes in the DRG relative
weights and in the GAF is 0.9986.

• The proposed FY 2001 outlier
adjustment factor is 0.9416.
• The proposed FY 2001 exceptions
payments adjustment factor is 0.9796.
Since the Federal rate has already
been adjusted for differences in casemix, wages, cost-of-living, indirect
medical education costs, and payments
to hospitals serving a disproportionate
share of low-income patients, we
propose to make no additional
adjustments in the standard Federal rate
for these factors other than the budget
neutrality factor for changes in the DRG
relative weights and the GAF.
We are providing a chart that shows
how each of the factors and adjustments
for FY 2001 affected the computation of
the proposed FY 2001 Federal rate in
comparison to the FY 2000 Federal rate.
The proposed FY 2001 update factor has
the effect of increasing the Federal rate
by 0.90 percent compared to the rate in
FY 2000, while the proposed geographic
and DRG budget neutrality factor has
the effect of decreasing the Federal rate
by 0.14 percent. The proposed FY 2001
outlier adjustment factor has the effect
of increasing the Federal rate by 0.15
percent compared to FY 2000. The
proposed FY 2001 exceptions reduction
factor has the effect of increasing the
Federal rate by 0.68 percent compared
to the exceptions reduction for FY 2000.
The combined effect of all the proposed
changes is to increase the proposed
Federal rate by 1.60 percent compared
to the Federal rate for FY 2000.

COMPARISON OF FACTORS AND ADJUSTMENTS: FY 2000 FEDERAL RATE AND PROPOSED FY 2001 FEDERAL RATE
Proposed
FY 2001

FY 2000
Update factor 1 .................................................................................................
GAF/DRG Adjustment Factor1 .........................................................................
Outlier Adjustment Factor2 ..............................................................................
Exceptions Adjustment Factor2 .......................................................................
Federal Rate ....................................................................................................

1.0030
0.9985
0.9402
0.9730
$377.03

1.0090
0.9986
0.9416
0.9796
$383.06

Change

Percent
change

1.0090
0.9986
1.0015
1.0068
1.0160

0.90
¥0.14
0.15
0.68
1.60

1 The update factor and the GAF/DRG budget neutrality factors are built permanently into the rates. Thus, for example, the incremental change
from FY 2000 to FY 2001 resulting from the application of the 0.9986 GAF/DRG budget neutrality factor for FY 2001 is 0.9986.
2 The outlier reduction factor and the exceptions reduction factor are not built permanently into the rates; that is, these factors are not applied
cumulatively in determining the rates. Thus, for example, the net change resulting from the application of the FY 2001 outlier reduction factor is
0.9416/0.9402, or 1.0015.

6. Special Rate for Puerto Rico
Hospitals
As explained at the beginning of
section IV of this Addendum, hospitals
in Puerto Rico are paid based on 50
percent of the Puerto Rico rate and 50
percent of the Federal rate. The Puerto
Rico rate is derived from the costs of
Puerto Rico hospitals only, while the
Federal rate is derived from the costs of
all acute care hospitals participating in
the prospective payment system
(including Puerto Rico). To adjust

VerDate 27<APR>2000

18:11 May 04, 2000

hospitals’ capital payments for
geographic variations in capital costs,
we apply a geographic adjustment factor
(GAF) to both portions of the blended
rate. The GAF is calculated using the
operating prospective payment system
wage index and varies depending on the
MSA or rural area in which the hospital
is located. We use the Puerto Rico wage
index to determine the GAF for the
Puerto Rico part of the capital-blended
rate and the national wage index to

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00055

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

determine the GAF for the national part
of the blended rate.
Since we implemented a separate
GAF for Puerto Rico in FY 1998, we also
apply separate budget neutrality
adjustments for the national GAF and
for the Puerto Rico GAF. However, we
apply the same budget neutrality factor
for DRG reclassifications and
recalibration nationally and for Puerto
Rico. The Puerto Rico GAF budget

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26336

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

neutrality factor is 1.0031, while the
DRG adjustment is 1.0002, for a
combined cumulative adjustment of
1.0033.
In computing the payment for a
particular Puerto Rico hospital, the
Puerto Rico portion of the rate (50
percent) is multiplied by the Puerto
Rico-specific GAF for the MSA in which
the hospital is located, and the national
portion of the rate (50 percent) is
multiplied by the national GAF for the
MSA in which the hospital is located
(which is computed from national data
for all hospitals in the United States and
Puerto Rico). In FY 1998, we
implemented a 17.78 percent reduction
to the Puerto Rico rate as a result of
Public Law 105–33.
For FY 2000, before application of the
GAF, the special rate for Puerto Rico
hospitals was $174.81. With the changes
we are proposing to the factors used to
determine the rate, the proposed FY
2001 special rate for Puerto Rico is
$185.38.
B. Calculation of Inpatient CapitalRelated Prospective Payments for FY
2001
During the capital prospective
payment system transition period, a
hospital is paid for the inpatient capitalrelated costs under one of two payment
methodologies—the fully prospective
payment methodology or the holdharmless methodology. The payment
methodology applicable to a particular
hospital is determined when a hospital
comes under the prospective payment
system for capital-related costs by
comparing its hospital-specific rate to
the Federal rate applicable to the
hospital’s first cost reporting period
under the prospective payment system.
The applicable Federal rate was
determined by making adjustments as
follows:
• For outliers, by dividing the
standard Federal rate by the outlier
reduction factor for that fiscal year; and
• For the payment adjustments
applicable to the hospital, by
multiplying the hospital’s GAF,
disproportionate share adjustment
factor, and IME adjustment factor, when
appropriate.
If the hospital-specific rate is above
the applicable Federal rate, the hospital
is paid under the hold-harmless
methodology. If the hospital-specific
rate is below the applicable Federal rate,
the hospital is paid under the fully
prospective methodology.
For purposes of calculating payments
for each discharge under both the holdharmless payment methodology and the
fully prospective payment methodology,
the standard Federal rate is adjusted as

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

follows: (Standard Federal Rate) × (DRG
weight) × (GAF) × (Large Urban Add-on,
if applicable) × (COLA adjustment for
hospitals located in Alaska and Hawaii)
× (1 + Disproportionate Share
Adjustment Factor + IME Adjustment
Factor, if applicable).
The result is the adjusted Federal rate.
Payments under the hold-harmless
methodology are determined under one
of two formulas. A hold-harmless
hospital is paid the higher of the
following:
• 100 percent of the adjusted Federal
rate for each discharge; or
• An old capital payment equal to 85
percent (100 percent for sole community
hospitals) of the hospital’s allowable
Medicare inpatient old capital costs per
discharge for the cost reporting period
plus a new capital payment based on a
percentage of the adjusted Federal rate
for each discharge. The percentage of
the adjusted Federal rate equals the ratio
of the hospital’s allowable Medicare
new capital costs to its total Medicare
inpatient capital-related costs in the cost
reporting period.
Once a hospital receives payment
based on 100 percent of the adjusted
Federal rate in a cost reporting period
beginning on or after October 1, 1994 (or
the first cost reporting period after
obligated capital that is recognized as
old capital under § 412.302(c) is put in
use for patient care, if later), the hospital
continues to receive capital prospective
payment system payments on that basis
for the remainder of the transition
period.
Payment for each discharge under the
fully prospective methodology is based
on the applicable transition blend
percentage of the hospital-specific rate
and the adjusted Federal rate.
Thus, for FY 2001 payments under
the fully prospective methodology will
be based on 100 percent of the adjusted
Federal rate and zero percent of the
hospital-specific rate.
Hospitals also may receive outlier
payments for those cases that qualify
under the thresholds established for
each fiscal year. Section 412.312(c)
provides for a single set of thresholds to
identify outlier cases for both inpatient
operating and inpatient capital-related
payments. Outlier payments are made
only on that portion of the Federal rate
that is used to calculate the hospital’s
inpatient capital-related payments. For
fully prospective hospitals, that portion
is 100 percent of the Federal rate for
discharges occurring in cost reporting
periods beginning during FY 2001.
Thus, a fully prospective hospital will
receive 100 percent of the capitalrelated outlier payment calculated for
the case for discharges occurring in cost

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00056

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

reporting periods beginning in FY 2001.
For hold-harmless hospitals that are
paid 85 percent of their reasonable costs
for old inpatient capital, the portion of
the Federal rate that is included in the
hospital’s outlier payments is based on
the hospital’s ratio of Medicare
inpatient costs for new capital to total
Medicare inpatient capital costs. For
hold-harmless hospitals that are paid
100 percent of the Federal rate, 100
percent of the Federal rate is included
in the hospital’s outlier payments.
The proposed outlier thresholds for
FY 2001 are in section II.A.4.c. of this
Addendum. For FY 2001, a case
qualifies as a cost outlier if the cost for
the case (after standardization for the
indirect teaching adjustment and
disproportionate share adjustment) is
greater than the prospective payment
rate for the DRG plus $17,250.
During the capital prospective
payment system transition period, a
hospital also may receive an additional
payment under an exceptions process if
its total inpatient capital-related
payments are less than a minimum
percentage of its allowable Medicare
inpatient capital-related costs. The
minimum payment level is established
by class of hospital under § 412.348.
The proposed minimum payment levels
for portions of cost reporting periods
occurring in FY 2001 are:
• Sole community hospitals (located
in either an urban or rural area), 90
percent;
• Urban hospitals with at least 100
beds and a disproportionate share
patient percentage of at least 20.2
percent or that receive more than 30
percent of their net inpatient care
revenues from State or local
governments for indigent care, 80
percent; and
• All other hospitals, 70 percent.
Under § 412.348(d), the amount of the
exceptions payment is determined by
comparing the cumulative payments
made to the hospital under the capital
prospective payment system to the
cumulative minimum payment levels
applicable to the hospital for each cost
reporting period subject to that system.
Any amount by which the hospital’s
cumulative payments exceed its
cumulative minimum payment is
deducted from the additional payment
that would otherwise be payable for a
cost reporting period. New hospitals are
exempted from the capital prospective
payment system for their first 2 years of
operation and are paid 85 percent of
their reasonable costs during that
period. A new hospital’s old capital
costs are its allowable costs for capital
assets that were put in use for patient
care on or before the later of December

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26337

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules
31, 1990, or the last day of the hospital’s
base year cost reporting period, and are
subject to the rules pertaining to old
capital and obligated capital as of the
applicable date. Effective with the third
year of operation, we will pay the
hospital under either the fully
prospective methodology, using the
appropriate transition blend in that
Federal fiscal year, or the hold-harmless
methodology. If the hold-harmless
methodology is applicable, the holdharmless payment for assets in use
during the base period would extend for
8 years, even if the hold-harmless
payments extend beyond the normal
transition period.
C. Capital Input Price Index
1. Background
Like the operating input price index,
the capital input price index (CIPI) is a
fixed-weight price index that measures
the price changes associated with costs
during a given year. The CIPI differs
from the operating input price index in
one important aspect—the CIPI reflects
the vintage nature of capital, which is
the acquisition and use of capital over
time. Capital expenses in any given year
are determined by the stock of capital in
that year (that is, capital that remains on
hand from all current and prior capital
acquisitions). An index measuring
capital price changes needs to reflect
this vintage nature of capital. Therefore,
the CIPI was developed to capture the
vintage nature of capital by using a
weighted-average of past capital
purchase prices up to and including the
current year.
Using Medicare cost reports,
American Hospital Association (AHA)
data, and Securities Data Company data,
a vintage-weighted price index was
developed to measure price increases
associated with capital expenses. We
periodically update the base year for the
operating and capital input prices to
reflect the changing composition of
inputs for operating and capital
expenses. Currently, the CIPI is based to
FY 1992 and was last rebased in 1997.
The most recent explanation of the CIPI
was discussed in the final rule with
comment period for FY 1998 published
on August 29, 1997 (62 FR 46050).
2. Forecast of the CIPI for Federal Fiscal
Year 2001
We are forecasting the CIPI to increase
0.9 percent for FY 2001. This reflects a
projected 1.5 percent increase in
vintage-weighted depreciation prices
(building and fixed equipment, and
movable equipment) and a 3.5 percent
increase in other capital expense prices
in FY 2001, partially offset by a 1.3

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

percent decline in vintage-weighted
interest rates in FY 2001. The weighted
average of these three factors produces
the 0.9 percent increase for the CIPI as
a whole.
V. Proposed Changes to Payment Rates
for Excluded Hospitals and Hospital
Units: Rate-of-Increase Percentages
The inpatient operating costs of
hospitals and hospital units excluded
from the prospective payment system
are subject to rate-of-increase limits
established under the authority of
section 1886(b) of the Act, which is
implemented in regulations at § 413.40.
Under these limits, a hospital-specific
target amount (expressed in terms of the
inpatient operating cost per discharge)
is set for each hospital, based on the
hospital’s own historical cost
experience trended forward by the
applicable rate-of-increase percentages
(update factors). In the case of a
psychiatric hospital or hospital unit, a
rehabilitation hospital or hospital unit,
or a long-term care hospital, the target
amount may not exceed the updated
figure for the 75th percentile of target
amounts adjusted to take into account
differences between average wagerelated costs in the area of the hospital
and the national average of such costs
within the same class of hospital for
hospitals and units in the same class
(psychiatric, rehabilitation, and longterm care) for cost reporting periods
ending during FY 1996. The target
amount is multiplied by the number of
Medicare discharges in a hospital’s cost
reporting period, yielding the ceiling on
aggregate Medicare inpatient operating
costs for the cost reporting period.
Each hospital-specific target amount
is adjusted annually, at the beginning of
each hospital’s cost reporting period, by
an 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 cost
reporting periods beginning on or after
October 1, 1998 and before October 1,
2002, the update factor for a hospital or
unit depends on the hospital’s or
hospital unit’s costs in relation to the
ceiling for the most recent cost reporting
period for which information is
available. For hospitals with costs
exceeding the ceiling by 10 percent or
more, the update factor is the market
basket increase. For hospitals with costs
exceeding the ceiling by less than 10
percent, the update factor is the market
basket minus .25 percent for each
percentage point by which costs are less
than 10 percent over the ceiling. For
hospitals with costs equal to or less than
the ceiling but greater than 66.7 percent
of the ceiling, the update factor is the

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00057

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

greater of 0 percent or the market basket
minus 2.5 percent. For hospitals with
costs that do not exceed 66.7 percent of
the ceiling, the update factor is 0.
The most recent forecast of the market
basket increase for FY 2001 for hospitals
and hospital units excluded from the
prospective payment system is 3.1
percent. Therefore, the update to a
hospital’s target amount for its cost
reporting period beginning in FY 2001
would be between 0.6 and 3.1 percent,
or 0 percent, depending on the
hospital’s or unit’s costs in relation to
its rate-of-increase limit.
In addition, § 413.40(c)(4)(iii) requires
that for cost reporting periods beginning
on or after October 1, 1998 and before
October 1, 2002, the target amount for
each psychiatric hospital or hospital
unit, rehabilitation hospital or hospital
unit, and long-term care hospital cannot
exceed a cap on the target amounts for
hospitals in the same class.
Section 121 of Public Law 106–113
amended section 1886(b)(3)(H) of the
Act to provide for an appropriate wage
adjustment to the caps on the target
amounts for psychiatric hospitals and
units, rehabilitation hospitals and units,
and long-term care hospitals, effective
for cost reporting periods beginning on
or after October 1, 1999, through
September 30, 2002. We intend to
publish an interim final rule with
comment period implementing this
provision for cost reporting periods
beginning on or after October 1, 1999
and before October 1, 2000. This
proposed rule addresses the wage
adjustment to the caps for cost reporting
periods beginning on or after October 1,
2000.
As discussed in section VI. of the
preamble of this proposed rule, under
section 121 of Public Law 106–113, the
cap on the target amount per discharge
is determined by adding the hospital’s
nonlabor-related portion of the national
75th percentile cap to its wage-adjusted,
labor-related portion of the national
75th percentile cap (the labor-related
portion of costs equals 0.71553 and the
nonlabor-related portion of costs equals
0.28447). A hospital’s wage-adjusted,
labor-related portion of the target
amount is calculated by multiplying the
labor-related portion of the national
75th percentile cap for the hospital’s
class by the wage index under the
hospital inpatient prospective payment
system (see § 412.63), without taking
into account reclassifications under
sections 1886(a)(10) and (d)(8)(B) of the
Act.
For cost reporting periods beginning
in FY 2001, the proposed caps are as
follows:

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26338

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

8A, and 8B are presented below. The
tables presented below are as follows:
Table 1A—National Adjusted Operating
Standardized Amounts, Labor/
Psychiatric ........
$8,106
$3,223
Nonlabor
Rehabilitation ....
15,108
6,007
Long-Term Care
29,312
11,654 Table 1C—Adjusted Operating
Standardized Amounts for Puerto
Rico, Labor/Nonlabor
Regulations at § 413.40(d) specify the
Table 1D—Capital Standard Federal
formulas for determining bonus and
Payment Rate
relief payments for excluded hospitals
Table 1E—National Adjusted Operating
and specify established criteria for an
Standardized Amounts for Sole
additional bonus payment for
Community Hospitals, Labor/
continuous improvement. Regulations at
Nonlabor
§413.40(f)(2)(ii) specify the payment
Table 3C—Hospital Case Mix Indexes
methodology for new hospitals and
for Discharges Occurring in Federal
hospital units (psychiatric,
Fiscal Year 1999 and Hospital
rehabilitation, and long-term care)
Average Hourly Wage for Federal
effective October 1, 1997.
Fiscal Year 2001 Wage Index
VI. Tables
Table 4A—Wage Index and Capital
Geographic Adjustment Factor
This section contains the tables
(GAF) for Urban Areas
referred to throughout the preamble to
Table
4B—Wage Index and Capital
this proposed rule and in this
Geographic Adjustment Factor
Addendum. For purposes of this
(GAF) for Rural Areas
proposed rule, and to avoid confusion,
Table 4C—Wage Index and Capital
we have retained the designations of
Geographic Adjustment Factor
Tables 1 through 5 that were first used
(GAF) for Hospitals That Are
in the September 1, 1983 initial
Reclassified
prospective payment final rule (48 FR
Table 4D—Average Hourly Wage for
39844). Tables 1A, 1C, 1D, 1E (a new
Urban Areas
table, as described in section II of this
Addendum), 3C, 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, 4E, 4F, Table 4E—Average Hourly Wage for
5, 6A, 6B, 6C, 6D, 6E, 6F, 6G, 7A, 7B,
Rural Areas
Class of excluded hospital
or unit

Laborrelated
share

Nonlaborrelated
share

Table 4F—Puerto Rico Wage Index and
Capital Geographic Adjustment
Factor (GAF)
Table 5—List of Diagnosis Related
Groups (DRGs), Relative Weighting
Factors, Geometric Mean Length of
Stay, and Arithmetic Mean Length
of Stay Points Used in the
Prospective Payment System
Table 6A—New Diagnosis Codes
Table 6B—New Procedure Codes
Table 6C—Invalid Diagnosis Codes
Table 6D—Revised Diagnosis Code
Titles
Table 6E—Revised Procedure Codes
Table 6F—Additions to the CC
Exclusions List
Table 6G—Deletions to the CC
Exclusions List
Table 7A—Medicare Prospective
Payment System Selected Percentile
Lengths of Stay FY 99 MEDPAR
Update 12/99 GROUPER V17.0
Table 7B—Medicare Prospective
Payment System Selected Percentile
Lengths of Stay FY 99 MEDPAR
Update 12/99 GROUPER V18.0
Table 8A—Statewide Average Operating
Cost-to-Charge Ratios for Urban and
Rural Hospitals (Case Weighted)
March 2000
Table 8B—Statewide Average Capital
Cost-to-Charge Ratios (Case
Weighted) March 2000

TABLE 1A.—NATIONAL ADJUSTED OPERATING STANDARDIZED AMOUNTS, LABOR/NONLABOR
Large urban areas

Other areas

Labor-related

Nonlabor-related

Labor-related

Nonlabor related

$2,856.71

$1,161.17

$2,811.49

$1,142.79

TABLE 1C.—ADJUSTED OPERATING STANDARDIZED AMOUNTS FOR PUERTO RICO, LABOR/NONLABOR
Large urban areas
Labor
National ............................................................................................................
Puerto Rico ......................................................................................................

Nonlabor

$2,832.11
1,373.19

$1,151.16
552.74

Other areas
Labor

Nonlabor

$2,832.11
1,351.45

$1,151.16
543.99

TABLE 1D.—CAPITAL STANDARD FEDERAL PAYMENT RATE
Rate
National ....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Puerto Rico ..............................................................................................................................................................................................

$383.06
185.38

TABLE 1E.—NATIONAL ADJUSTED OPERATING STANDARDIZED AMOUNTS FOR SOLE COMMUNITY HOSPITALS, LABOR/
NONLABOR
Large urban areas

Other areas

Labor-related

Nonlabor-related

Labor-related

Nonlabor-related

$2,887.52

$1,173.69

$2,841.81

$1,155.11

VerDate 27<APR>2000

18:11 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00058

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26339

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00059

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26340

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00060

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26341

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00061

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26342

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00062

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26343

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00063

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26344

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00064

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26345

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00065

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26346

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00066

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26347

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00067

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26348

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00068

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26349

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00069

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26350

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00070

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26351

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00071

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26352

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00072

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26353

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00073

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26354

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00074

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26355

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00075

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26356

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00076

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26357

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00077

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26358

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00078

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26359

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00079

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26360

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00080

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26361

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00081

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4725

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26362

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)

0040 Abilene, TX .......
Taylor, TX
0060 Aguadilla, PR ....
Aguada, PR
Aguadilla, PR
Moca, PR
0080 Akron, OH .........
Portage, OH
Summit, OH
0120 Albany, GA ........
Dougherty, GA
Lee, GA
0160 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY ............
Albany, NY
Montgomery, NY
Rensselaer, NY
Saratoga, NY
Schenectady, NY
Schoharie, NY
0200 Albuquerque,
NM .............................
Bernalillo, NM
Sandoval, NM
Valencia, NM
0220 Alexandria, LA ...
Rapides, LA
0240 Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA .....
Carbon, PA
Lehigh, PA
Northampton, PA
0280 Altoona, PA .......
Blair, PA
0320 Amarillo, TX Potter, TX .......................
Randall, TX
0380 Anchorage, AK ..
Anchorage, AK
0440 Ann Arbor, MI ....
Lenawee, MI
Livingston, MI
Washtenaw, MI
0450 Anniston, AL ......
Calhoun, AL
0460 Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah, WI ......
Calumet, WI
Outagamie, WI
Winnebago, WI
0470 Arecibo, PR .......
Arecibo, PR
Camuy, PR
Hatillo, PR
0480 Asheville, NC ....
Buncombe, NC
Madison, NC
0500 Athens, GA ........
Clarke, GA
Madison, GA
Oconee, GA
0520 1 Atlanta, GA .....
Barrow, GA
Bartow, GA
Carroll, GA
Cherokee, GA
Clayton, GA
Cobb, GA
Coweta, GA

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

GAF

0.8318

0.8815

0.4826

0.6072

1.0557

1.0378

1.1854

1.1235

0.8563

0.9365

0.8992

0.9561

0.8262

0.8774

0.9849

0.9896

0.9262

0.9489

0.8663

0.9064

1.2967

1.1947

1.1283

1.0862

0.8331

0.8825

0.9101

0.9375

0.4540

0.5823

0.9527

0.9674

0.9829

0.9883

0.9945

0.9962

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
DeKalb, GA
Douglas, GA
Fayette, GA
Forsyth, GA
Fulton, GA
Gwinnett, GA
Henry, GA
Newton, GA
Paulding, GA
Pickens, GA
Rockdale, GA
Spalding, GA
Walton, GA
0560 Atlantic-Cape
May, NJ .....................
Atlantic, NJ
Cape May, NJ
0580 Auburn-Opelika,
AL ..............................
Lee, AL
0600 Augusta-Aiken,
GA–SC ......................
Columbia, GA
McDuffie, GA
Richmond, GA
Aiken, SC
Edgefield, SC
0640 1 Austin-San
Marcos, TX ................
Bastrop, TX
Caldwell, TX
Hays, TX
Travis, TX
Williamson, TX
0680 2 Bakersfield, CA
Kern, CA
0720 1 Baltimore, MD
Anne Arundel, MD
Baltimore, MD
Baltimore City, MD
Carroll, MD
Harford, MD
Howard, MD
Queen Anne’s, MD
0733 Bangor, ME .......
Penobscot, ME
0743 BarnstableYarmouth, MA ...........
Barnstable, MA
0760 Baton Rouge, LA
Ascension, LA
East Baton Rouge,
LA
Livingston, LA
West Baton Rouge,
LA
0840 Beaumont-Port
Arthur, TX ..................
Hardin, TX
Jefferson, TX
Orange, TX
0860 Bellingham, WA
Whatcom, WA
0870 2 Benton Harbor,
MI ..............................
Berrien, MI
0875 1 Bergen-Passaic, NJ .....................

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00082

Wage
index

Urban area
(constituent counties)

GAF

1.1220

1.0820

0.8170

0.8707

0.9226

0.9463

0.9436

0.9610

0.9966

0.9977

0.9485

0.9644

0.9613

0.9733

1.3938

1.2553

0.8964

0.9278

0.8361

0.8846

1.1491

1.0998

0.9133

0.9398

1.1727

1.1153

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Bergen, NJ
Passaic, NJ
0880 Billings, MT .......
Yellowstone, MT
0920 Biloxi-GulfportPascagoula, MS ........
Hancock, MS
Harrison, MS
Jackson, MS
0960 Binghamton, NY
Broome, NY
Tioga, NY
1000 Birmingham, AL
Blount, AL
Jefferson, AL
St. Clair, AL
Shelby, AL
1010 Bismarck, ND ....
Burleigh, ND
Morton, ND
1020 BloomingtonNormal, IL .................
Monroe, IN
1040 BloomingtonNormal, IL .................
McLean, IL
1080 Boise City, ID ....
Ada, ID
Canyon, ID
1123 1 2 BostonWorcester-LawrenceLowell-Brockton, MA–
NH (MA Hospitals) ....
Bristol, MA
Essex, MA
Middlesex, MA
Norfolk, MA
Plymouth, MA
Suffolk, MA
Worcester, MA
Hillsborough, NH
Merrimack, NH
Rockingham, NH
Strafford, NH
1123 1 BostonWorcester-LawrenceLowell-Brockton, MA–
NH (NH Hospitals) ....
Bristol, MA
Essex, MA
Middlesex, MA
Norfolk, MA
Plymouth, MA
Suffolk, MA
Worcester, MA
Hillsborough, NH
Merrimack, NH
Rockingham, NH
Strafford, NH
1125 BoulderLongmont, CO ...........
Boulder, CO
1145 Brazoria, TX ......
Brazoria, TX
1150 Bremerton, WA
Kitsap, WA
1240 Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito, TX

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

0.9577

0.9708

0.8282

0.8789

0.8723

0.9107

0.8574

0.9000

0.8016

0.8595

0.8854

0.9200

0.9294

0.9511

0.9133

0.9398

1.1348

1.0905

1.1239

1.0833

0.9798

0.9861

0.8751

0.9127

1.1069

1.0720

0.8794

0.9158

PsN: 05MYP2

26363

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
Cameron, TX
1260 Bryan-College
Station, TX ................
Brazos, TX
1280 1 Buffalo-Niagara
Falls, NY ...................
Erie, NY
Niagara, NY
1303 Burlington, VT ...
Chittenden, VT
Franklin, VT
Grand Isle, VT
1310 Caguas, PR .......
Caguas, PR
Cayey, PR
Cidra, PR
Gurabo, PR
San Lorenzo, PR
1320 2 CantonMassillon, OH ............
Carroll, OH
Stark, OH
1350 2 Casper, WY ....
Natrona, WY
1360 Cedar Rapids, IA
Linn, IA
1400 Champaign-Urbana, IL .....................
Champaign, IL
1440 Charleston-North
Charleston, SC ..........
Berkeley, SC
Charleston, SC
Dorchester, SC
1480 Charleston, WV
Kanawha, WV
Putnam, WV
1520 1 Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC–
SC .............................
Cabarrus, NC
Gaston, NC
Lincoln, NC
Mecklenburg, NC
Rowan, NC
Stanly, NC
Union, NC
York, SC
1540 Charlottesville,
VA .............................
Albemarle, VA
Charlottesville City,
VA
Fluvanna, VA
Greene, VA
1560 Chattanooga,
TN–GA ......................
Catoosa, GA
Dade, GA
Walker, GA
Hamilton, TN
Marion, TN
1580 2 Cheyenne, WY
Laramie, WY
1600 1 Chicago, IL ......
Cook, IL
DeKalb, IL

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

0.8306
0.9566

GAF

0.8806
0.9701

0.9624

0.9741

0.4591

0.5868

0.8778

0.9146

0.9046

0.9336

0.8396

0.8872

0.9353

0.9552

0.9094

0.9370

0.9324

0.9307

1.0744

1.0083

0.9532

0.9520

1.0504

1.0057

0.9046

0.9336

1.1027

1.0692

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
DuPage, IL
Grundy, IL
Kane, IL
Kendall, IL
Lake, IL
McHenry, IL
Will, IL
1620 Chico-Paradise,
CA .............................
Butte, CA
1640 1Cincinnati, OH–
KY–IN ........................
Dearborn, IN
Ohio, IN
Boone, KY
Campbell, KY
Gallatin, KY
Grant, KY
Kenton, KY
Pendleton, KY
Brown, OH
Clermont, OH
Hamilton, OH
Warren, OH
1660 Clarksville-Hopkinsville, TN–KY ........
Christian, KY
Montgomery, TN
1680 1 Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria, OH ..........
Ashtabula, OH
Cuyahoga, OH
Geauga, OH
Lake, OH
Lorain, OH
Medina, OH
1720 Colorado
Springs, CO ..............
El Paso, CO
1740 Columbia, MO ...
Boone, MO
1760 Columbia, SC ....
Lexington, SC
Richland, SC
1800 Columbus, GA–
AL ..............................
Russell, AL
Chattahoochee, GA
Harris, GA
Muscogee, GA
1840 1 Columbus, OH
Delaware, OH
Fairfield, OH
Franklin, OH
Licking, OH
Madison, OH
Pickaway, OH
1880 Corpus Christi,
TX ..............................
Nueces, TX
San Patricio, TX
1890 Corvallis, OR .....
Benton, OR
1900 2 Cumberland,
MD–WV (MD Hospitals) .........................
Allegany, MD

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00083

Wage
index

Urban area
(constituent counties)

GAF

1.0684

1.0464

0.9330

0.9536

0.8393

0.8869

0.9649

0.9758

0.9770

0.9842

0.8600

0.9019

0.9641

0.9753

0.8607

0.9024

0.9741

0.9822

0.8496

0.8944

1.1439

1.0964

0.8717

0.9103

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Mineral, WV
1900 Cumberland,
MD–WV (WV Hospital) ..........................
Allegany, MD
Mineral, WV
1920 1 Dallas, TX .......
Collin, TX
Dallas, TX
Denton, TX
Ellis, TX
Henderson, TX
Hunt, TX
Kaufman, TX
Rockwall, TX
1950 Danville, VA ......
Danville City, VA
Pittsylvania, VA
1960 Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA–
IL ...............................
Scott, IA
Henry, IL
Rock Island, IL
2000 Dayton-Springfield, OH ....................
Clark, OH
Greene, OH
Miami, OH
Montgomery, OH
2020 Daytona Beach,
FL ..............................
Flagler, FL
Volusia, FL
2030 Decatur, AL .......
Lawrence, AL
Morgan, AL
2040 Decatur, IL ........
Macon, IL
2080 1 Denver, CO .....
Adams, CO
Arapahoe, CO
Denver, CO
Douglas, CO
Jefferson, CO
2120 Des Moines, IA
Dallas, IA
Polk, IA
Warren, IA
2160 1 Detroit, MI .......
Lapeer, MI
Macomb, MI
Monroe, MI
Oakland, MI
St. Clair, MI
Wayne, MI
2180 Dothan, AL ........
Dale, AL
Houston, AL
2190 Dover, DE .........
Kent, DE
2200 Dubuque, IA ......
Dubuque, IA
2240 Duluth-Superior,
MN–WI ......................
St. Louis, MN
Douglas, WI

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

0.8437

0.8901

0.9220

0.9459

0.8527

0.8966

0.9021

0.9319

0.9519

0.9668

0.9179

0.9430

0.8627

0.9038

0.8601

0.9019

1.0032

1.0022

0.9211

0.9453

1.0057

1.0039

0.8105

0.8660

1.1032

1.0696

0.8928

0.9253

1.0201

1.0137

PsN: 05MYP2

26364

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
2281 Dutchess County, NY ........................
Dutchess, NY
2290 2 Eau Claire, WI
Chippewa, WI
Eau Claire, WI
2320 El Paso, TX .......
El Paso, TX
2330 Elkhart-Goshen,
IN ...............................
Elkhart, IN
2335 Elmira, NY .........
Chemung, NY
2340 Enid, OK ............
Garfield, OK
2360 Erie, PA .............
Erie, PA
2400 Eugene-Springfield, OR ....................
Lane, OR
2440 2 Evansville-Henderson, IN–KY (IN
Hospitals) ..................
Posey, IN
Vanderburgh, IN
Warrick, IN
Henderson, KY
2440 Evansville-Henderson, IN–KY (KY
Hospitals) ..................
Posey, IN
Vanderburgh, IN
Warrick, IN
Henderson, KY
2520 Fargo-Moorhead,
ND–MN .....................
Clay, MN
Cass, ND
2560 Fayetteville, NC
Cumberland, NC
2580 FayettevilleSpringdale-Rogers,
AR .............................
Benton, AR
Washington, AR
2620 Flagstaff, AZ–UT
Coconino, AZ
Kane, UT
2640 Flint, MI .............
Genesee, MI
2650 Florence, AL ......
Colbert, AL
Lauderdale, AL
2655 Florence, SC .....
Florence, SC
2670 Fort CollinsLoveland, CO ............
Larimer, CO
2680 1 Ft. Lauderdale,
FL ..............................
Broward, FL
2700 Fort Myers-Cape
Coral, FL ...................
Lee, FL
2710 Fort Pierce-Port
St. Lucie, FL ..............
Martin, FL

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

GAF

0.9599

0.9724

0.9073

0.9356

0.9215

0.9456

0.9549

0.9689

0.8645

0.9051

0.8781

0.9148

0.9021

0.9319

1.1026

1.0692

0.8807

0.8018

0.9167

0.8596

0.8830

0.9183

0.8638

0.9046

0.7999

0.8582

1.0844

1.0571

1.1189

1.0800

0.7621

0.8302

0.8838

0.9189

1.1005

1.0678

1.0228

1.0156

0.9112
0.9672

0.9383
0.9774

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
St. Lucie, FL
2720 Fort Smith, AR–
OK .............................
Crawford, AR
Sebastian, AR
Sequoyah, OK
2750 Fort Walton
Beach, FL ..................
Okaloosa, FL
2760 2 Fort Wayne, IN
Adams, IN
Allen, IN
De Kalb, IN
Huntington, IN
Wells, IN
Whitley, IN
2800 1 Forth Worth-Arlington, TX .................
Hood, TX
Johnson, TX
Parker, TX
Tarrant, TX
2840 Fresno, CA ........
Fresno, CA
Madera, CA
2880 Gadsden, AL .....
Etowah, AL
2900 Gainesville, FL ..
Alachua, FL
2920 Galveston-Texas
City, TX .....................
Galveston, TX
2960 Gary, IN .............
Lake, IN
Porter, IN
2975 2 Glens Falls, NY
Warren, NY
Washington, NY
2980 2 Goldsboro, NC
Wayne, NC
2985 Grand Forks,
ND–MN .....................
Polk, MN
Grand Forks, ND
2995 Grand Junction,
CO .............................
Mesa, CO
3000 1 Grand RapidsMuskegon-Holland,
MI ..............................
Allegan, MI
Kent, MI
Muskegon, MI
Ottawa, MI
3040 Great Falls, MT
Cascade, MT
3060 Greeley, CO ......
Weld, CO
3080 Green Bay, WI ..
Brown, WI
3120 1 GreensboroWinston-Salem-High
Point, NC ...................
Alamance, NC
Davidson, NC
Davie, NC
Forsyth, NC

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00084

Wage
index

Urban area
(constituent counties)

GAF

0.8858

0.9203

0.9351

0.9551

0.8807

0.9167

0.9442

0.9614

1.0184

1.0126

0.8491

0.8940

1.0286

1.0195

1.0284

1.0194

0.9454

0.9623

0.8558

0.8989

0.8553

0.8985

1.0207

1.0141

0.9601

0.9725

1.0256

1.0175

0.9447

0.9618

0.9908

0.9937

0.9359

0.9556

0.9187

Fmt 4701

0.9436

Sfmt 4702

Guilford, NC
Randolph, NC
Stokes, NC
Yadkin, NC
3150 Greenville, NC ...
Pitt, NC
3160 GreenvilleSpartanburg-Anderson, SC .....................
Anderson, SC
Cherokee, SC
Greenville, SC
Pickens, SC
Spartanburg, SC
3180 Hagerstown, MD
Washington, MD
3200 Hamilton-Middletown, OH ...................
Butler, OH
3240 Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA ......
Cumberland, PA
Dauphin, PA
Lebanon, PA
Perry, PA
3283 1 2 Hartford, CT ..
Hartford, CT
Litchfield, CT
Middlesex, CT
Tolland, CT
3285 2 Hattiesburg,
MS .............................
Forrest, MS
Lamar, MS
3290 Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC .....
Alexander, NC
Burke, NC
Caldwell, NC
Catawba, NC
3320 Honolulu, HI ......
Honolulu, HI
3350 Houma, LA ........
Lafourche, LA
Terrebonne, LA
3360 1 Houston, TX ....
Chambers, TX
Fort Bend, TX
Harris, TX
Liberty, TX
Montgomery, TX
Waller, TX
3400 Huntington-Ashland, WV–KY–OH .....
Boyd, KY
Carter, KY
Greenup, KY
Lawrence, OH
Cabell, WV
Wayne, WV
3440 Huntsville, AL ....
Limestone, AL
Madison, AL
3480 1 Indianapolis, IN
Boone, IN
Hamilton, IN
Hancock, IN

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

0.9454

0.9623

0.9160

0.9417

0.9647

0.9757

0.8892

0.9227

0.9467

0.9632

1.1798

1.1199

0.7608

0.8293

0.8989

0.9296

1.1905

1.1268

0.8218

0.8742

0.9661

0.9767

0.9961

0.9973

0.9089

0.9367

0.9314

0.9525

PsN: 05MYP2

26365

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
Hendricks, IN
Johnson, IN
Madison, IN
Marion, IN
Morgan, IN
Shelby, IN
3500 Iowa City, IA ......
Johnson, IA
3520 2 Jackson, MI .....
Jackson, MI
3560 Jackson, MS .....
Hinds, MS
Madison, MS
Rankin, MS
3580 Jackson, TN ......
Madison, TN
Chester, TN
3600 1 Jacksonville,
FL ..............................
Clay, FL
Duval, FL
Nassau, FL
St. Johns, FL
3605 2 Jacksonville,
NC .............................
Onslow, NC
3610 2 Jamestown, NY
Chautauqua, NY
3620 Janesville-Beloit,
WI ..............................
Rock, WI
3640 Jersey City, NJ ..
Hudson, NJ
3660 Johnson CityKingsport-Bristol, TN–
VA .............................
Carter, TN
Hawkins, TN
Sullivan, TN
Unicoi, TN
Washington, TN
Bristol City, VA
Scott, VA
Washington, VA
3680 Johnstown, PA ..
Cambria, PA
Somerset, PA
3700 Jonesboro, AR ..
Craighead, AR
3710 Joplin, MO .........
Jasper, MO
Newton, MO
3720 KalamazooBattlecreek, MI ..........
Calhoun, MI
Kalamazoo, MI
Van Buren, MI
3740 Kankakee, IL .....
Kankakee, IL
3760 1 Kansas City,
KS–MO ......................
Johnson, KS
Leavenworth, KS
Miami, KS
Wyandotte, KS
Cass, MO
Clay, MO

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

GAF

0.9749

0.9827

0.9133

0.9398

0.8890

0.9226

0.8939

0.8995

0.9261

0.9300

0.8553

0.8985

0.8558

0.8989

0.9856

0.9901

1.0985

1.0664

0.8412

0.8686
0.8587
0.7924

1.0247

0.8954
0.9629

0.8883

0.9080
0.9009
0.8527

1.0168

0.9271
0.9744

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
Clinton, MO
Jackson, MO
Lafayette, MO
Platte, MO
Ray, MO
3800 Kenosha, WI .....
Kenosha, WI
3810 Killeen-Temple,
TX ..............................
Bell, TX
Coryell, TX
3840 Knoxville, TN .....
Anderson, TN
Blount, TN
Knox, TN
Loudon, TN
Sevier, TN
Union, TN
3850 Kokomo, IN .......
Howard, IN
Tipton, IN
3870 La Crosse, WI–
MN .............................
Houston, MN
La Crosse, WI
3880 Lafayette, LA .....
Acadia, LA
Lafayette, LA
St. Landry, LA
St. Martin, LA
3920 Lafayette, IN ......
Clinton, IN
Tippecanoe, IN
3960 2 Lake Charles,
LA ..............................
Calcasieu, LA
3980 Lakeland-Winter
Haven, FL .................
Polk, FL
4000 Lancaster, PA ...
Lancaster, PA
4040 Lansing-East
Lansing, MI ...............
Clinton, MI
Eaton, MI
Ingham, MI
4080 Laredo, TX ........
Webb, TX
4100 Las Cruces, NM
Dona Ana, NM
4120 1 Las Vegas,
NV–AZ .......................
Mohave, AZ
Clark, NV
Nye, NV
4150 Lawrence, KS ....
Douglas, KS
4200 Lawton, OK .......
Comanche, OK
4243 Lewiston-Auburn, ME ...................
Androscoggin, ME
4280 Lexington, KY ....
Bourbon, KY
Clark, KY
Fayette, KY
Jessamine, KY

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00085

Wage
index

Urban area
(constituent counties)

GAF

0.9703

0.9796

1.0321

1.0219

0.8422

0.8890

0.9190

0.9438

0.9442

0.9614

0.8852

0.9199

0.9091

0.9368

0.7921

0.8525

0.8904

0.9236

0.9274

0.9497

0.9873

0.9913

0.7637

0.8314

0.8744

0.9122

1.0876

1.0592

0.8272

0.8782

0.9156

0.9414

0.9064

0.9349

0.8921

0.9248

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Madison, KY
Scott, KY
Woodford, KY
4320 Lima, OH ...........
Allen, OH
Auglaize, OH
4360 Lincoln, NE ........
Lancaster, NE
4400 Little Rock-North
Little Rock, AR ..........
Faulkner, AR
Lonoke, AR
Pulaski, AR
Saline, AR
4420 Longview-Marshall, TX ....................
Gregg, TX
Harrison, TX
Upshur, TX
4480 1 Los AngelesLong Beach, CA ........
Los Angeles, CA
4520 Louisville, KY–IN
Clark, IN
Floyd, IN
Harrison, IN
Scott, IN
Bullitt, KY
Jefferson, KY
Oldham, KY
4600 Lubbock, TX ......
Lubbock, TX
4640 Lynchburg, VA ..
Amherst, VA
Bedford, VA
Bedford City, VA
Campbell, VA
Lynchburg City, VA
4680 Macon, GA ........
Bibb, GA
Houston, GA
Jones, GA
Peach, GA
Twiggs, GA
4720 Madison, WI ......
Dane, WI
4800 2 Mansfield, OH
Crawford, OH
Richland, OH
4840 Mayaguez, PR ..
Anasco, PR
Cabo Rojo, PR
Hormigueros, PR
Mayaguez, PR
Sabana Grande, PR
San German, PR
4880 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX .......
Hidalgo, TX
4890 Medford-Ashland, OR ....................
Jackson, OR
4900 MelbourneTitusville-Palm Bay,
FL ..............................
Brevard, Fl

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

0.9634

0.9748

0.9808

0.9868

0.8959

0.9275

0.8816

0.9173

1.1955

1.1301

0.9395

0.9582

0.8828

0.9182

0.9218

0.9458

0.9046

0.9336

1.0354

1.0241

0.8778

0.9146

0.4617

0.5891

0.8403

0.8877

1.0438

1.0298

0.9713

0.9803

PsN: 05MYP2

26366

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
4920 1 2 Memphis, TN–
AR–MS (TN Hospitals) .........................
Crittenden, AR
DeSoto, MS
Fayette, TN
Shelby, TN
Tipton, TN
4920 1 2 Memphis, TN–
AR–MS (AR Hospitals) .........................
Crittenden, AR
DeSoto, MS
Fayette, TN
Shelby, TN
Tipton, TN
4920 1 2 Memphis, TN–
AR–MS (MS Hospitals) .........................
Crittenden, AR
DeSoto, MS
Fayette, TN
Shelby, TN
Tipton, TN
4940 2 Merced, CA .....
Merced, CA
5000 1 Miami, FL ........
Dade, FL
5015 1 MiddlesexSomerset-Hunterdon,
NJ ..............................
Hunterdon, NJ
Middlesex, NJ
Somerset, NJ
5080 1 MilwaukeeWaukesha, WI ...........
Milwaukee, WI
Ozaukee, WI
Washington, WI
Waukesha, WI
5120 1 Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN–WI .............
Anoka, MN
Carver, MN
Chisago, MN
Dakota, MN
Hennepin, MN
Isanti, MN
Ramsey, MN
Scott, MN
Sherburne, MN
Washington, MN
Wright, MN
Pierce, WI
St. Croix, WI
5140 Missoula, MT .....
Missoula, MT
5160 Mobile, AL .........
Baldwin, AL
Mobile, AL
5170 Modesto, CA .....
Stanislaus, CA
5190 1 MonmouthOcean, NJ .................
Monmouth, NJ
Ocean, NJ
5200 Monroe, LA .......

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

0.7980

0.7538

0.7608

GAF

0.8568

0.8240

0.8293

0.9966

0.9977

1.0148

1.0101

1.0342

0.9803

1.1118

1.0233

0.9865

1.0753

0.9462

0.9628

0.8205

0.8733

1.0481

1.0327

1.1552
0.8467

1.1038
0.8923

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
Ouachita, LA
5240 2 Montgomery,
AL ..............................
Autauga, AL
Elmore, AL
Montgomery, AL
5280 Muncie, IN .........
Delaware, IN
5330 Myrtle Beach,
SC .............................
Horry, SC
5345 Naples, FL .........
Collier, FL
5360 1 Nashville, TN ..
Cheatham, TN
Davidson, TN
Dickson, TN
Robertson, TN
Rutherford TN
Sumner, TN
Williamson, TN
Wilson, TN
5380 1 Nassau-Suffolk,
NY .............................
Nassau, NY
Suffolk, NY
5483 1 New HavenBridgeport-StamfordWaterbury-Danbury,
CT .............................
Fairfield, CT
New Haven, CT
5523 New LondonNorwich, CT ..............
New London, CT
5560 1 New Orleans,
LA ..............................
Jefferson, LA
Orleans, LA
Plaquemines, LA
St. Bernard, LA
St. Charles, LA
St. James, LA
St. John The Baptist,
LA
St. Tammany, LA
5600 1 New York, NY
Bronx, NY
Kings, NY
New York, NY
Putnam, NY
Queens, NY
Richmond, NY
Rockland, NY
Westchester, NY
5640 1 Newark, NJ .....
Essex, NJ
Morris, NJ
Sussex, NJ
Union, NJ
Warren, NJ
5660 Newburgh, NY–
PA .............................
Orange, NY
Pike, PA
5720 1 Norfolk-Virginia
Beach-Newport
News, VA–NC ...........

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00086

Wage
index

Urban area
(constituent counties)

GAF

0.7610

0.8294

1.0734

1.0497

0.8658

0.9060

0.9396

0.9582

0.9201

0.9446

1.3089

1.2024

1.2135

1.1417

1.1984

1.1319

0.9283

0.9503

1.4445

1.0717

1.0946

0.8429

Fmt 4701

1.2864

1.0486

1.0639

0.8896

Sfmt 4702

Currituck, NC
Chesapeake City, VA
Gloucester, VA
Hampton City, VA
Isle of Wight, VA
James City, VA
Mathews, VA
Newport News City,
VA
Norfolk City, VA
Poquoson City, VA
Portsmouth City, VA
Suffolk City, VA
Virginia Beach City,
VA
Williamsburg City, VA
York, VA
5775 1 Oakland, CA ...
Alameda, CA
Contra Costa, CA
5790 Ocala, FL ..........
Marion, FL
5800 Odessa-Midland,
TX ..............................
Ector, TX
Midland, TX
5880 1 Oklahoma City,
OK .............................
Canadian, OK
Cleveland, OK
Logan, OK
McClain, OK
Oklahoma, OK
Pottawatomie, OK
5910 Olympia, WA .....
Thurston, WA
5920 Omaha, NE–IA ..
Pottawattamie, IA
Cass, NE
Douglas, NE
Sarpy, NE
Washington, NE
5945 1 Orange County,
CA .............................
Orange, CA
5960 1 Orlando, FL .....
Lake, FL
Orange, FL
Osceola, FL
Seminole, FL
5990 2 Owensboro, KY
Daviess, KY
6015 Panama City, FL
Bay, FL
6020 2 ParkersburgMarietta, WV–OH
(WV Hospitals) ..........
Washington, OH
Wood, WV
6020 2 ParkersburgMarietta, WV–OH
(OH Hospitals) ..........
Washington, OH
Wood, WV
6080 2 Pensacola, FL
Escambia, FL
Santa Rosa, FL

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

1.5051

1.3231

0.8904

0.9236

0.9168

0.9422

0.8910

0.9240

1.0787

1.0532

0.9707

0.9798

1.1560

1.1044

0.9959

0.9972

0.8017

0.8595

0.9129

0.9395

0.8321

0.8817

0.8778

0.9146

0.8904

0.9236

PsN: 05MYP2

26367

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
6120 Peoria-Pekin, IL
Peoria, IL
Tazewell, IL
Woodford, IL
6160 1 Philadelphia,
PA–NJ .......................
Burlington, NJ
Camden, NJ
Gloucester, NJ
Salem, NJ
Bucks, PA
Chester, PA
Delaware, PA
Montgomery, PA
Philadelphia, PA
6200 1 Phoenix-Mesa,
AZ ..............................
Maricopa, AZ
Pinal, AZ
6240 Pine Bluff, AR ...
Jefferson, AR
6280 1 Pittsburgh, PA
Allegheny, PA
Beaver, PA
Butler, PA
Fayette, PA
Washington, PA
Westmoreland, PA
6323 2 Pittsfield, MA ...
Berkshire, MA
6340 Pocatello, ID ......
Bannock, ID
6360 Ponce, PR .........
Guayanilla, PR
Juana Diaz, PR
Penuelas, PR
Ponce, PR
Villalba, PR
Yauco, PR
6403 Portland, ME .....
Cumberland, ME
Sagadahoc, ME
York, ME
6440 1 Portland-Vancouver, OR–WA ........
Clackamas, OR
Columbia, OR
Multnomah, OR
Washington, OR
Yamhill, OR
Clark, WA
6483 1 ProvidenceWarwick-Pawtucket,
RI ...............................
Bristol, RI
Kent, RI
Newport, RI
Providence, RI
Washington, RI
6520 Provo-Orem, UT
Utah, UT
6560 2 Pueblo, CO .....
Pueblo, CO
6580 Punta Gorda, FL
Charlotte, FL
6600 Racine, WI ........
Racine, WI

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

GAF

0.8687

0.9081

1.0660

1.0447

0.9532

0.9677

0.7866

0.8484

0.9818

0.9875

1.1348

1.0905

1.0819

1.0554

0.4347

0.5652

0.9779

1.0928

1.0955

0.9848

1.0627

1.0645

0.9972

0.9981

0.9179

0.9430

0.9565

0.9700

0.9298

0.9514

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
6640 1 Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
Chatham, NC
Durham, NC
Franklin, NC
Johnston, NC
Orange, NC
Wake, NC
6660 Rapid City, SD ..
Pennington, SD
6680 Reading, PA ......
Berks, PA
6690 Redding, CA ......
Shasta, CA
6720 Reno, NV ..........
Washoe, NV
6740 RichlandKennewick-Pasco,
WA ............................
Benton, WA
Franklin, WA
6760 Richmond-Petersburg, VA ..............
Charles City County,
VA
Chesterfield, VA
Colonial Heights City,
VA
Dinwiddie, VA
Goochland, VA
Hanover, VA
Henrico, VA
Hopewell City, VA
New Kent, VA
Petersburg City, VA
Powhatan, VA
Prince George, VA
Richmond City, VA
6780 1 Riverside-San
Bernardino, CA .........
Riverside, CA
San Bernardino, CA
6800 Roanoke, VA .....
Botetourt, VA
Roanoke, VA
Roanoke City, VA
Salem City, VA
6820 Rochester, MN ..
Olmsted, MN
6840 1 Rochester, NY
Genesee, NY
Livingston, NY
Monroe, NY
Ontario, NY
Orleans, NY
Wayne, NY
6880 Rockford, IL .......
Boone, IL
Ogle, IL
Winnebago, IL
6895 Rocky Mount,
NC .............................
Edgecombe, NC
Nash, NC
6920 1 Sacramento,
CA .............................
El Dorado, CA

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00087

Wage
index

GAF

Urban area
(constituent counties)

0.9749

0.9827

0.8463

0.8920

0.9203

0.9447

1.1795

1.1197

1.0508

1.0345

1.1564

1.1046

0.9679

0.9779

1.1159
0.9543

1.0780
0.9685

1.1361

1.0913

0.8846

0.9195

0.8904

0.9236

0.8875

0.9215

1.2003

1.1332

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Placer, CA
Sacramento, CA
6960 Saginaw-Bay
City-Midland, MI ........
Bay, MI
Midland, MI
Saginaw, MI
6980 St. Cloud, MN ...
Benton, MN
Stearns, MN
7000 St. Joseph, MO
Andrew, MO
Buchanan, MO
7040 1 St. Louis, MO–
IL ...............................
Clinton, IL
Jersey, IL
Madison, IL
Monroe, IL
St. Clair, IL
Franklin, MO
Jefferson, MO
Lincoln, MO
St. Charles, MO
St. Louis, MO
St. Louis City, MO
Warren, MO
7080 2 Salem, OR ......
Marion, OR
Polk, OR
7120 Salinas, CA .......
Monterey, CA
7160 1 Salt Lake CityOgden, UT ................
Davis, UT
Salt Lake, UT
Weber, UT
7200 San Angelo, TX
Tom Green, TX
7240 1 San Antonio,
TX ..............................
Bexar, TX
Comal, TX
Guadalupe, TX
Wilson, TX
7320 1 San Diego, CA
San Diego, CA
7360 1 San Francisco,
CA .............................
Marin, CA
San Francisco, CA
San Mateo, CA
7400 1 San Jose, CA ..
Santa Clara, CA
7440 1 San Juan-Bayamon, PR ................
Aguas Buenas, PR
Barceloneta, PR
Bayamon, PR
Canovanas, PR
Carolina, PR
Catano, PR
Ceiba, PR
Comerio, PR
Corozal, PR
Dorado, PR
Fajardo, PR

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

0.9475

0.9637

1.0164

1.0112

0.9245

0.9477

0.9114

0.9384

1.0300

1.0204

1.4649

1.2988

0.9661

0.9767

0.7747

0.8396

0.8087

0.8647

1.1901

1.1266

1.4433

1.2857

1.4376

1.2822

0.4691

0.5955

PsN: 05MYP2

26368

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
ued
ued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
Florida, PR
Guaynabo, PR
Humacao, PR
Juncos, PR
Los Piedras, PR
Loiza, PR
Luguillo, PR
Manati, PR
Morovis, PR
Naguabo, PR
Naranjito, PR
Rio Grande, PR
San Juan, PR
Toa Alta, PR
Toa Baja, PR
Trujillo Alto, PR
Vega Alta, PR
Vega Baja, PR
Yabucoa, PR
7460 San Luis
Obispo-AtascaderoPaso Robles, CA ......
San Luis Obispo, CA
7480 Santa BarbaraSanta Maria-Lompoc,
CA .............................
Santa Barbara, CA
7485 Santa CruzWatsonville, CA .........
Santa Cruz, CA
7490 Santa Fe, NM ....
Los Alamos, NM
Santa Fe, NM
7500 Santa Rosa, CA
Sonoma, CA
7510 Sarasota-Bradenton, FL .................
Manatee, FL
Sarasota, FL
7520 Savannah, GA ...
Bryan, GA
Chatham, GA
Effingham, GA
7560 2 ScrantonWilkes-Barre-Hazleton, PA ......................
Columbia, PA
Lackawanna, PA
Luzerne, PA
Wyoming, PA
7600 1 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA ........
Island, WA
King, WA
Snohomish, WA
7610 2 Sharon, PA .....
Mercer, PA
7620 2 Sheboygan, WI
Sheboygan, WI
7640 ShermanDenison, TX ..............
Grayson, TX
7680 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA ..............
Bossier, LA
Caddo, LA
Webster, LA

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

1.0755

1.0728

GAF

1.0511

1.0493

1.4736

1.3041

0.9383

0.9573

1.3182

1.2083

0.9670

0.9773

0.8689

0.8686

0.9083

0.9080

1.1134

1.0763

0.8686

0.9080

0.9073

0.9356

0.8619

0.9032

0.8853

0.9200

13:17 May 04, 2000

Urban area
(constituent counties)
7720 Sioux City, IA–
NE .............................
Woodbury, IA
Dakota, NE
7760 Sioux Falls, SD
Lincoln, SD
Minnehaha, SD
7800 South Bend, IN
St. Joseph, IN
7840 Spokane, WA ....
Spokane, WA
7880 Springfield, IL ....
Menard, IL
Sangamon, IL
7920 Springfield, MO
Christian, MO
Greene, MO
Webster, MO
8003 2 Springfield, MA
Hampden, MA
Hampshire, MA
8050 State College,
PA .............................
Centre, PA
8080 2 SteubenvilleWeirton, OH–WV (OH
Hospitals) ..................
Jefferson, OH
Brooke, WV
Hancock, WV
8080 SteubenvilleWeirton, OH–WV
(WV Hospitals) ..........
Jefferson, OH
Brooke, WV
Hancock, WV
8120 Stockton-Lodi,
CA .............................
San Joaquin, CA
8140 2 Sumter, SC .....
Sumter, SC
8160 Syracuse, NY ....
Cayuga, NY
Madison, NY
Onondaga, NY
Oswego, NY
8200 Tacoma, WA .....
Pierce, WA
8240 2 Tallahassee,
FL ..............................
Gadsden, FL
Leon, FL
8280 1 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater,
FL ..............................
Hernando, FL
Hillsborough, FL
Pasco, FL
Pinellas, FL
8320 2 Terre Haute, IN
Clay, IN
Vermillion, IN
Vigo, IN
8360 Texarkana, ARTexarkana, TX ..........
Miller, AR
Bowie, TX

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00088

Wage
index

GAF

Urban area
(constituent counties)

0.8571

0.8998

0.8890

0.9226

1.0233

1.0159

1.1979

1.1316

0.8744

0.9122

0.8357

0.8843

1.1348

1.0905

0.9114

0.9384

0.8778

0.9146

0.8658

0.9060

1.0711

1.0482

0.8445

0.8907

0.9662

0.9767

1.1658

1.1108

0.8904

0.9236

0.9111

0.9382

0.8807

0.9167

0.7962

0.8555

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

8400 Toledo, OH ........
Fulton, OH
Lucas, OH
Wood, OH
8440 Topeka, KS .......
Shawnee, KS
8480 Trenton, NJ .......
Mercer, NJ
8520 Tucson, AZ ........
Pima, AZ
8560 Tulsa, OK ..........
Creek, OK
Osage, OK
Rogers, OK
Tulsa, OK
Wagoner, OK
8600 Tuscaloosa, AL
Tuscaloosa, AL
8640 Tyler, TX ...........
Smith, TX
8680 2 Utica-Rome,
NY .............................
Herkimer, NY
Oneida, NY
8720 Vallejo-FairfieldNapa, CA ..................
Napa, CA
Solano, CA
8735 Ventura, CA ......
Ventura, CA
8750 Victoria, TX .......
Victoria, TX
8760 Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ .....
Cumberland, NJ
8780 2 Visalia-TularePorterville, CA ...........
Tulare, CA
8800 Waco, TX ..........
McLennan, TX
8840 1 Washington,
DC–MD–VA–WV .......
District of Columbia,
DC
Calvert, MD
Charles, MD
Frederick, MD
Montgomery, MD
Prince Georges, MD
Alexandria City, VA
Arlington, VA
Clarke, VA
Culpeper, VA
Fairfax, VA
Fairfax City, VA
Falls Church City, VA
Fauquier, VA
Fredericksburg City,
VA
King George, VA
Loudoun, VA
Manassas City, VA
Manassas Park City,
VA
Prince William, VA
Spotsylvania, VA
Stafford, VA

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

0.9705

0.9797

0.9134

0.9399

0.9919

0.9944

0.8826

0.9180

0.8698

0.9089

0.8081

0.8642

0.9270

0.9494

0.8558

0.8989

1.2672

1.1761

1.0586

1.0398

0.8133

0.8680

1.0462

1.0314

0.9966

0.9977

0.8402

0.8876

1.0832

1.0563

PsN: 05MYP2

26369

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4A.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4B.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPGEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
ITAL
GEOGRAPHIC
ADJUSTMENT
(GAF) FOR URBAN AREAS—Contin(GAF) FOR RURAL AREAS
FACTOR (GAF) FOR HOSPITALS
ued
THAT ARE RECLASSIFIED—ContinWage
ued
Nonurban Area
GAF
Index
Urban area
(constituent counties)

Warren, VA
Berkeley, WV
Jefferson, WV
8920 Waterloo-Cedar
Falls, IA .....................
Black Hawk, IA
8940 Wausau, WI ......
Marathon, WI
8960 1 West Palm
Beach-Boca Raton,
FL ..............................
Palm Beach, FL
9000 2 Wheeling, WV–
OH (WV Hospitals) ...
Belmont, OH
Marshall, WV
Ohio, WV
9000 2 Wheeling, WV–
OH (OH Hospitals) ....
Belmont, OH
Marshall, WV
Ohio, WV
9040 Wichita, KS .......
Butler, KS
Harvey, KS
Sedgwick, KS
9080 Wichita Falls, TX
Archer, TX
Wichita, TX
9140 2 Williamsport,
PA .............................
Lycoming, PA
9160 Wilmington-Newark, DE–MD ..............
New Castle, DE
Cecil, MD
9200 Wilmington, NC
New Hanover, NC
Brunswick, NC
9260 2 Yakima, WA ....
Yakima, WA
9270 Yolo, CA ............
Yolo, CA
9280 York, PA ............
York, PA
9320 YoungstownWarren, OH ...............
Columbiana, OH
Mahoning, OH
Trumbull, OH
9340 Yuba City, CA ...
Sutter, CA
Yuba, CA
9360 Yuma, AZ ..........
Yuma, AZ

Wage
index

GAF

0.8932

0.9256

0.9511

0.9663

0.9658

0.9765

0.8321

0.8817

0.8778

0.9146

0.9574

0.9706

0.7668

0.8337

0.8686

0.9080

1.1281

1.0860

0.9474

0.9637

1.0763

1.0516

1.0261

1.0178

0.9427

0.9604

0.9604

0.9727

1.0820

1.0555

0.9605

0.9728

Alabama ........................
Alaska ...........................
Arizona ..........................
Arkansas .......................
California .......................
Colorado .......................
Connecticut ...................
Delaware .......................
Florida ...........................
Georgia .........................
Hawaii ...........................
Idaho .............................
Illinois ............................
Indiana ..........................
Iowa ..............................
Kansas ..........................
Kentucky .......................
Louisiana ......................
Maine ............................
Maryland .......................
Massachusetts ..............
Michigan .......................
Minnesota .....................
Mississippi ....................
Missouri ........................
Montana ........................
Nebraska ......................
Nevada .........................
New Hampshire ............
New Jersey 1 .................
New Mexico ..................
New York ......................
North Carolina ..............
North Dakota ................
Ohio ..............................
Oklahoma .....................
Oregon ..........................
Pennsylvania ................
Puerto Rico ...................
Rhode Island 1 ..............
South Carolina ..............
South Dakota ................
Tennessee ....................
Texas ............................
Utah ..............................
Vermont ........................
Virginia ..........................
Washington ...................
West Virginia ................
Wisconsin .....................
Wyoming .......................

0.8294
1.1766
0.8875
0.8240
0.9977
0.9430
1.1199
0.9549
0.9236
0.8954
1.0964
0.9184
0.8817
0.9167
0.8726
0.8369
0.8595
0.8525
0.9171
0.9103
1.0905
0.9398
0.9386
0.8293
0.8410
0.9316
0.8777
0.9553
0.9997
..............
0.8893
0.8989
0.8985
0.8360
0.9146
0.8303
1.0204
0.9080
0.5550
..............
0.8907
0.8425
0.8568
0.8229
0.9432
0.9681
0.8846
1.0516
0.8817
0.9356
0.9336

1 All

counties within the State are classified
as urban.

TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC
ADJUSTMENT
FACTOR (GAF) FOR HOSPITALS
THAT ARE RECLASSIFIED
Area

1 Large

Urban Area
geographically located in the
area are assigned the statewide rural wage
index for FY 2000.

0.7610
1.2681
0.8400
0.7538
0.9966
0.9179
1.1798
0.9349
0.8904
0.8510
1.1438
0.8831
0.8320
0.8807
0.8196
0.7710
0.8017
0.7921
0.8813
0.8717
1.1348
0.9133
0.9116
0.7608
0.7766
0.9017
0.8265
0.9354
0.9995
0.0000
0.8425
0.8558
0.8553
0.7698
0.8778
0.7622
1.0300
0.8686
0.4232
0.0000
0.8445
0.7786
0.7980
0.7523
0.9182
0.9538
0.8361
1.0763
0.8321
0.9073
0.9046

Wage
index

GAF

0.8318
1.0181
1.0783
0.8262
0.8663

0.8815
1.0124
1.0530
0.8774
0.9064

2 Hospitals

VerDate 27<APR>2000

13:17 May 04, 2000

Abilene, TX ...................
Akron, OH .....................
Albany, GA ...................
Alexandria, LA ..............
Amarillo, TX ..................

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00089

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Area
Anchorage, AK .............
Ann Arbor, MI ...............
Atlanta, GA ...................
Atlantic-Cape May, NJ ..
Augusta-Aiken, GA–SC
Baltimore, MD ...............
Barnstable-Yarmouth,
MA .............................
Baton Rouge, LA ..........
Benton Harbor, MI ........
Bergen-Passaic, NJ ......
Billings, MT ...................
Binghamton, NY ...........
Birmingham, AL ............
Bismarck, ND ................
Bloomington, IN ............
Boise City, ID ................
Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Lowell-Brockton, MA–NH (NH, RI,
and VT Hospitals) .....
Bryan-College Station,
TX ..............................
Burlington, VT (VT Hospitals) .........................
Burlington, VT (NY Hospital) ..........................
Casper, WY ..................
Champaign-Urbana, IL
Charleston-North
Charleston, SC ..........
Charleston, WV ............
Charlotte-GastoniaRock Hill, NC–SC .....
Chattanooga, TN–GA ...
Chicago, IL ...................
Cincinnati, OH–KY–IN ..
Clarksville-Hopkinsville,
TN–KY .......................
Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria,
OH .............................
Columbia, MO ...............
Columbia, SC ...............
Columbus, OH ..............
Dallas, TX .....................
Danville, VA ..................
Davenport-Moline—
Rock Island, IA–IL .....
Dayton-Springfield, OH
Denver, CO ...................
Des Moines, IA .............
Dothan, AL ....................
Dover, DE .....................
Duluth-Superior, MN–WI
Eau Claire, WI ..............
Erie, PA ........................
Eugene-Springfield, OR
Fargo-Moorhead, ND–
MN (ND and SD Hospitals) .........................
Fayetteville, NC ............
Flagstaff, AZ–UT ..........
Flint, MI .........................
Florence, AL .................
Florence, SC .................

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

Wage
index

GAF

1.2967
1.1177
0.9945
1.0998
0.9226
0.9485

1.1947
1.0792
0.9962
1.0673
0.9463
0.9644

1.3694
0.8856
0.9133
1.1727
0.9577
0.8723
0.8574
0.8016
0.9294
0.9133

1.2402
0.9202
0.9398
1.1153
0.9708
0.9107
0.9000
0.8595
0.9511
0.9398

1.1239

1.0833

0.8306

0.8806

0.9538

0.9681

0.9238
0.9046
0.9353

0.9472
0.9336
0.9552

0.9094
0.9003

0.9370
0.9306

0.9307
0.9795
1.0902
0.9330

0.9520
0.9859
1.0609
0.9536

0.8393

0.8869

0.9649
0.8600
0.9517
0.9741
0.9220
0.8361

0.9758
0.9019
0.9667
0.9822
0.9459
0.8846

0.9021
0.9519
1.0032
0.9087
0.8105
0.9349
1.0201
0.9073
0.9021
1.1026

0.9319
0.9668
1.0022
0.9365
0.8660
0.9549
1.0137
0.9356
0.9319
1.0692

0.8597
0.8553
1.0678
1.1189
0.7621
0.8838

0.9017
0.8985
1.0459
1.0800
0.8302
0.9189

PsN: 05MYP2

26370

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAP- TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAP- TABLE 4C.—WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL
GEOGRAPHIC
ADJUSTMENT
ITAL
GEOGRAPHIC
ADJUSTMENT
ITAL
GEOGRAPHIC
ADJUSTMENT
FACTOR (GAF) FOR HOSPITALS
FACTOR (GAF) FOR HOSPITALS
FACTOR (GAF) FOR HOSPITALS
THAT ARE RECLASSIFIED—ContinTHAT ARE RECLASSIFIED—ContinTHAT ARE RECLASSIFIED—Continued
ued
ued
Area
Fort Collins-Loveland,
CO .............................
Ft. Lauderdale, FL ........
Fort Pierce-Port St.
Lucie, FL ...................
Fort Smith, AR–OK .......
Fort Wayne, IN .............
Forth Worth-Arlington,
TX ..............................
Gadsden, AL .................
Grand Forks, ND–MN ...
Grand Junction, CO ......
Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, MI .....
Great Falls, MT .............
Greeley, CO ..................
Green Bay, WI ..............
Greensboro-WinstonSalem-High Point, NC
Greenville, NC ..............
Greenville-SpartanburgAnderson, SC ............
Harrisburg-LebanonCarlisle, PA ...............
Hartford, CT (MA Hospital) ..........................
Hattiesburg, MS ............
Hickory-MorgantonLenoir, NC .................
Honolulu, HI ..................
Houston, TX ..................
Huntington-Ashland,
WV–KY–OH ..............
Huntsville, AL ................
Indianapolis, IN .............
Jackson, MS .................
Jackson, TN ..................
Jacksonville, FL ............
Jersey City, NJ .............
Johnson City-KingsportBristol, TN–VA ..........
Joplin, MO ....................
Kalamazoo-Battlecreek,
MI ..............................
Kansas City, KS–MO ....
Knoxville, TN ................
Kokomo, IN ...................
Lafayette, LA ................
Lansing-East Lansing,
MI ..............................
Las Cruces, NM ............
Las Vegas, NV–AZ .......
Lexington, KY ...............
Lima, OH ......................
Lincoln, NE ...................
Little Rock-North Little
Rock, AR ...................
Longview-Marshall, TX
Los Angeles-Long
Beach, CA .................
Louisville, KY–IN ..........
Lynchburg, VA ..............
Macon, GA ....................
Madison, WI ..................
Mansfield, OH ...............

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Wage
index

GAF

1.1005
1.0228

1.0678
1.0156

0.9672
0.8634
0.8807

0.9774
0.9043
0.9167

0.9442
0.8491
1.0042
0.9601

0.9614
0.8940
1.0029
0.9725

1.0150
0.9447
0.9642
0.9359

1.0102
0.9618
0.9753
0.9556

0.9187
0.9244

0.9436
0.9476

0.9160

0.9417

0.9360

0.9557

1.1530
0.7608

1.1024
0.8293

0.8766
1.1905
0.9661

0.9138
1.1268
0.9767

0.9721
0.8882
0.9314
0.8776
0.8939
0.8995
1.0985

0.9808
0.9220
0.9525
0.9145
0.9261
0.9300
1.0664

0.8412
0.7924

0.8883
0.8527

1.0144
0.9629
0.8422
0.9190
0.8852

1.0098
0.9744
0.8890
0.9438
0.9199

0.9873
0.8623
1.0876
0.8769
0.9497
0.9808

0.9913
0.9035
1.0592
0.9140
0.9653
0.9868

0.8841
0.8403

0.9191
0.8877

1.1955
0.9395
0.9090
0.9046
1.0354
0.8778

1.1301
0.9582
0.9368
0.9336
1.0241
0.9146

13:17 May 04, 2000

Area
Memphis, TN–AR–MS
(AR Hospital) .............
Memphis, TN–AR–MS
(MS Hospital) ............
Milwaukee-Waukesha,
WI ..............................
Minneapolis-St. Paul,
MN–WI ......................
Missoula, MT ................
Mobile, AL .....................
Monmouth-Ocean, NJ ..
Montgomery, AL ...........
Myrtle Beach, SC (NC
Hospital) ....................
Nashville, TN ................
New Haven-BridgeportStamford-WaterburyDanbury, CT ..............
New London-Norwich,
CT .............................
New Orleans, LA ..........
New York, NY ...............
Newburgh, NY–PA .......
Norfolk-Virginia BeachNewport News, VA–
NC (NC Hospital) ......
Oakland, CA .................
Ocala, FL ......................
Odessa-Midland, TX .....
Oklahoma City, OK .......
Omaha, NE–IA .............
Orange County, CA ......
Orlando, FL ...................
Peoria-Pekin, IL ............
Pine Bluff, AR ...............
Pittsburgh, PA ...............
Pittsfield, MA (VT Hospital) ..........................
Pocatello, ID .................
Portland, ME .................
Portland-Vancouver,
ORWA .......................
Provo-Orem, UT ...........
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel
Hill, NC ......................
Rapid City, SD ..............
Redding, CA .................
Reno, NV ......................
Richland-KennewickPasco, WA ................
Roanoke, VA ................
Rochester, MN ..............
Rockford, IL ..................
Sacramento, CA ...........
Saginaw-Bay City-Midland, MI .....................
St. Cloud, MN ...............
St. Joseph, MO .............
St. Louis, MO–IL ...........
Salinas, CA ...................
Salt Lake City-Ogden,
UT .............................
San Diego, CA ..............
Santa Cruz-Watsonville,
CA .............................
Santa Fe, NM ...............

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00090

Wage
index

GAF

0.7538

0.8240

0.7608

0.8293

0.9803

0.9865

1.1118
0.9462
0.8205
1.1552
0.7610

1.0753
0.9628
0.8733
1.1038
0.8294

0.8553
0.9078

0.8985
0.9359

1.2135

1.1417

1.1861
0.9283
1.4445
0.9919

1.1240
0.9503
1.2864
0.9944

0.8553
1.5051
0.8904
0.9058
0.8910
0.9707
1.1560
0.9856
0.8687
0.7762
0.9713

0.8985
1.3231
0.9236
0.9345
0.9240
0.9798
1.1044
0.9901
0.9081
0.8407
0.9803

1.0032
0.9265
0.9622

1.0022
0.9491
0.9740

1.0928
0.9972

1.0627
0.9981

0.9749
0.8463
1.1795
1.0508

0.9827
0.8920
1.1197
1.0345

Area
Santa Rosa, CA ............
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA ......................
Sherman-Denison, TX ..
Sioux City, IA–NE .........
South Bend, IN .............
Spokane, WA ................
Springfield, IL ................
Springfield, MO .............
Syracuse, NY ................
Tampa-St. PetersburgClearwater, FL ..........
Texarkana, AR-Texarkana, TX ................
Toledo, OH ...................
Topeka, KS ...................
Tucson, AZ ...................
Tulsa, OK ......................
Tuscaloosa, AL .............
Tyler, TX .......................
Victoria, TX ...................
Washington, DC–MD–
VA–WV ......................
Waterloo-Cedar Falls,
IA ...............................
Wausau, WI ..................
Wichita, KS ...................
Rural Alabama ..............
Rural Florida .................
Rural Illinois ..................
Rural Louisiana .............
Rural Michigan ..............
Rural Minnesota ...........
Rural Missouri ...............
Rural Montana ..............
Rural Oregon ................
Rural Texas (OK Hospital) ..........................
Rural Washington .........
Rural West Virginia .......
Rural Wisconsin ............
Rural Wyoming .............

Wage
index

GAF

1.2832

1.1862

1.1134
0.8619
0.8571
1.0233
1.1608
0.8744
0.8089
0.9662

1.0763
0.9032
0.8998
1.0159
1.1075
0.9122
0.8648
0.9767

0.9111

0.9382

0.7962
0.9705
0.9134
0.8826
0.8698
0.8081
0.9077
0.8133

0.8555
0.9797
0.9399
0.9180
0.9089
0.8642
0.9358
0.8680

1.0832

1.0563

0.8932
0.9511
0.9290
0.7610
0.8904
0.8320
0.7921
0.9133
0.9116
0.7766
0.9017
1.0300

0.9256
0.9663
0.9508
0.8294
0.9236
0.8817
0.8525
0.9398
0.9386
0.8410
0.9316
1.0204

0.7622
1.0763
0.8321
0.9073
0.8905

0.8303
1.0516
0.8817
0.9356
0.9237

TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR URBAN AREAS
Average
hourly
wage

Urban area
1.1267
0.9543
1.1361
0.8904
1.2003

1.0851
0.9685
1.0913
0.9236
1.1332

0.9475
1.0164
0.9036
0.9114
1.4649

0.9637
1.0112
0.9329
0.9384
1.2988

0.9661
1.1901

0.9767
1.1266

1.2834
0.9383

1.1863
0.9573

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Abilene, TX ...................................
Aguadilla, PR ................................
Akron, OH .....................................
Albany, GA ...................................
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY .....
Albuquerque, NM ..........................
Alexandria, LA ..............................
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA
Altoona, PA ...................................
Amarillo, TX ..................................
Anchorage, AK .............................
Ann Arbor, MI ...............................
Anniston, AL .................................
Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah, WI ....
Arecibo, PR ..................................

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

18.0486
10.4725
22.9067
25.7222
18.5809
20.3203
17.8813
21.3707
20.0974
18.7968
27.9780
24.4830
18.0781
19.7485
9.8505

26371

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
Average
hourly
wage

Urban area
Asheville, NC ................................
Athens, GA ...................................
Atlanta, GA ...................................
Atlantic-Cape May, NJ ..................
Auburn-Opelika, AL ......................
Augusta-Aiken, GA–SC ................
Austin-San Marcos, TX ................
Bakersfield, CA .............................
Baltimore, MD ...............................
Bangor, ME ...................................
Barnstable-Yarmouth, MA ............
Baton Rouge, LA ..........................
Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX ............
Bellingham, WA ............................
Benton Harbor, MI ........................
Bergen-Passaic, NJ ......................
Billings, MT ...................................
Biloxi-Gulfport-Pascagoula, MS ....
Binghamton, NY ...........................
Birmingham, AL ............................
Bismarck, ND ................................
Bloomington,IN .............................
Bloomington-Normal, IL ................
Boise City, ID ................................
Boston-Worcester-Lawrence-Lowell-Brockton, MA–NH ................
Boulder-Longmont, CO .................
Brazoria, TX ..................................
Bremerton, WA .............................
Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito,
TX ..............................................
Bryan-College Station, TX ............
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY .............
Burlington, VT ...............................
Caguas, PR ..................................
Canton-Massillon, OH ..................
Casper, WY ..................................
Cedar Rapids, IA ..........................
Champaign-Urbana, IL .................
Charleston-North Charleston, SC
Charleston, WV ............................
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC–
SC .............................................
Charlottesville, VA ........................
Chattanooga, TN–GA ...................
Cheyenne, WY .............................
Chicago, IL ...................................
Chico-Paradise, CA ......................
Cincinnati, OH–KY–IN ..................
Clarksville-Hopkinsville, TN–KY ...
Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria, OH .........
Colorado Springs, CO ..................
Columbia, MO ...............................
Columbia, SC ...............................
Columbus, GA-AL .........................
Columbus, OH ..............................
Corpus Christi, TX ........................
Corvallis, OR ................................
Cumberland, MD-WV ...................
Dallas, TX .....................................
Danville, VA ..................................
Davenport-Moline-Rock Island,
IA–IL ..........................................
Dayton-Springfield, OH .................
Daytona Beach, FL .......................
Decatur, AL ...................................
Decatur, IL ....................................
Denver, CO ...................................
Des Moines, IA .............................

VerDate 27<APR>2000

TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued

20.6721
21.3273
21.5792
24.3464
17.7284
20.0184
20.4753
21.1738
20.4985
20.8595
30.2448
19.4498
18.1415
24.9338
19.0728
25.6998
20.6821
17.9703
18.9273
18.5525
17.1607
19.2118
20.0254
19.7312
24.3877
21.2598
18.9889
24.0180
19.0812
17.9622
20.7580
23.6135
9.9614
18.8702
19.0746
18.2191
20.1555
19.7335
20.2316
20.1566
23.3140
21.8793
18.3270
23.9273
23.1834
20.2453
17.9692
20.9457
21.1998
18.6606
20.9200
18.6769
21.1363
18.4356
24.8210
18.3080
20.0063
18.5023
19.5749
20.6558
20.0411
18.7206
18.6640
21.7676
19.9873

13:17 May 04, 2000

Average
hourly
wage

Urban area
Detroit, MI .....................................
Dothan, AL ....................................
Dover, DE .....................................
Dubuque, IA ..................................
Duluth-Superior, MN–WI ..............
Dutchess County, NY ...................
Eau Claire, WI ..............................
El Paso, TX ..................................
Elkhart-Goshen, IN .......................
Elmira, NY ....................................
Enid, OK .......................................
Erie, PA ........................................
Eugene-Springfield, OR ................
Evansville, Henderson, IN–KY .....
Fargo-Moorhead, ND-MN .............
Fayetteville, NC ............................
Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers,
AR .............................................
Flagstaff, AZ–UT ..........................
Flint, MI .........................................
Florence, AL .................................
Florence, SC .................................
Fort Collins-Loveland, CO ............
Fort Lauderdale, FL ......................
Fort Myers-Cape Coral, FL ..........
Fort Pierce-Port St. Lucie, FL ......
Fort Smith, AR-OK .......................
Fort Walton Beach, FL .................
Fort Wayne, IN .............................
Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ..............
Fresno, CA ...................................
Gadsden, AL .................................
Gainesville, FL ..............................
Galveston-Texas City, TX ............
Gary, IN ........................................
Glens Falls, NY ............................
Goldsboro, NC ..............................
Grand Forks, ND–MN ...................
Grand Junction, CO ......................
Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland,
MI ..............................................
Great Falls, MT .............................
Greeley, CO ..................................
Green Bay, WI ..............................
Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High
Point, NC ...................................
Greenville, NC ..............................
Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson,
SC .............................................
Hagerstown, MD ...........................
Hamilton-Middletown, OH .............
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA ..
Hartford, CT ..................................
Hattiesburg, MS ............................
Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC .....
Honolulu, HI ..................................
Houma, LA ....................................
Houston, TX ..................................
Huntington-Ashland, WV–KY–OH
Huntsville, AL ................................
Indianapolis, IN .............................
Iowa City, IA .................................
Jackson, MI ..................................
Jackson, MS .................................
Jackson, TN ..................................
Jacksonville, FL ............................
Jacksonville, NC ...........................
Jamestown, NY ............................
Janesville-Beloit, WI .....................

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00091

Fmt 4701

21.8228
17.4329
23.9388
19.3729
22.0638
22.3565
17.5107
19.9962
20.7202
18.7582
19.0534
19.5749
23.9117
17.3973
19.1596
18.7438
17.3575
23.5301
24.1126
16.4548
19.1780
23.3920
22.1262
19.7718
20.7352
19.2209
20.2902
18.9774
20.4871
22.0987
18.4245
22.3195
22.3151
20.4033
18.2226
18.4077
22.1477
20.0924
22.2552
19.9908
21.4997
20.3069
19.9482
20.5145
19.8759
20.9333
19.2938
20.5425
24.8641
16.4489
19.9965
25.7981
17.8310
20.9625
21.6140
19.7211
20.2095
21.1537
19.4234
19.2901
19.3964
19.5189
17.0264
17.1320
21.3868

Sfmt 4702

TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
Average
hourly
wage

Urban area
Jersey City, NJ .............................
Johnson City-Kingsport-Bristol,
TN–VA .......................................
Johnstown, PA ..............................
Jonesboro, AR ..............................
Joplin, MO ....................................
Kalamazoo-Battlecreek, MI ..........
Kankakee, IL .................................
Kansas City, KS–MO ....................
Kenosha, WI .................................
Killeen-Temple, TX .......................
Knoxville, TN ................................
Kokomo, IN ...................................
La Crosse, WI–MN .......................
Lafayette, LA ................................
Lafayette, IN .................................
Lake Charles, LA ..........................
Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL ..........
Lancaster, PA ...............................
Lansing-East Lansing, MI .............
Laredo, TX ....................................
Las Cruces, NM ............................
Las Vegas, NV-AZ ........................
Lawrence, KS ...............................
Lawton, OK ...................................
Lewiston-Auburn, ME ...................
Lexington, KY ...............................
Lima, OH ......................................
Lincoln, NE ...................................
Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR
Longview-Marshall, TX .................
Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA ......
Louisville, KY–IN ..........................
Lubbock, TX .................................
Lynchburg, VA ..............................
Macon, GA ....................................
Madison, WI ..................................
Mansfield, OH ...............................
Mayaguez, PR ..............................
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX .....
Medford-Ashland, OR ...................
Melbourne-Titusville-Palm Bay, FL
Memphis, TN–AR–MS ..................
Merced, CA ...................................
Miami, FL ......................................
Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdon,
NJ ..............................................
Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ............
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN–WI ......
Missoula, MT ................................
Mobile, AL .....................................
Modesto, CA .................................
Monmouth-Ocean, NJ ..................
Monroe, LA ...................................
Montgomery, AL ...........................
Muncie, IN ....................................
Myrtle Beach, SC .........................
Naples, FL ....................................
Nashville, TN ................................
Nassau-Suffolk, NY ......................
New Haven-Bridgeport-StamfordWaterbury-Danbury, CT ............
New London-Norwich, CT ............
New Orleans, LA ..........................
New York, NY ...............................
Newark, NJ ...................................
Newburgh, NY-PA ........................
Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport
News, VA–NC ...........................

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

23.7469
18.0944
20.7614
18.6323
17.0944
22.2348
19.4290
20.8941
21.0547
22.3946
18.1724
19.8136
20.4875
19.1482
19.7271
16.2042
20.7380
20.1227
21.4235
16.5720
18.9734
23.6000
17.9498
19.8665
19.6684
19.3574
20.9055
21.1236
19.4396
19.1300
25.8459
20.3861
19.1566
20.0013
19.6297
22.4673
19.0435
10.0185
18.2331
22.6499
21.0752
15.8781
21.1426
22.0202
24.8629
21.2711
24.1246
20.4135
17.8029
22.7416
24.6814
18.3733
16.4427
23.2904
18.7864
20.3889
19.9647
30.5221
26.9488
26.0037
20.1432
31.3439
25.6220
23.7525
18.2637

26372

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued
Average
hourly
wage

Urban area
Oakland, CA .................................
Ocala, FL ......................................
Odessa-Midland, TX .....................
Oklahoma City, OK .......................
Olympia, WA .................................
Omaha, NE-IA ..............................
Orange County, CA ......................
Orlando, FL ...................................
Owensboro, KY ............................
Panama City, FL ...........................
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV–OH .....
Pensacola, FL ...............................
Peoria-Pekin, IL ............................
Philadelphia, PA–NJ .....................
Phoenix-Mesa, AZ ........................
Pine Bluff, AR ...............................
Pittsburgh, PA ...............................
Pittsfield, MA .................................
Pocatello, ID .................................
Ponce, PR ....................................
Portland, ME .................................
Portland-Vancouver, OR–WA .......
Providence-Warwick, RI ...............
Provo-Orem, UT ...........................
Pueblo, CO ...................................
Punta Gorda, FL ...........................
Racine, WI ....................................
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
Rapid City, SD ..............................
Reading, PA .................................
Redding, CA .................................
Reno, NV ......................................
Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, WA ..
Richmond-Petersburg, VA ............
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA .....
Roanoke, VA ................................
Rochester, MN ..............................
Rochester, NY ..............................
Rockford, IL ..................................
Rocky Mount, NC .........................
Sacramento, CA ...........................
Saginaw-Bay City-Midland, MI .....
St. Cloud, MN ...............................
St. Joseph, MO .............................
St. Louis, MO–IL ...........................
Salem, OR ....................................
Salinas, CA ...................................
Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT ............
San Angelo, TX ............................
San Antonio, TX ...........................
San Diego, CA ..............................
San Francisco, CA .......................
San Jose, CA ...............................
San Juan-Bayamon, PR ...............
San Luis Obispo-AtascaderoPaso Robles, CA ......................
Santa Barbara-Santa MariaLompoc, CA ..............................
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA .........
Santa Fe, NM ...............................
Santa Rosa, CA ............................

VerDate 27<APR>2000

TABLE 4D.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR URBAN AREAS—Continued

32.6592
19.2230
19.8941
19.3346
23.4064
21.0639
25.1808
21.6103
16.7178
19.8085
17.5453
17.8738
18.7922
23.1316
20.6836
17.0672
21.3039
22.6239
23.4749
9.4317
21.2189
23.7092
23.7714
21.5911
18.5332
20.7540
20.1753
21.1552
18.3452
19.9691
25.5947
22.8021
25.0933
21.0026
24.4131
20.7061
24.6529
19.1942
19.3204
19.2567
26.0102
20.5596
22.0551
20.0604
19.7758
22.3396
31.7057
20.9541
16.8092
17.5486
25.8245
31.2006
31.3127
10.1790
23.3363
23.2791
31.9763
20.3593
28.6042

13:17 May 04, 2000

Average
hourly
wage

Urban area
Sarasota-Bradenton, FL ...............
Savannah, GA ..............................
Scranton-Wilkes Barre-Hazleton,
PA .............................................
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA .......
Sharon, PA ...................................
Sheboygan, WI .............................
Sherman-Denison, TX ..................
Shreveport-Bossier City, LA .........
Sioux City, IA-NE ..........................
Sioux Falls, SD .............................
South Bend, IN .............................
Spokane, WA ................................
Springfield, IL ................................
Springfield, MO .............................
Springfield, MA .............................
State College, PA .........................
Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV .....
Stockton-Lodi, CA .........................
Sumter, SC ...................................
Syracuse, NY ................................
Tacoma, WA .................................
Tallahassee, FL ............................
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater,
FL ..............................................
Terre Haute, IN .............................
Texarkana, AR-Texarkana, TX .....
Toledo, OH ...................................
Topeka, KS ...................................
Trenton, NJ ...................................
Tucson, AZ ...................................
Tulsa, OK ......................................
Tuscaloosa, AL .............................
Tyler, TX .......................................
Utica-Rome, NY ............................
Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa, CA ............
Ventura, CA ..................................
Victoria, TX ...................................
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ ....
Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA .......
Waco, TX ......................................
Washington, DC–MD–VA–WV .....
Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA ..............
Wausau, WI ..................................
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton,
FL ..............................................
Wheeling, OH-WV ........................
Wichita, KS ...................................
Wichita Falls, TX ..........................
Williamsport, PA ...........................
Wilmington-Newark, DE–MD ........
Wilmington, NC .............................
Yakima, WA ..................................
Yolo, CA .......................................
York, PA .......................................
Youngstown-Warren, OH .............
Yuba City, CA ...............................
Yuma, AZ ......................................

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00092

Fmt 4701

20.9819
18.8537
18.1723
24.0236
17.3633
18.3680
18.3921
19.2092
18.5977
19.2902
22.2041
25.9937
18.9742
18.1326
23.4382
19.7770
18.7875
23.2417
15.4277
20.8181
25.2962
18.6152
19.5050
15.3117
17.0551
21.4500
19.8204
21.5233
19.0859
18.8729
17.5354
20.1140
18.2490
28.7082
24.1637
17.6229
22.7012
21.2165
18.2321
23.5031
18.4528
20.5783
21.1018
16.9649
20.7737
16.6396
18.2295
24.4776
20.5573
21.7819
22.2646
20.4558
20.8393
23.4776
20.8420

Sfmt 4702

TABLE 4E.—AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
FOR RURAL AREAS
Nonurban area

Average
hourly
wage

Alabama ........................................
Alaska ...........................................
Arizona ..........................................
Arkansas .......................................
California .......................................
Colorado .......................................
Connecticut ...................................
Delaware .......................................
Florida ...........................................
Georgia .........................................
Hawaii ...........................................
Idaho .............................................
Illinois ............................................
Indiana ..........................................
Iowa ..............................................
Kansas ..........................................
Kentucky .......................................
Louisiana ......................................
Maine ............................................
Maryland .......................................
Massachusetts ..............................
Michigan .......................................
Minnesota .....................................
Mississippi ....................................
Missouri ........................................
Montana ........................................
Nebraska ......................................
Nevada .........................................
New Hampshire ............................
New Jersey 1 .................................
New Mexico ..................................
New York ......................................
North Carolina ..............................
North Dakota ................................
Ohio ..............................................
Oklahoma .....................................
Oregon ..........................................
Pennsylvania ................................
Puerto Rico ...................................
Rhode Island 1 ..............................
South Carolina ..............................
South Dakota ................................
Tennessee ....................................
Texas ............................................
Utah ..............................................
Vermont ........................................
Virginia ..........................................
Washington ...................................
West Virginia ................................
Wisconsin .....................................
Wyoming .......................................

16.4226
27.5158
18.2279
16.3570
21.6246
19.9177
25.5994
20.2855
19.2234
18.4650
24.8190
19.1619
18.0540
19.1101
17.7834
16.7288
17.3951
17.1441
19.1234
18.9146
24.6234
19.7353
19.7808
16.5082
16.8219
19.5658
17.9331
20.2962
21.6890
................
18.2818
18.5706
18.5592
16.7027
19.0464
16.5386
22.3491
18.8470
9.1823
................
18.3244
16.8938
17.3149
16.3108
19.9234
20.3374
18.1413
23.3538
18.0536
19.6848
19.6292

1 All counties within the State are classified
as urban.

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26373

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4F.—PUERTO RICO WAGE INDEX AND CAPITAL GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR (GAF)
Wage
index

Area

Aguadilla, PR ...................................................................................................
Arecibo, PR ......................................................................................................
Caguas, PR .....................................................................................................
Mayaguez, PR .................................................................................................
Ponce, PR ........................................................................................................
San Juan-Bayamon, PR ..................................................................................
Rural Puerto Rico ............................................................................................

Wage
index—
reclass.
hospitals

GAF—
reclass.
hospitals

........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................

........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................

GAF

1.0507
0.9883
0.9995
1.0052
0.9463
1.0213
0.9213

1.0344
0.9920
0.9997
1.0036
0.9629
1.0145
0.9454

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY
DRG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

MDC

Type

.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......

01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

9 .......
10 .....
11 .....
12 .....
13 .....
14 .....
15 .....
16 .....
17 .....
18 .....
19 .....
20 .....
21 .....
22 .....
23 .....
24 .....
25 .....
26 .....
27 .....
28 .....
29 .....
30 .....
31 .....
32 .....
33 .....
34 .....
35 .....
36 .....
37 .....
38 .....
39 .....
40 .....
41 .....
42 .....
43 .....
44 .....
45 .....
46 .....
47 .....
48 .....
49 .....
50 .....
51 .....
52 .....
53 .....

01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
02
03
03
03
03
03

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
CRANIOTOMY AGE >17 EXCEPT FOR TRAUMA .............................
CRANIOTOMY FOR TRAUMA AGE >17 ............................................
* CRANIOTOMY AGE 0–17 ..................................................................
SPINAL PROCEDURES .......................................................................
EXTRACRANIAL VASCULAR PROCEDURES ...................................
CARPAL TUNNEL RELEASE ..............................................................
PERIPH & CRANIAL NERVE & OTHER NERV SYST PROC W CC
PERIPH & CRANIAL NERVE & OTHER NERV SYST PROC W/O
CC.
SPINAL DISORDERS & INJURIES .....................................................
NERVOUS SYSTEM NEOPLASMS W CC ..........................................
NERVOUS SYSTEM NEOPLASMS W/O CC ......................................
DEGENERATIVE NERVOUS SYSTEM DISORDERS ........................
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS & CEREBELLAR ATAXIA ............................
SPECIFIC CEREBROVASCULAR DISORDERS EXCEPT TIA ..........
TRANSIENT ISCHEMIC ATTACK & PRECEREBRAL OCCLUSIONS
NONSPECIFIC CEREBROVASCULAR DISORDERS W CC .............
NONSPECIFIC CEREBROVASCULAR DISORDERS W/O CC ..........
CRANIAL & PERIPHERAL NERVE DISORDERS W CC ....................
CRANIAL & PERIPHERAL NERVE DISORDERS W/O CC ................
NERVOUS SYSTEM INFECTION EXCEPT VIRAL MENINGITIS ......
VIRAL MENINGITIS .............................................................................
HYPERTENSIVE ENCEPHALOPATHY ...............................................
NONTRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA .................................................
SEIZURE & HEADACHE AGE >17 W CC ...........................................
SEIZURE & HEADACHE AGE >17 W/O CC .......................................
SEIZURE & HEADACHE AGE 0–17 ....................................................
TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA >1 HR .................................
TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA <1 HR AGE 17 ≥ W CC ....
TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA <1 HR AGE 17 ≥ W/O CC
* TRAUMATIC STUPOR & COMA, COMA < 1 HR AGE 0–17 ...........
CONCUSSION AGE >17 W CC ...........................................................
CONCUSSION AGE >17 W/O CC .......................................................
* CONCUSSION AGE 0–17 ..................................................................
OTHER DISORDERS OF NERVOUS SYSTEM W CC .......................
OTHER DISORDERS OF NERVOUS SYSTEM W/O CC ...................
RETINAL PROCEDURES ....................................................................
ORBITAL PROCEDURES ....................................................................
PRIMARY IRIS PROCEDURES ...........................................................
LENS PROCEDURES WITH OR WITHOUT VITRECTOMY ..............
EXTRAOCULAR PROCEDURES EXCEPT ORBIT AGE >17 .............
* EXTRAOCULAR PROCEDURES EXCEPT ORBIT AGE 0–17 .........
INTRAOCULAR PROCEDURES EXCEPT RETINA, IRIS & LENS ....
HYPHEMA ............................................................................................
ACUTE MAJOR EYE INFECTIONS .....................................................
NEUROLOGICAL EYE DISORDERS ..................................................
OTHER DISORDERS OF THE EYE AGE >17 W CC .........................
OTHER DISORDERS OF THE EYE AGE >17 W/O CC .....................
* OTHER DISORDERS OF THE EYE AGE 0–17 ................................
MAJOR HEAD & NECK PROCEDURES .............................................
SIALOADENECTOMY ..........................................................................
SALIVARY GLAND PROCEDURES EXCEPT SIALOADENECTOMY
CLEFT LIP & PALATE REPAIR ...........................................................
SINUS & MASTOID PROCEDURES AGE >17 ...................................

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00093

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

3.1023
3.1157
1.9575
2.2879
1.4334
.8265
2.5918
1.3987

6.3
7.3
12.7
4.8
2.3
2.2
6.9
2.1

9.1
9.7
12.7
7.3
3.3
3.2
10.3
3.0

1.3176
1.2276
.8343
.8916
.7675
1.2205
.7486
1.1670
.6563
.9616
.6975
2.7645
1.5003
1.0084
.8021
.9925
.6045
.6453
1.2871
1.3124
.7037
.3311
.8655
.5374
.2080
1.0108
.6051
.6636
1.0020
.4832
.5803
.8625
.3370
.6472
.5008
.6293
.7031
.7767
.4921
.2968
1.8368
.8531
.7986
.8428
1.2137

4.8
4.9
3.1
4.5
4.1
4.8
2.9
4.6
2.7
4.3
2.9
7.9
5.2
3.8
3.2
3.7
2.6
2.4
3.2
4.5
2.8
2.0
3.1
2.1
1.6
3.8
2.7
1.2
2.6
1.8
1.5
2.3
1.6
1.6
2.6
4.0
2.7
3.5
2.5
2.9
3.5
1.6
1.8
1.6
2.3

6.7
6.7
4.2
6.1
5.1
6.2
3.6
6.1
3.4
5.6
3.7
10.5
6.9
5.0
4.2
5.0
3.3
3.2
5.1
6.3
3.7
2.0
4.2
2.7
1.6
5.2
3.4
1.4
3.7
2.5
1.9
3.6
1.6
2.2
3.3
5.0
3.3
4.6
3.3
2.9
5.0
2.0
2.6
2.1
3.7

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26374

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG

MDC

Type

54 .....
55 .....

03
03

SURG
SURG

56 .....
57 .....

03
03

SURG
SURG

58 .....

03

SURG

59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80

.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....

03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
04
04
04
04
04
04

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG
SURG
MED
MED
MED

81 .....
82 .....
83 .....
84 .....
85 .....
86 .....
87 .....
88 .....
89 .....
90 .....
91 .....
92 .....
93 .....
94 .....
95 .....
96 .....
97 .....
98 .....
99 .....
100 ...
101 ...
102 ...
103 ...
104 ...

04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
PRE
05

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG

105 ...

05

SURG

106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

114 ...

05

SURG

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
* SINUS & MASTOID PROCEDURES AGE 0–17 ...............................
MISCELLANEOUS EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT PROCEDURES.
RHINOPLASTY .....................................................................................
T
&
A
PROC,
EXCEPT
TONSILLECTOMY
&
/OR
ADENOIDECTOMY ONLY, AGE >17.
* T & A PROC, EXCEPT TONSILLECTOMY & /OR
ADENOIDECTOMY ONLY, AGE 0–17.
TONSILLECTOMY & /OR ADENOIDECTOMY ONLY, AGE >17 .......
* TONSILLECTOMY & /OR ADENOIDECTOMY ONLY, AGE 0–17 ...
MYRINGOTOMY W TUBE INSERTION AGE >17 ..............................
* MYRINGOTOMY W TUBE INSERTION AGE 0–17 ..........................
OTHER EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT O.R. PROCEDURES ......
EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT MALIGNANCY ..............................
DYSEQUILIBRIUM ...............................................................................
EPISTAXIS ...........................................................................................
EPIGLOTTITIS ......................................................................................
OTITIS MEDIA & URI AGE >17 W CC ................................................
OTITIS MEDIA & URI AGE >17 W/O CC ............................................
OTITIS MEDIA & URI AGE 0–17 .........................................................
LARYNGOTRACHEITIS .......................................................................
NASAL TRAUMA & DEFORMITY ........................................................
OTHER EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT DIAGNOSES AGE >17 ...
* OTHER EAR, NOSE, MOUTH & THROAT DIAGNOSES AGE 0–17
MAJOR CHEST PROCEDURES .........................................................
OTHER RESP SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W CC ........................
OTHER RESP SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W/O CC .....................
PULMONARY EMBOLISM ...................................................................
RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS & INFLAMMATIONS AGE >17 W CC
RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS & INFLAMMATIONS AGE >17 W/O
CC.
* RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS & INFLAMMATIONS AGE 0–17 .......
RESPIRATORY NEOPLASMS .............................................................
MAJOR CHEST TRAUMA W CC .........................................................
MAJOR CHEST TRAUMA W/O CC .....................................................
PLEURAL EFFUSION W CC ...............................................................
PLEURAL EFFUSION W/O CC ...........................................................
PULMONARY EDEMA & RESPIRATORY FAILURE ..........................
CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE ..........................
SIMPLE PNEUMONIA & PLEURISY AGE >17 W CC ........................
SIMPLE PNEUMONIA & PLEURISY AGE >17 W/O CC ....................
SIMPLE PNEUMONIA & PLEURISY AGE 0–17 .................................
INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE W CC ...............................................
INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE W/O CC ...........................................
PNEUMOTHORAX W CC ....................................................................
PNEUMOTHORAX W/O CC ................................................................
BRONCHITIS & ASTHMA AGE >17 W CC .........................................
BRONCHITIS & ASTHMA AGE >17 W/O CC .....................................
BRONCHITIS & ASTHMA AGE 0–17 ..................................................
RESPIRATORY SIGNS & SYMPTOMS W CC ...................................
RESPIRATORY SIGNS & SYMPTOMS W/O CC ................................
OTHER RESPIRATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W CC .....................
OTHER RESPIRATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W/O CC .................
HEART TRANSPLANT .........................................................................
CARDIAC VALVE & OTHER MAJOR CARDIOTHORACIC PROC W
CARDIAC CATH.
CARDIAC VALVE & OTHER MAJOR CARDIOTHORACIC PROC W/
O CARDIAC CATH.
CORONARY BYPASS W PTCA ..........................................................
CORONARY BYPASS W CARDIAC CATH .........................................
OTHER CARDIOTHORACIC PROCEDURES .....................................
CORONARY BYPASS W/O PTCA OR CARDIAC CATH ...................
MAJOR CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES W CC .........................
MAJOR CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES W/O CC .....................
PERCUTANEOUS CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES ...................
AMPUTATION FOR CIRC SYSTEM DISORDERS EXCEPT UPPER
LIMB & TOE.
UPPER LIMB & TOE AMPUTATION FOR CIRC SYSTEM DISORDERS.

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00094

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

.4812
.9049

3.2
1.9

3.2
2.9

.9487
1.0775

2.1
2.6

3.1
4.0

.2733

1.5

1.5

.6824
.2081
1.2708
.2946
1.3393
1.2285
.5383
.5580
.8088
.6744
.5114
.4666
.7730
.6409
.7763
.3348
3.1338
2.7905
1.1793
1.3703
1.6471
.9168

1.8
1.5
2.8
1.3
3.0
4.2
2.3
2.5
2.8
3.4
2.7
2.4
3.0
2.6
3.3
2.1
7.8
8.4
3.4
6.0
6.6
4.6

2.4
1.5
4.9
1.3
4.3
6.5
2.9
3.2
3.5
4.2
3.3
2.9
3.9
3.3
4.3
2.1
10.0
11.3
4.9
7.0
8.5
5.7

1.5162
1.3810
.9752
.5492
1.2201
.6990
1.3746
.9314
1.0638
.6540
.6702
1.1852
.7211
1.1694
.6072
.7873
.5871
.9098
.7104
.5415
.8535
.5522
17.3527
7.2014

6.1
5.2
4.4
2.8
4.9
2.9
4.8
4.2
5.0
3.6
2.8
5.0
3.3
4.8
3.0
3.9
3.1
3.0
2.5
1.8
3.3
2.1
28.8
8.9

6.1
7.0
5.6
3.4
6.4
3.8
6.3
5.2
6.0
4.2
3.3
6.3
4.0
6.3
3.7
4.7
3.7
4.7
3.2
2.2
4.4
2.7
48.6
11.7

5.6515

7.4

9.3

7.5379
5.3870
5.6650
4.0244
4.1440
2.2427
1.8729
2.7595

9.4
9.2
8.0
6.8
7.1
4.7
2.6
9.7

11.2
10.4
10.6
7.7
9.5
5.5
3.8
12.7

1.5650

6.0

8.3

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26375

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG

MDC

Type

115 ...

05

SURG

116 ...

05

SURG

117 ...

05

SURG

118
119
120
121

...
...
...
...

05
05
05
05

SURG
SURG
SURG
MED

122 ...

05

MED

123 ...
124 ...

05
05

MED
MED

125 ...

05

MED

126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

136 ...

05

MED

137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
05
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

155 ...

06

SURG

156 ...

06

SURG

157 ...
158 ...
159 ...

06
06
06

SURG
SURG
SURG

160 ...

06

SURG

161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170

06
06
06
06
06
06
06
03
03
06

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
PRM CARD PACEM IMPL W AMI,HRT FAIL OR SHK,OR AICD
LEAD OR GNRTR PR.
OTH PERM CARD PACEMAK IMPL OR PTCA W CORONARY ARTERY STENT IMPLNT.
CARDIAC PACEMAKER REVISION EXCEPT DEVICE REPLACEMENT.
CARDIAC PACEMAKER DEVICE REPLACEMENT ...........................
VEIN LIGATION & STRIPPING ...........................................................
OTHER CIRCULATORY SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES ...................
CIRCULATORY DISORDERS W AMI & MAJOR COMP, DISCHARGED ALIVE.
CIRCULATORY DISORDERS W AMI W/O MAJOR COMP, DISCHARGED ALIVE.
CIRCULATORY DISORDERS W AMI, EXPIRED ...............................
CIRCULATORY DISORDERS EXCEPT AMI, W CARD CATH &
COMPLEX DIAG.
CIRCULATORY DISORDERS EXCEPT AMI, W CARD CATH W/O
COMPLEX DIAG.
ACUTE & SUBACUTE ENDOCARDITIS .............................................
HEART FAILURE & SHOCK ................................................................
DEEP VEIN THROMBOPHLEBITIS .....................................................
CARDIAC ARREST, UNEXPLAINED ..................................................
PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISORDERS W CC .................................
PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISORDERS W/O CC .............................
ATHEROSCLEROSIS W CC ...............................................................
ATHEROSCLEROSIS W/O CC ............................................................
HYPERTENSION ..................................................................................
CARDIAC CONGENITAL & VALVULAR DISORDERS AGE >17 W
CC.
CARDIAC CONGENITAL & VALVULAR DISORDERS AGE >17 W/O
CC.
* CARDIAC CONGENITAL & VALVULAR DISORDERS AGE 0–17 ...
CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIA & CONDUCTION DISORDERS W CC ......
CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIA & CONDUCTION DISORDERS W/O CC ..
ANGINA PECTORIS .............................................................................
SYNCOPE & COLLAPSE W CC ..........................................................
SYNCOPE & COLLAPSE W/O CC ......................................................
CHEST PAIN ........................................................................................
OTHER CIRCULATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W CC .....................
OTHER CIRCULATORY SYSTEM DIAGNOSES W/O CC .................
RECTAL RESECTION W CC ...............................................................
RECTAL RESECTION W/O CC ...........................................................
MAJOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W CC ................
MAJOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W/O CC ............
PERITONEAL ADHESIOLYSIS W CC .................................................
PERITONEAL ADHESIOLYSIS W/O CC .............................................
MINOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W CC ................
MINOR SMALL & LARGE BOWEL PROCEDURES W/O CC ............
STOMACH, ESOPHAGEAL & DUODENAL PROCEDURES AGE
>17 W CC.
STOMACH, ESOPHAGEAL & DUODENAL PROCEDURES AGE
>17 W/O CC.
* STOMACH, ESOPHAGEAL & DUODENAL PROCEDURES AGE
0–17.
ANAL & STOMAL PROCEDURES W CC ...........................................
ANAL & STOMAL PROCEDURES W/O CC ........................................
HERNIA PROCEDURES EXCEPT INGUINAL & FEMORAL AGE
>17 W CC.
HERNIA PROCEDURES EXCEPT INGUINAL & FEMORAL AGE
>17 W/O CC.
INGUINAL & FEMORAL HERNIA PROCEDURES AGE >17 W CC ..
INGUINAL & FEMORAL HERNIA PROCEDURES AGE >17 W/O CC
* HERNIA PROCEDURES AGE 0–17 ..................................................
APPENDECTOMY W COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W CC .......
APPENDECTOMY W COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W/O CC ...
APPENDECTOMY W/O COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W CC ...
APPENDECTOMY W/O COMPLICATED PRINCIPAL DIAG W/O CC
MOUTH PROCEDURES W CC ...........................................................
MOUTH PROCEDURES W/O CC .......................................................
OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W CC ...............

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00095

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

3.4763

6.0

8.4

2.4225

2.6

3.7

1.2983

2.6

4.1

1.4952
1.2627
2.0394
1.6191

1.9
2.9
4.9
5.5

2.8
4.8
8.1
6.7

1.0872

3.3

4.0

1.5531
1.4152

2.8
3.3

4.6
4.4

1.0624

2.2

2.8

2.5352
1.0135
.7644
1.0936
.9474
.5891
.6703
.5656
.5921
.9085

9.2
4.2
5.0
1.8
4.7
3.6
2.4
1.9
2.6
3.3

12.0
5.4
5.8
2.8
5.9
4.4
3.1
2.4
3.3
4.5

.6074

2.3

2.9

.8170
.8288
.5139
.5737
.7225
.5556
.5403
1.1676
.6308
2.7439
1.6272
3.4317
1.5645
2.8508
1.3404
1.9422
1.2045
4.1504

3.3
3.1
2.0
2.2
2.9
2.2
1.8
3.8
2.2
8.9
6.0
10.1
6.1
9.1
4.8
6.8
4.9
10.1

3.3
4.0
2.5
2.7
3.7
2.7
2.2
5.4
2.8
10.2
6.6
12.1
6.6
11.2
5.9
8.2
5.5
13.3

1.3691

3.3

4.3

.8413

6.0

6.0

1.2381
.6630
1.3341

3.9
2.1
3.8

5.5
2.6
5.0

.7828

2.2

2.7

1.1022
.6236
.8701
2.3776
1.2823
1.4813
.8936
1.2069
.7475
2.8739

2.9
1.6
2.1
7.1
4.3
4.0
2.3
3.2
1.9
7.7

4.2
2.0
2.1
8.4
4.9
5.1
2.7
4.6
2.4
11.2

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26376

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182

MDC

Type

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06
06

SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

183 ...

06

MED

184 ...

06

MED

185 ...

03

MED

186 ...

03

MED

187
188
189
190
191
192
193

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

03
06
06
06
07
07
07

MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG
SURG

194 ...

07

SURG

195 ...
196 ...
197 ...

07
07
07

SURG
SURG
SURG

198 ...

07

SURG

199 ...
200 ...

07
07

SURG
SURG

201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

07
07
07
07
07
07
07
07
08

SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG

210 ...

08

SURG

211 ...

08

SURG

212 ...
213 ...

08
08

SURG
SURG

214 ...
215 ...
216 ...

08
08
08

SURG
SURG
SURG

217 ...

08

SURG

218 ...

08

SURG

219 ...

08

SURG

220 ...

08

SURG

221 ...

08

SURG

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES W/O CC ...........
DIGESTIVE MALIGNANCY W CC .......................................................
DIGESTIVE MALIGNANCY W/O CC ...................................................
G.I. HEMORRHAGE W CC ..................................................................
G.I. HEMORRHAGE W/O CC ..............................................................
COMPLICATED PEPTIC ULCER ........................................................
UNCOMPLICATED PEPTIC ULCER W CC ........................................
UNCOMPLICATED PEPTIC ULCER W/O CC ....................................
INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE ..................................................
G.I. OBSTRUCTION W CC ..................................................................
G.I. OBSTRUCTION W/O CC ..............................................................
ESOPHAGITIS, GASTROENT & MISC DIGEST DISORDERS AGE
>17 W CC.
ESOPHAGITIS, GASTROENT & MISC DIGEST DISORDERS AGE
>17 W/O CC.
ESOPHAGITIS, GASTROENT & MISC DIGEST DISORDERS AGE
0–17.
DENTAL & ORAL DIS EXCEPT EXTRACTIONS & RESTORATIONS, AGE >17.
* DENTAL & ORAL DIS EXCEPT EXTRACTIONS & RESTORATIONS, AGE 0–17.
DENTAL EXTRACTIONS & RESTORATIONS ....................................
OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W CC ...........
OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W/O CC ........
OTHER DIGESTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES AGE 0–17 ....................
PANCREAS, LIVER & SHUNT PROCEDURES W CC .......................
PANCREAS, LIVER & SHUNT PROCEDURES W/O CC ...................
BILIARY TRACT PROC EXCEPT ONLY CHOLECYST W OR W/O
C.D.E. W CC.
BILIARY TRACT PROC EXCEPT ONLY CHOLECYST W OR W/O
C.D.E. W/O CC.
CHOLECYSTECTOMY W C.D.E. W CC .............................................
CHOLECYSTECTOMY W C.D.E. W/O CC .........................................
CHOLECYSTECTOMY EXCEPT BY LAPAROSCOPE W/O C.D.E.
W CC.
CHOLECYSTECTOMY EXCEPT BY LAPAROSCOPE W/O C.D.E.
W/O CC.
HEPATOBILIARY DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE FOR MALIGNANCY
HEPATOBILIARY DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE FOR NON-MALIGNANCY.
OTHER HEPATOBILIARY OR PANCREAS O.R. PROCEDURES .....
CIRRHOSIS & ALCOHOLIC HEPATITIS .............................................
MALIGNANCY OF HEPATOBILIARY SYSTEM OR PANCREAS .......
DISORDERS OF PANCREAS EXCEPT MALIGNANCY .....................
DISORDERS OF LIVER EXCEPT MALIG,CIRR,ALC HEPA W CC ...
DISORDERS OF LIVER EXCEPT MALIG,CIRR,ALC HEPA W/O CC
DISORDERS OF THE BILIARY TRACT W CC ...................................
DISORDERS OF THE BILIARY TRACT W/O CC ...............................
MAJOR JOINT & LIMB REATTACHMENT PROCEDURES OF
LOWER EXTREMITY.
HIP & FEMUR PROCEDURES EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT AGE >17
W CC.
HIP & FEMUR PROCEDURES EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT AGE >17
W/O CC.
* HIP & FEMUR PROCEDURES EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT AGE 0–17
AMPUTATION FOR MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONN TISSUE DISORDERS.
NO LONGER VALID .............................................................................
NO LONGER VALID .............................................................................
BIOPSIES OF MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONNECTIVE
TISSUE.
WND DEBRID & SKN GRFT EXCEPT HAND, FOR MUSCSKELET
& CONN TISS DIS.
LOWER EXTREM & HUMER PROC EXCEPT HIP, FOOT, FEMUR
AGE >17 W CC.
LOWER EXTREM & HUMER PROC EXCEPT HIP, FOOT, FEMUR
AGE >17 W/O CC.
* LOWER EXTREM & HUMER PROC EXCEPT HIP, FOOT, FEMUR
AGE 0–17.
NO LONGER VALID .............................................................................

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00096

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

1.1951
1.3502
.7641
.9981
.5495
1.1057
.8997
.6593
1.0583
.9426
.5309
.7922

3.6
5.1
2.8
3.9
2.5
4.1
3.7
2.6
4.7
4.2
2.8
3.4

4.8
7.0
3.9
4.8
2.9
5.3
4.6
3.1
6.0
5.4
3.4
4.4

.5713

2.4

3.0

.5137

2.5

3.3

.8624

3.3

4.5

.3207

2.9

2.9

.7687
1.1005
.5799
.9912
4.3818
1.7866
3.3954

2.9
4.1
2.4
4.1
10.5
5.3
10.3

3.8
5.6
3.1
6.0
14.1
6.6
12.6

1.6141

5.6

6.8

2.9025
1.6543
2.4551

8.3
4.9
7.2

9.9
5.7
8.7

1.2323

3.9

4.5

2.3610
3.1765

7.2
7.0

9.7
10.8

3.4002
1.3035
1.3284
1.2030
1.2072
.6759
1.1037
.6532
2.0902

10.2
4.9
5.0
4.5
4.7
3.0
4.0
2.3
4.6

13.9
6.5
6.7
5.9
6.3
3.9
5.2
2.9
5.2

1.8074

6.0

6.9

1.2663

4.6

5.0

.8449
1.7751

11.1
6.4

11.1
8.7

.0000
.0000
2.1983

.0
.0
7.1

.0
.0
9.8

2.9142

8.9

13.1

1.5309

4.2

5.4

1.0219

2.7

3.2

.5828

5.3

5.3

.0000

.0

.0

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26377

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG

MDC

Type

222 ...
223 ...

08
08

SURG
SURG

224 ...

08

SURG

225
226
227
228

...
...
...
...

08
08
08
08

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

229 ...
230 ...

08
08

SURG
SURG

231 ...

08

SURG

232 ...
233 ...
234 ...

08
08
08

SURG
SURG
SURG

235
236
237
238
239

...
...
...
...
...

08
08
08
08
08

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

08
08
08
08
08
08
08
08

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

248 ...
249 ...

08
08

MED
MED

250 ...

08

MED

251 ...

08

MED

252 ...
253 ...

08
08

MED
MED

254 ...

08

MED

255 ...

08

MED

256 ...

08

MED

257
258
259
260
261

...
...
...
...
...

09
09
09
09
09

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

262 ...
263 ...

09
09

SURG
SURG

264 ...

09

SURG

265 ...

09

SURG

266 ...

09

SURG

267 ...
268 ...

09
09

SURG
SURG

269 ...
270 ...

09
09

SURG
SURG

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
NO LONGER VALID .............................................................................
MAJOR SHOULDER/ELBOW PROC, OR OTHER UPPER EXTREMITY PROC W CC.
SHOULDER,ELBOW OR FOREARM PROC,EXC MAJOR JOINT
PROC, W/O CC.
FOOT PROCEDURES .........................................................................
SOFT TISSUE PROCEDURES W CC .................................................
SOFT TISSUE PROCEDURES W/O CC .............................................
MAJOR THUMB OR JOINT PROC,OR OTH HAND OR WRIST
PROC W CC.
HAND OR WRIST PROC, EXCEPT MAJOR JOINT PROC, W/O CC
LOCAL EXCISION & REMOVAL OF INT FIX DEVICES OF HIP &
FEMUR.
LOCAL EXCISION & REMOVAL OF INT FIX DEVICES EXCEPT
HIP & FEMUR.
ARTHROSCOPY ..................................................................................
OTHER MUSCULOSKELET SYS & CONN TISS O.R. PROC W CC
OTHER MUSCULOSKELET SYS & CONN TISS O.R. PROC W/O
CC.
FRACTURES OF FEMUR ....................................................................
FRACTURES OF HIP & PELVIS .........................................................
SPRAINS, STRAINS, & DISLOCATIONS OF HIP, PELVIS & THIGH
OSTEOMYELITIS .................................................................................
PATHOLOGICAL FRACTURES & MUSCULOSKELETAL & CONN
TISS MALIGNANCY.
CONNECTIVE TISSUE DISORDERS W CC .......................................
CONNECTIVE TISSUE DISORDERS W/O CC ...................................
SEPTIC ARTHRITIS .............................................................................
MEDICAL BACK PROBLEMS ..............................................................
BONE DISEASES & SPECIFIC ARTHROPATHIES W CC ................
BONE DISEASES & SPECIFIC ARTHROPATHIES W/O CC .............
NON-SPECIFIC ARTHROPATHIES ....................................................
SIGNS & SYMPTOMS OF MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONN
TISSUE.
TENDONITIS, MYOSITIS & BURSITIS ...............................................
AFTERCARE, MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONNECTIVE
TISSUE.
FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF FOREARM, HAND, FOOT AGE >17
W CC.
FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF FOREARM, HAND, FOOT AGE >17
W/O CC.
* FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF FOREARM, HAND, FOOT AGE 0–17
FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF UPARM, LOWLEG EX FOOT AGE
>17 W CC.
FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF UPARM, LOWLEG EX FOOT AGE
>17 W/O CC.
* FX, SPRN, STRN & DISL OF UPARM, LOWLEG EX FOOT AGE
0–17.
OTHER MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM & CONNECTIVE TISSUE
DIAGNOSES.
TOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W CC ...........................
TOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W/O CC .......................
SUBTOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W CC ....................
SUBTOTAL MASTECTOMY FOR MALIGNANCY W/O CC ................
BREAST PROC FOR NON-MALIGNANCY EXCEPT BIOPSY &
LOCAL EXCISION.
BREAST BIOPSY & LOCAL EXCISION FOR NON-MALIGNANCY ...
SKIN GRAFT & /OR DEBRID FOR SKN ULCER OR CELLULITIS W
CC.
SKIN GRAFT & /OR DEBRID FOR SKN ULCER OR CELLULITIS
W/O CC.
SKIN GRAFT & /OR DEBRID EXCEPT FOR SKIN ULCER OR
CELLULITIS W CC.
SKIN GRAFT & /OR DEBRID EXCEPT FOR SKIN ULCER OR
CELLULITIS W/O CC.
PERIANAL & PILONIDAL PROCEDURES ..........................................
SKIN, SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE & BREAST PLASTIC PROCEDURES.
OTHER SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST PROC W CC ....................
OTHER SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST PROC W/O CC ................

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00097

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

.0000
.9560

.0
2.0

.0
2.6

.7986

1.7

2.0

1.0864
1.4749
.8025
1.0648

3.3
4.3
2.1
2.4

4.7
6.3
2.7
3.6

.7157
1.2592

1.8
3.4

2.4
5.1

1.3813

3.2

4.8

1.0833
2.0825
1.2661

2.3
5.3
2.7

3.6
7.7
3.6

.7584
.7218
.5668
1.3520
.9749

3.8
4.0
3.0
6.4
4.9

5.2
5.0
3.7
8.6
6.2

1.2671
.6166
1.0690
.7261
.7170
.4842
.5572
.5698

4.9
3.1
5.1
3.7
3.7
2.8
3.0
2.6

6.6
3.9
6.6
4.7
4.8
3.6
3.6
3.4

.7854
.6919

3.7
2.6

4.7
3.8

.6912

3.3

4.3

.4993

2.4

3.0

.2531
.7239

1.8
3.7

1.8
4.7

.4403

2.6

3.2

.2947

2.9

2.9

.7950

3.8

5.1

.9100
.7223
.9083
.6521
.9307

2.3
1.8
1.8
1.3
1.7

2.8
2.0
2.8
1.4
2.2

.8768
2.1112

2.7
8.9

3.8
12.1

1.1515

5.4

7.2

1.5284

4.2

6.6

.8726

2.4

3.3

1.0827
1.1382

3.1
2.4

5.2
3.7

1.7023
.7657

5.8
2.3

8.3
3.3

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26378

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG

MDC

Type

271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

282
283
284
285

...
...
...
...

09
09
09
10

MED
MED
MED
SURG

286 ...
287 ...

10
10

SURG
SURG

288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED

298
299
300
301
302
303

...
...
...
...
...
...

10
10
10
10
11
11

MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG

304 ...

11

SURG

305 ...

11

SURG

306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

326 ...

11

MED

327
328
329
330
331

11
11
11
11
11

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

...
...
...
...
...

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
SKIN ULCERS ......................................................................................
MAJOR SKIN DISORDERS W CC ......................................................
MAJOR SKIN DISORDERS W/O CC ..................................................
MALIGNANT BREAST DISORDERS W CC ........................................
MALIGNANT BREAST DISORDERS W/O CC ....................................
NON-MALIGANT BREAST DISORDERS ............................................
CELLULITIS AGE >17 W CC ...............................................................
CELLULITIS AGE >17 W/O CC ...........................................................
* CELLULITIS AGE 0–17 ......................................................................
TRAUMA TO THE SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST AGE >17 W CC
TRAUMA TO THE SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST AGE >17 W/O
CC.
* TRAUMA TO THE SKIN, SUBCUT TISS & BREAST AGE 0–17 .....
MINOR SKIN DISORDERS W CC .......................................................
MINOR SKIN DISORDERS W/O CC ...................................................
AMPUTAT OF LOWER LIMB FOR ENDOCRINE, NUTRIT, &
METABOL DISORDERS.
ADRENAL & PITUITARY PROCEDURES ...........................................
SKIN GRAFTS & WOUND DEBRID FOR ENDOC, NUTRIT &
METAB DISORDERS.
O.R. PROCEDURES FOR OBESITY ..................................................
PARATHYROID PROCEDURES .........................................................
THYROID PROCEDURES ...................................................................
THYROGLOSSAL PROCEDURES ......................................................
OTHER ENDOCRINE, NUTRIT & METAB O.R. PROC W CC ...........
OTHER ENDOCRINE, NUTRIT & METAB O.R. PROC W/O CC .......
DIABETES AGE >35 ............................................................................
DIABETES AGE 0–35 ..........................................................................
NUTRITIONAL & MISC METABOLIC DISORDERS AGE >17 W CC
NUTRITIONAL & MISC METABOLIC DISORDERS AGE >17 W/O
CC.
NUTRITIONAL & MISC METABOLIC DISORDERS AGE 0–17 ..........
INBORN ERRORS OF METABOLISM ................................................
ENDOCRINE DISORDERS W CC .......................................................
ENDOCRINE DISORDERS W/O CC ...................................................
KIDNEY TRANSPLANT ........................................................................
KIDNEY, URETER & MAJOR BLADDER PROCEDURES FOR NEOPLASM.
KIDNEY, URETER & MAJOR BLADDER PROC FOR NON-NEOPL
W CC.
KIDNEY, URETER & MAJOR BLADDER PROC FOR NON-NEOPL
W/O CC.
PROSTATECTOMY W CC ...................................................................
PROSTATECTOMY W/O CC ...............................................................
MINOR BLADDER PROCEDURES W CC ..........................................
MINOR BLADDER PROCEDURES W/O CC ......................................
TRANSURETHRAL PROCEDURES W CC .........................................
TRANSURETHRAL PROCEDURES W/O CC .....................................
URETHRAL PROCEDURES, AGE >17 W CC ....................................
URETHRAL PROCEDURES, AGE >17 W/O CC ................................
* URETHRAL PROCEDURES, AGE 0–17 ...........................................
OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT O.R. PROCEDURES ..............
RENAL FAILURE ..................................................................................
ADMIT FOR RENAL DIALYSIS ...........................................................
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT NEOPLASMS W CC ............................
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT NEOPLASMS W/O CC ........................
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS AGE >17 W CC ............
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS AGE >17 W/O CC .........
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS AGE 0–17 .....................
URINARY STONES W CC, & /OR ESW LITHOTRIPSY ....................
URINARY STONES W/O CC ...............................................................
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT SIGNS & SYMPTOMS AGE >17 W
CC.
KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT SIGNS & SYMPTOMS AGE >17 W/O
CC.
* KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT SIGNS & SYMPTOMS AGE 0–17 .....
URETHRAL STRICTURE AGE >17 W CC ..........................................
URETHRAL STRICTURE AGE >17 W/O CC ......................................
* URETHRAL STRICTURE AGE 0–17 .................................................
OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W CC

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00098

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

1.0093
1.0005
.6162
1.2100
.5316
.6919
.8398
.5526
.6626
.6769
.4720

5.5
4.8
3.2
4.9
2.4
3.6
4.7
3.6
4.2
3.2
2.4

7.1
6.4
4.2
7.0
3.3
4.7
5.7
4.3
4.2
4.2
3.1

.2563
.6924
.4348
1.9923

2.2
3.5
2.5
7.7

2.2
4.6
3.2
10.4

2.1300
1.8336

4.9
7.8

6.2
10.5

2.1764
.9892
.9207
.5503
2.4548
1.2190
.7596
.7555
.8594
.5170

4.6
2.0
1.8
1.4
6.9
3.5
3.6
2.9
4.0
2.8

5.7
3.1
2.4
1.6
10.0
4.9
4.7
3.9
5.2
3.5

.5309
.9442
1.0836
.6108
3.4495
2.4639

2.5
4.0
4.7
2.9
7.9
7.0

3.2
5.6
6.1
3.7
9.4
8.5

2.3371

6.4

8.9

1.1844

3.1

3.8

1.2483
.6424
1.6345
.9332
1.1174
.6165
1.0197
.6464
.4939
2.0511
1.3444
.7439
1.1316
.6045
.8625
.5686
.4946
.7992
.4502
.6468

3.7
1.9
4.2
2.0
3.0
1.6
3.0
1.7
2.3
4.2
4.9
2.1
4.3
2.1
4.3
3.2
3.3
2.4
1.6
3.0

5.5
2.3
6.4
2.5
4.4
1.9
4.5
2.1
2.3
7.5
6.7
3.2
6.0
2.9
5.4
3.8
4.1
3.2
1.9
3.9

.4302

2.1

2.7

.3533
.7487
.5283
.3182
1.0226

3.1
2.8
1.7
1.6
4.1

3.1
3.9
2.0
1.6
5.6

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26379

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG

MDC

Type

332 ...

11

MED

333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

11
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12

MED
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG

345 ...

12

SURG

346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

12
12
12
12
12
12
12
13

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG

354 ...

13

SURG

355 ...

13

SURG

356 ...

13

SURG

357 ...

13

SURG

358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13

SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED

370
371
372
373
374
375

...
...
...
...
...
...

14
14
14
14
14
14

SURG
SURG
MED
MED
SURG
SURG

376 ...

14

MED

377 ...

14

SURG

378
379
380
381

...
...
...
...

14
14
14
14

MED
MED
MED
SURG

382 ...
383 ...

14
14

MED
MED

384 ...

14

MED

385 ...

15

MED

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT DIAGNOSES AGE >17 W/O
CC.
OTHER KIDNEY & URINARY TRACT DIAGNOSES AGE 0–17 ........
MAJOR MALE PELVIC PROCEDURES W CC ...................................
MAJOR MALE PELVIC PROCEDURES W/O CC ...............................
TRANSURETHRAL PROSTATECTOMY W CC ..................................
TRANSURETHRAL PROSTATECTOMY W/O CC ..............................
TESTES PROCEDURES, FOR MALIGNANCY ...................................
TESTES PROCEDURES, NON-MALIGNANCY AGE >17 ..................
* TESTES PROCEDURES, NON-MALIGNANCY AGE 0–17 ..............
PENIS PROCEDURES .........................................................................
CIRCUMCISION AGE >17 ...................................................................
* CIRCUMCISION AGE 0–17 ...............................................................
OTHER MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES
FOR MALIGNANCY.
OTHER MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROC EXCEPT
FOR MALIGNANCY.
MALIGNANCY, MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM, W CC ................
MALIGNANCY, MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM, W/O CC .............
BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERTROPHY W CC ...................................
BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERTROPHY W/O CC ...............................
INFLAMMATION OF THE MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM ...........
* STERILIZATION, MALE .....................................................................
OTHER MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM DIAGNOSES ..................
PELVIC EVISCERATION, RADICAL HYSTERECTOMY & RADICAL
VULVECTOMY.
UTERINE, ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-OVARIAN/ADNEXAL MALIG
W CC.
UTERINE, ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-OVARIAN/ADNEXAL MALIG
W/O CC.
FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM RECONSTRUCTIVE PROCEDURES.
UTERINE & ADNEXA PROC FOR OVARIAN OR ADNEXAL MALIGNANCY.
UTERINE & ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-MALIGNANCY W CC .........
UTERINE & ADNEXA PROC FOR NON-MALIGNANCY W/O CC .....
VAGINA, CERVIX & VULVA PROCEDURES ......................................
LAPAROSCOPY & INCISIONAL TUBAL INTERRUPTION .................
* ENDOSCOPIC TUBAL INTERRUPTION ...........................................
D & C, CONIZATION & RADIO-IMPLANT, FOR MALIGNANCY ........
D & C, CONIZATION EXCEPT FOR MALIGNANCY ..........................
OTHER FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM O.R. PROCEDURES
MALIGNANCY, FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM W CC .............
MALIGNANCY, FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM W/O CC .........
INFECTIONS, FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM ..........................
MENSTRUAL & OTHER FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM DISORDERS.
CESAREAN SECTION W CC ..............................................................
CESAREAN SECTION W/O CC ..........................................................
VAGINAL DELIVERY W COMPLICATING DIAGNOSES ....................
VAGINAL DELIVERY W/O COMPLICATING DIAGNOSES ................
VAGINAL DELIVERY W STERILIZATION & /OR D & C ....................
* VAGINAL DELIVERY W O.R. PROC EXCEPT STERIL & /OR D &
C.
POSTPARTUM & POST ABORTION DIAGNOSES W/O O.R. PROCEDURE.
POSTPARTUM & POST ABORTION DIAGNOSES W O.R. PROCEDURE.
ECTOPIC PREGNANCY ......................................................................
THREATENED ABORTION ..................................................................
ABORTION W/O D & C ........................................................................
ABORTION W D & C, ASPIRATION CURETTAGE OR
HYSTEROTOMY.
FALSE LABOR .....................................................................................
OTHER ANTEPARTUM DIAGNOSES W MEDICAL COMPLICATIONS.
OTHER ANTEPARTUM DIAGNOSES W/O MEDICAL COMPLICATIONS.
* NEONATES, DIED OR TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER ACUTE
CARE FACILITY.

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00099

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

.5994

2.5

3.3

.8248
1.5582
1.1706
.8873
.6147
1.1903
1.0710
.2828
1.1668
.8214
.1537
1.1489

3.5
4.2
3.2
2.7
1.9
3.5
3.0
2.4
2.1
2.5
1.7
1.6

5.1
4.9
3.4
3.5
2.2
5.3
4.5
2.4
3.2
3.1
1.7
2.3

.8813

2.6

3.8

.9783
.5905
.7170
.4420
.6987
.2358
.6875
1.9232

4.3
2.4
3.2
2.0
3.6
1.3
2.8
5.3

5.8
3.4
4.2
2.6
4.4
1.3
3.9
6.7

1.5267

4.9

5.9

.9265

3.1

3.3

.7838

2.1

2.4

2.3601

6.9

8.5

1.2247
.8582
.8859
1.2248
.3013
.8178
.7559
1.8502
1.2498
.5675
1.1249
.5721

3.7
2.6
2.4
2.2
1.4
2.6
2.6
5.0
4.8
2.4
5.0
2.4

4.4
2.8
3.0
3.5
1.4
3.5
3.6
7.3
6.8
3.2
6.7
3.2

1.0631
.7157
.6069
.4172
.7698
.6841

4.4
3.3
2.7
2.0
2.7
4.4

5.7
3.7
3.5
2.3
3.5
4.4

.5314

2.6

3.5

.8870

2.6

3.9

.7543
.3981
.4867
.5323

2.1
2.0
1.8
1.5

2.3
3.1
2.2
2.0

.1845
.5082

1.2
2.7

1.3
3.9

.3232

1.7

2.3

1.3729

1.8

1.8

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2

26380

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 88 / Friday, May 5, 2000 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 5.—LIST OF DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUPS (DRGS), RELATIVE WEIGHTING FACTORS, GEOMETRIC AND ARITHMETIC
MEAN LENGTH OF STAY—Continued
DRG

MDC

Type

386 ...

15

MED

387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

15
15
15
15
15
16
16
16

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG
SURG

395
396
397
398
399
400
401

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

16
16
16
16
16
17
17

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG
SURG

402 ...

17

SURG

403
404
405
406

...
...
...
...

17
17
17
17

MED
MED
MED
SURG

407 ...

17

SURG

408 ...

17

SURG

409 ...
410 ...

17
17

MED
MED

411 ...
412 ...
413 ...

17
17
17

MED
MED
MED

414 ...

17

MED

415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
19

SURG
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
SURG

425 ...

19

MED

426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20

MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED

435 ...

20

MED

436 ...
437 ...

20
20

MED
MED

438 ...
439 ...
440 ...

............
21
21

SURG
SURG

VerDate 27<APR>2000

Relative
weights

DRG title
* EXTREME IMMATURITY OR RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME, NEONATE.
* PREMATURITY W MAJOR PROBLEMS ...........................................
* PREMATURITY W/O MAJOR PROBLEMS .......................................
* FULL TERM NEONATE W MAJOR PROBLEMS ..............................
NEONATE W OTHER SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS .............................
* NORMAL NEWBORN .........................................................................
SPLENECTOMY AGE >17 ...................................................................
* SPLENECTOMY AGE 0–17 ...............................................................
OTHER O.R. PROCEDURES OF THE BLOOD AND BLOOD FORMING ORGANS.
RED BLOOD CELL DISORDERS AGE >17 ........................................
RED BLOOD CELL DISORDERS AGE 0–17 ......................................
COAGULATION DISORDERS .............................................................
RETICULOENDOTHELIAL & IMMUNITY DISORDERS W CC ...........
RETICULOENDOTHELIAL & IMMUNITY DISORDERS W/O CC .......
LYMPHOMA & LEUKEMIA W MAJOR O.R. PROCEDURE ...............
LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W OTHER O.R. PROC W
CC.
LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W OTHER O.R. PROC W/
O CC.
LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W CC .................................
LYMPHOMA & NON-ACUTE LEUKEMIA W/O CC .............................
* ACUTE LEUKEMIA W/O MAJOR O.R. PROCEDURE AGE 0–17 ...
MYELOPROLIF DISORD OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL W MAJ
O.R.PROC W CC.
MYELOPROLIF DISORD OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL W MAJ
O.R.PROC W/O CC.
MYELOPROLIF DISORD OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL W OTHER
O.R.PROC.
RADIOTHERAPY ..................................................................................
CHEMOTHERAPY W/O ACUTE LEUKEMIA AS SECONDARY DIAGNOSIS.
HISTORY OF MALIGNANCY W/O ENDOSCOPY ..............................
HISTORY OF MALIGNANCY W ENDOSCOPY ..................................
OTHER MYELOPROLIF DIS OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL DIAG W
CC.
OTHER MYELOPROLIF DIS OR POORLY DIFF NEOPL DIAG W/O
CC.
O.R. PROCEDURE FOR INFECTIOUS & PARASITIC DISEASES ....
SEPTICEMIA AGE >17 ........................................................................
SEPTICEMIA AGE 0–17 ......................................................................
POSTOPERATIVE & POST-TRAUMATIC INFECTIONS ....................
FEVER OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AGE >17 W CC ...............................
FEVER OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AGE >17 W/O CC ...........................
VIRAL ILLNESS AGE >17 ....................................................................
VIRAL ILLNESS & FEVER OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AGE 0–17 ........
OTHER INFECTIOUS & PARASITIC DISEASES DIAGNOSES .........
O.R. PROCEDURE W PRINCIPAL DIAGNOSES OF MENTAL ILLNESS.
ACUTE ADJUSTMENT REACTION & PSYCHOLOGICAL DYSFUNCTION.
DEPRESSIVE NEUROSES ..................................................................
NEUROSES EXCEPT DEPRESSIVE ..................................................
DISORDERS OF PERSONALITY & IMPULSE CONTROL .................
ORGANIC DISTURBANCES & MENTAL RETARDATION .................
PSYCHOSES ........................................................................................
CHILDHOOD MENTAL DISORDERS ..................................................
OTHER MENTAL DISORDER DIAGNOSES .......................................
ALCOHOL/DRUG ABUSE OR DEPENDENCE, LEFT AMA ...............
ALC/DRUG ABUSE OR DEPEND, DETOX OR OTH SYMPT TREAT
W CC.
ALC/DRUG ABUSE OR DEPEND, DETOX OR OTH SYMPT TREAT
W/O CC.
ALC/DRUG DEPENDENCE W REHABILITATION THERAPY ............
ALC/DRUG DEPENDENCE, COMBINED REHAB & DETOX THERAPY.
NO LONGER VALID .............................................................................
SKIN GRAFTS FOR INJURIES ...........................................................
WOUND DEBRIDEMENTS FOR INJURIES ........................................

13:17 May 04, 2000

Jkt 190000

PO 00000

Frm 00100

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

Geometric
mean LOS

Arithmetic
mean LOS

4.5275

17.9

17.9

3.0922
1.8657
1.8357
.8865
.1523
3.1818
1.3449
1.5946

13.3
8.6
4.7
2.9
3.1
7.1
9.1
4.1

13.3
8.6
4.7
3.7
3.1
9.5
9.1
6.7

.8262
1.2128
1.2290
1.2765
.6899
2.6272
2.7311

3.3
2.4
3.8
4.7
2.8
5.8
7.8

4.5
3.7
5.2
6.0
3.6
9.1
11.2

1.1002

2.8

3.9

1.7607
.8495
1.9067
2.8109

5.7
3.1
4.9
7.5

8.1
4.2
4.9
10.3

1.3138

3.6

4.4

1.9991

4.7

7.7

1.1226
.9493

4.4
2.9

5.9
3.7

.3288
.4877
1.3665

2.0
2.0
5.3

2.3
2.7
7.3

.7522

3.0

4.1

3.5919
1.5287
1.2437
1.0076
.8724
.6053
.6760
.7893
1.7317
2.2742

10.3
5.5
3.9
4.8
3.7
2.9
3.1
2.8
5.9
8.7

14.2
7.4
6.3
6.2
4.8
3.6
3.9
5.1
8.2
13.5

.7022

3.0

4.1

.5303
.5673
.7360
.8567
.7659
.6434
.6488
.2829
.7239

3.3
3.3
4.4
4.9
5.9
4.7
3.2
2.2
3.9

4.6
5.0
7.1
6.6
8.3
6.6
4.8
3.0
5.1

.4167

3.5

4.3

.7433
.6576

10.3
7.6

12.9
9.0

.0000
1.7255
1.9063

.0
5.3
5.8

.0
8.2
8.9

E:\FR\FM\05MYP2.SGM

pfrm03

PsN: 05MYP2