Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient 
Protection and Affordable Care Act 
Curtis W. Copeland 
Specialist in American National Government 
December 10, 2010 
Congressional Research Service
7-5700 
www.crs.gov 
R41346 
CRS Report for Congress
P
  repared for Members and Committees of Congress        
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Summary 
More than 40 provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, P.L. 111-148, 
March 23, 2010, as amended) specifically require or permit federal agencies to issue regulations 
to implement the act’s requirements. This report describes the final rules implementing PPACA 
that had been published in the 
Federal Register during the first 8½ months of implementation.  
As of December 7, 2010, at least 18 final rules had been issued implementing certain provisions 
in PPACA. An 
Appendix to this report lists these 18 final rules, including a summary of their 
requirements and their effective dates. PPACA specifically required that some of the rules be 
published. Other rules cited particular sections of PPACA as the statutory authority, but those 
sections did not specifically require the agencies to accomplish the underlying policy objectives 
through the rulemaking process. Most of the final rules were issued without a prior notice of 
proposed rulemaking, with the agencies often invoking the “good cause” exception in the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. §551 
et seq.) for not allowing the public to 
comment before the final rules were issued. In several of the rules, the issuing agencies also 
stated that Congress had specifically authorized the issuance of final rules without first issuing a 
proposed rule. Most of the final rules permitted post-promulgation public comments, with the 
comment periods ending on or after the dates that the rules took effect. Most of the rules were 
considered “economically significant” (i.e., with an annual impact on the economy of at least 
$100 million), so the agencies provided estimates of their costs, benefits, and transfers.  
This report will not be updated; its intent is to describe the initial rules being issued pursuant to 
PPACA, not to serve as an ongoing compendium of all PPACA-related rules. 
 
 
Congressional Research Service 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Contents 
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 
Final Rules to Implement PPACA ............................................................................................... 1 
Most Final Rules Not Specifically Required by PPACA ........................................................ 2 
No Prior Opportunity to Comment ........................................................................................ 5 
Costs, Benefits, and Transfers ............................................................................................... 7 
Concluding Observations .......................................................................................................... 11 
Congressional Oversight Options ........................................................................................ 11 
 
Tables 
Table 1. Effective Dates and Comment Periods for PPACA Interim Final Rules........................... 7 
Table 2. Cost, Benefit, and Transfer Estimates of PPPACA Final Rules ....................................... 9 
 
Appendixes 
Appendix. Final Rules Implementing PPACA (as of December 7, 2010).................................... 14 
 
Contacts 
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 18 
 
Congressional Research Service 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Introduction 
As discussed in a previous CRS report,1 more than 40 provisions in the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act (PPACA, P.L. 111-148, March 23, 2010, as amended) specifically require or 
permit federal agencies to issue regulations to implement the act’s policy objectives. A number of 
these PPACA regulatory provisions require that the rules be issued or take effect by a certain date, 
and some of those deadlines occurred during the first several months of the act’s implementation. 
For example: 
•  Section 10501(l) of the act requires the Secretary of the Department of Health 
and Human Services (HHS) to establish a grant program to (among other things) 
assist in the recruitment of students in underserved rural communities. The 
section also states “Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this 
section [i.e., by May 22, 2010], the Secretary shall by regulation define 
‘underserved rural community’ for the purposes of this section.”  
•  Section 1332(a)(4)(b) states that “the Secretary shall promulgate regulations 
relating to waivers under this section,” and requires that the rule be promulgated 
within 180 days of enactment (i.e., by September 19, 2010). 
•  Section 10201(i) of PPACA states that the Secretary of the Department of Health 
and Human Services (HHS) “shall promulgate regulations relating to applications 
for, and renewals of, a demonstration project…,” and requires that the rule be 
issued within 180 days of enactment (i.e., by September 19, 2010).  
Federal agencies have begun issuing the regulations that were called for in PPACA. Also, 
agencies have issued other regulations citing the act’s authority, even though PPACA does not 
specifically require or otherwise mention rulemaking in those areas.  
This report describes the final rules that were published in the 
Federal Register within the first 
8½ months of the act’s implementation (i.e., as of December 7, 2010).2 An 
Appendix to this 
report lists these rules, including summaries of their requirements and their effective dates. The 
report will not be updated; its intent is to describe the initial rules being issued pursuant to 
PPACA, not to serve as an ongoing compendium of all PPACA-related rules. 
Final Rules to Implement PPACA 
As of December 7, 2010, federal agencies had issued at least 18 final rules implementing certain 
provisions in PPACA. The act specifically required that some of the rules be issued. For example: 
                                                
1 See CRS Report R41180, 
Regulations Pursuant to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), by 
Curtis W. Copeland, for a summary of the provisions that required or permitted rulemaking. Shortly after PPACA was 
enacted, Congress passed and the President signed the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 
(HCERA, P.L. 111-152, March 30, 2010), which amended various health care and revenue provisions in PPACA. This 
report considers both acts under the general heading of PPACA. 
2 To identify these rules and documents, CRS conducted searches through the electronic 
Federal Register at GPO 
Access (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/advanced.html) using the term “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” 
Rules in which PPACA was mentioned but not cited as the statutory authority were eliminated from the search results. 
Congressional Research Service 
1 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
•  Section 6402(a) of PPACA required the Secretary of HHS to “promulgate a 
regulation that requires, not later than January 1, 2011, all providers of medical 
or other items or services and suppliers under the programs under titles XVIII 
and XIX that qualify for a national provider identifier to include their national 
provider identifier on all applications to enroll in such programs and on all claims 
for payment submitted under such programs.” On May 5, 2010, the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) within HHS published a final rule 
implementing this requirement.3 The rule took effect on July 6, 2010. 
•  Section 1001 of PPACA added a new Section 2714 to the Public Health Service 
Act. Subsection (a) of the new section states that a “group health plan and a 
health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage 
that provides dependent coverage of children shall continue to make such 
coverage available for an adult child (who is not married) until the child turns 26 
years of age.” Subsection (b) then states that “The Secretary shall promulgate 
regulations to define dependents to which coverage shall be made available under 
subsection (a).” On May 13, 2010, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the 
Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) within the Department of 
Labor, and HHS jointly published a final rule implementing this requirement.4 
The rule took effect on July 12, 2010, and it was generally applicable to group 
health plans, and to group and individual health insurance issuers, for plan years 
beginning on or after September 23, 2010.  
•  As noted previously in this report, Section 10501(l) of the act required the 
Secretary to issue a rule by May 22, 2010, defining the term “underserved rural 
community” for the purposes of a grant program designed to assist in the 
recruitment of students to those communities. On May 26, 2010, the Health 
Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) within HHS published a final 
rule pursuant to this directive.5 The rule was effective on June 25, 2010. 
Most Final Rules Not Specifically Required by PPACA 
Other final rules cited particular sections of PPACA as the statutory authority, but those sections 
did not specifically require the agencies to accomplish the stated objectives through the 
rulemaking process. For example: 
•  On May 5, 2010, HHS published a final rule implementing the early retiree 
reinsurance program that was established by Section 1102 of PPACA.6 Although 
                                                
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Medicare and 
Medicaid Programs; Changes in Provider and Supplier Enrollment, Ordering and Referring, and Documentation 
Requirements; and Changes in Provider Agreements,” 75 
Federal Register 24437, May 5, 2010.  
4 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security 
Administration; Department of Health and Human Services, “Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers 
Relating to Dependent Coverage of Children to Age 26 Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Interim 
Final Rule and Proposed Rule,” 75 
Federal Register 27122, May 13, 2010. 
5 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, “Publish Health 
Service Act, Rural Physician Training Grant Program, Definition of ‘Underserved Rural Community,’” 75 
Federal 
Register 29447, May 26, 2010.  
6 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, “Early Retiree Reinsurance Program,” 75 
Federal Register 24450, May 5, 2010. This program provides reimbursement to participating employment-based plans 
(continued...) 
Congressional Research Service 
2 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
that section of the act required the Secretary to establish this reinsurance program 
within 90 days after enactment (i.e., by June 21, 2010), it did not specifically 
state that the program had to be implemented through regulations. The rule took 
effect on June 1, 2010. 
•  Also on May 5, 2010, HHS published a final rule implementing a requirement in 
Section 1103(a) of PPACA (as amended by Section 10102(b) of the act) that the 
Secretary establish a mechanism, including an internet website, through with 
individuals in any state could identify affordable health insurance coverage 
options.7 Although the act required the agency to develop a “standardized 
format” to be used in the presentation of this information, PPACA did not require 
that this mechanism and format be established through rulemaking. The rule took 
effect on May 10, 2010, and the website became active on July 1, 2010.  
•  On June 15, 2010, the IRS published a final rule providing guidance on the 
indoor tanning services excise tax imposed through Section 10907 of PPACA.8 
That section of the act requires that the tax be remitted “at such time and in such 
manner as provided by the Secretary,” but it does not specifically require the 
issuance of regulations.9 The IRS rule took effect the day it was published, and 
applies to amounts paid after June 30, 2010. The rule expires on or before June 
11, 2013.  
•  Section 1251 of PPACA states that certain provisions of the statute (subtitles A 
and C of Title I on “Immediate Improvements in Health Care Coverage for All 
Americans” and “Quality Health Insurance Coverage for All Americans,” 
respectively) do not apply to group health plans and health insurance coverage in 
existence as of the date that the legislation was enacted (March 23, 2010). 
Although Section 1251 does not specifically require that new regulations be 
issued with regard to these “grandfathered” health plans, on June 17, 2010, the 
IRS, EBSA, and HHS jointly published a final rule implementing this section.10 
The rule became effective on June 14, 2010 (three days before it was published), 
although certain amendments took effect on July 12, 2010.  
•  On June 28, 2010, IRS, EBSA, and HHS jointly published a final rule 
implementing several new sections of the Public Health Service Act that were 
added by Section 1001 of PPACA: (1) Section 2704 (prohibiting preexisting 
condition exclusions); (2) Section 2711 (regarding lifetime and annual dollar 
limits on benefits); (3) Section 2712 (prohibiting rescissions); and (4) Section 
                                                             
(...continued) 
for a portion of the cost of health benefits for early retirees and their spouses, surviving spouses, and dependents.  
7 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, “Health Care Reform Insurance Web Portal 
Requirements,” 75 
Federal Register 24470, May 5, 2010. The address of this website is http://www.healthcare.gov/. 
8 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, “Indoor Tanning Services; Cosmetic Services; Excise 
Taxes,” 75 
Federal Register 33683, June 15, 2010.  
9 It does, however, state that every person receiving a payment for services on which a tax is imposed “shall collect the 
amount of the tax from the individual on whom the service is performed and remit such tax quarterly to the Secretary at 
such time and in such manner as provided by the Secretary.”  
10 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security 
Administration; Department of Health and Human Services, “Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage 
Relating to Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Interim Final 
Rule and Proposed Rule,” 75 
Federal Register 34538, June 17, 2010. 
Congressional Research Service 
3 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
2719A (regarding patient protections).11 None of these four sections specifically 
required that new regulations be issued. The final rule takes effect on August 27, 
2010, and is generally applicable to group health plans and group health issuers 
for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010. It is applicable to 
individual health insurance issuers for policy years beginning on or after January 
1, 2014, except that for enrollees under the age of 19, the regulations apply for 
policy years starting on or after September 23, 2010. 
•  Section 1001 of PPACA also added a new Section 2713 to the Public Health 
Service Act on “Coverage of Preventive Health Services.” On July 19, 2010, IRS, 
EBSA, and HHS published a final rule implementing this new section. Although 
PPACA required the Secretary of HHS to take certain actions (e.g., establishing 
when certain statutory provisions would take effect), the legislation did not 
specifically require that those actions be accomplished through the rulemaking 
process. The rule takes effect on September 17, 2010, and applies to group health 
plans and insurers for plan years starting on or after September 23, 2010. 
•  In addition, Section 1001 of PPACA (and amendments in Section 10101) added a 
new Section 2719 to the Public Health Service Act regarding internal claims and 
appeals and external appeals processes for group health plans and health issuers 
that are not grandfathered plans. On July 23, 2010, IRS, EBSA, and HHS 
published a final rule implementing this new section.12 Although PPACA allowed 
the Secretary of HHS to deem an existing external review process to be in 
compliance, it did not specifically require regulations. The rule takes effect on 
September 21, 2010, and applies to group health plans and insurers for plan years 
starting on or after September 23, 2010. 
Although PPACA did not specifically require the agencies to issue any of these rules, the 
agencies’ use of rulemaking to accomplish the underlying statutory objectives does not appear to 
be either improper or unusual. In fact, to the extent that those requirements were intended to be 
binding on the public, rulemaking may have been the agencies only viable option to implement 
the statutory provisions. For example, if an agency issues a guidance document, policy statement, 
or other non-rule document with the intent of legally binding the public, it could be subject to a 
possible judicial challenge for not having properly promulgated the policy through the APA 
rulemaking process. Case law and guidance from OMB indicate that agencies should not attempt 
to bind affected parties through policy statements and other non-rule documents.13 Also, to the 
                                                
11 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security 
Administration; Department of Health and Human Services, “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Preexisting 
Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, and Patient Protections,” 75 
Federal Register 37188, 
June 28, 2010. 
12 U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security 
Administration; Department of Health and Human Services, “Interim Final Rules for Group Health Plans and Health 
Insurance Issuers Relating to Internal Claims and Appeals and External Review Processes Under the Patient Protection 
and Affordable Care Act,” 75 
Federal Register 43330, July 23, 2010. 
13 See, for example, 
Appalachian Power Co. v. Environmental Protection Agency, 208 F.3d 1015 (D.C. Cir. 2000); and 
Office of Management and Budget, “Final Bulletin for Agency Good Guidance Practices,” 72 
Federal Register 3432, 
January 25, 2007, which states (on p. 3433) that “The courts, Congress, and other authorities have emphasized that 
rules which do not merely interpret existing law or announce tentative policy positions but which establish new policy 
positions that the agency treats as binding must comply with the (Administrative Procedure Act’s) notice-and-comment 
requirements, regardless of how they initially are labeled.” 
Congressional Research Service 
4 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
extent that PPACA changed existing regulatory requirements, new rules would have to be issued 
to amend those regulations. 
No Prior Opportunity to Comment 
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. §551 
et seq.) establishes the basic 
requirements for the rulemaking process, and generally requires that federal agencies publish a 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the 
Federal Register, give “interested persons” an 
opportunity to comment on the proposed rule (usually at least 30 days), and after considering the 
public comments, publish a final rule. The APA also provides certain exceptions to the NPRM 
requirement. For example, 5 U.S.C. §553(b)(3)(B) permits agencies to issue final rules without a 
prior NPRM when the agency finds, for “good cause,” that notice and comment procedures are 
“impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.”14 A process known as “interim 
final” rulemaking can be viewed as a particular application of the good cause exception, in which 
an agency issues a final rule without an NPRM, but with a post-promulgation opportunity for the 
public to comment. If the public comments persuade the agency that changes are needed in the 
interim final rule, the agency may revise the rule by publishing a final rule reflecting those 
changes.15 
Most of the PPACA-related final rules that had been published as of December 7, 2010, were 
issued without pre-publication public comment. Twelve of the 18 final rules were issued as 
interim final rules. The issuing agencies frequently said that they invoked the APA’s “good cause” 
exception to notice and comment because of the tight time constraints set by PPACA, and for 
other reasons. For example: 
•  In the May 5, 2010, rule on the early retiree insurance program, HHS noted that 
PPACA required the program to be established by June 21, 2010, but said that in 
a practical sense, the program had to begin operations by June 1, 2010. Because 
of the short time frame provided after the enactment of PPACA on March 23, 
2010, HHS said “we find good cause to waive the notice of proposed rulemaking 
and to issue this final rule on an interim basis without prior comment.”16 
•  In the May 26, 2010, rule on underserved rural communities, HHS stated that 
issuing a prior proposed rule and taking comments was “impractical” because the 
department was required to publish the rule within 60 days after the enactment of 
PPACA, and “those procedures take significantly longer than 60 days.”17 HHS 
also said that it believed it was unnecessary to undertake notice and comment 
because the rule would have limited impact, and because the funds for the 
program “might become available with little notice and awarding the funds 
quickly would serve an important public interest.”18 
                                                
14 5 U.S.C. §553(b). 
15 For more information, see Michael Asimow, “Interim Final Rulemaking: Making Haste Slowly,” 
Administrative Law 
Review, 51 (Summer 1999), pp. 703-755.  
16 75 
Federal Register 24460. 
17 75 
Federal Register 29448.  
18 Ibid. 
Congressional Research Service 
5 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
In five final rules jointly issued by IRS, EBSA, and HHS,19 the agencies indicated that Congress 
had specifically authorized the use of interim final rulemaking. All five of the rules contained the 
following language. 
Section 9833 of the Code, section 734 of ERISA (the Employee Retirement Income Security 
Act), and section 2792 of the (Public Health Service or PHS) Act authorize the Secretaries of 
the Treasury, Labor, and HHS (collectively, the Secretaries) to promulgate any interim final 
rules that they determine are appropriate to carry out the provisions of chapter 100 of the 
Code, part 7 of subtitle B of title I of ERISA, and part A of title XXVII of the PHS Act, 
which include PHS Act sections 2701 through 2728 and the incorporation of those sections 
into ERISA section 715 and Code section 9815.20 
Even without specific statutory permission to issue these interim final rules, the agencies 
indicated that they would have done so under the “good cause” exception in Section 553(b) of the 
APA. For example, in the June 17 rule on “grandfathered health plans,” the agencies said that 
even if the specific authorization for interim final rulemaking had not existed, “the Secretaries 
have determined that it would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest to delay putting 
the provisions in these interim final regulations in place until a full public notice and comment 
process was completed.”21 The agencies pointed out that numerous provisions of PPACA were 
applicable for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010 (six months after enactment), 
and that there was not sufficient time to draft and publish proposed rules, receive and consider 
comments, and draft and publish final regulations before that date.22  
In most cases, the agencies issuing the rules provided explanations for why final rules were being 
issued without an NPRM. However, in the IRS rule on the indoor tanning services excise tax, the 
agency simply said that it had “been determined” that the notice and comment requirements of 
the Administrative Procedure Act did not apply to these regulations, but provided no further 
explanation (e.g., who made that determination, or why).23 
All 12 of the interim final rules permitted the public a post-promulgation opportunity to 
comment. As 
Table 1 below indicates, all of these rules took effect on or before the dates that the 
comment periods expired.  
                                                
19 These were the May 13 rule on dependent coverage of children to age 26; the June 17 rule on “grandfathered” health 
plans; the June 28 rule on preexisting condition exclusions and other matters; the July 19 rule on preventive services; 
and the July 23 rule on internal claims and appeals and external review processes. 
20 See, for example, 75 
Federal Register 2715; 75 
Federal Register 34545; 75 
Federal Register 37195; and 75 
Federal 
Register 41729. 
21 75 
Federal Register 34545. 
22 Agencies often publish final rules without prior proposed rules, and frequently cite the “good cause” exception. For 
example, in 1998, GAO determined that about half of the 4,000 final rules published that year had no prior NPRM, and 
that the agencies most commonly cited the “good cause” exception. See U.S. General Accounting Office, 
Federal 
Rulemaking: Agencies Often Published Final Actions Without Proposed Rules, GAO-98-126, August 31, 1998. 
23 75 
Federal Register33685. IRS also said that it had “been determined” that the rule was not a “significant regulatory 
action” as defined in Executive Order 12866, so a regulatory assessment was not required. The rule was not reviewed 
by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget prior to publication.  
Congressional Research Service 
6 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Table 1. Effective Dates and Comment Periods for PPACA Interim Final Rules 
End of  
Publication Date 
Agency/Agencies 
Subject 
Effective Date 
Comment Period 
05/05/10 HHS/CMS  National 
Provider 
07/06/10 07/06/10 
Identifier 
05/05/10 HHS 
Web 
Portal 05/10/10 06/04/10 
Requirements 
05/05/10 HHS 
Early 
Retiree 
06/01/10 06/04/10 
Insurance Program 
05/13/10 IRS/EBSA/HHS 
Coverage 
of 07/12/10 08/11/10 
Children to Age 26 
05/26/10 HHS 
Underserved 
Rural 
06/25/10 07/26/10 
Communities 
06/17/10 IRS/EBSA/HHS 
Grandfathered 
06/14/10a 08/16/10 
Health Plans 
06/28/10 IRS/EBSA/HHS 
Preexisting 08/27/10 08/27/10 
Condition Exclusions 
07/19/10 IRS/EBSA/HHS 
Preventive 
Services 
09/17/10  09/17/10 
07/23/10 IRS/EBSA/HHS 
Internal 
Claims/ 
09/21/10 09/21/10 
Appeals and External 
Review Processes 
07/30/10 HHS/OCIIO 
Pre-Existing 07/30/10 09/28/10 
Condition Insurance 
Plan Program 
11/17/10 Treasury/IRS; 
Amendment to 
11/15/10 12/17/10 
DOL/EBSA; 
Grandfathered 
HHS/OCIIO 
Health Plans Rule 
12/01/10 HHS/OCIIO 
Medical 
Loss 
Ratio 
01/01/11 01/31/11 
Requirements 
Source: CRS, using information provided in the preambles to the agencies’ rules. 
a.  Certain amendments took effect July 12, 2010.  
Costs, Benefits, and Transfers 
Executive Order 12866 on “Regulatory Planning and Review” requires that covered agencies 
(generally, all executive branch agencies except independent regulatory agencies like the 
Securities and Exchange Commission) prepare a cost-benefit analysis before publishing any rule 
that the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determines to be “economically significant.”24 The 
executive order defines a regulatory action as economically significant if it is expected to have at 
least a $100 million annual impact on the economy or “adversely affect in a material way the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, 
                                                
24 The President, Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58 
Federal Register 51735. The cost-
benefit requirements are in Section 6(a)(3)(C) of the order. The definition of an “economically significant” rule is in 
Section 3(f)(1) of the order. 
Congressional Research Service 
7 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
or tribal government or communities.” OMB Circular A-4 requires agencies to present the 
information in a standardized accounting statement, showing costs, benefits, and transfers 
separately.25  
IRS did not indicate whether the June 15, 2010, rule on the indoor tanning services excise tax was 
economically significant or not, and did not provide any estimates of the rule’s costs, benefits, or 
transfers. Several of the other final rules issued pursuant to PPACA were not considered 
economically significant, so the issuing agencies did not conduct a formal cost-benefit analysis or 
accounting statement. For example: 
•  In the May 5, 2010, rule on web portal requirements, HHS estimated that the 
total cost of the rule would be about $17 million in 2010, and about $15 million 
per year thereafter—well below the $100 million threshold to be considered 
economically significant.26  
•  CMS said that the May 5, 2010, rule requiring the use of National Provider 
Identification numbers was not economically significant because most providers 
and suppliers were already meeting the requirements.27  
•  HHS said that the May 26, 2010, rule on “underserved rural communities” was 
“technical in nature” and “will not change grant or funding eligibility for any 
other grant program.”28  
•  CMS said that the November 15, 2010, rule on upper reimbursement limits 
withdrew those regulatory provisions that were superseded by PPACA, and was 
not economically significant.29 
•  OCIIO said that the November 17, 2010, rule amending the previously issued 
rule on “grandfathered” health plans was significant, but not economically 
significant. 
However, other final rules issued pursuant to PPACA were considered economically significant 
by either OIRA or the issuing agencies because they were expected to have at least a $100 million 
impact on the economy. The issuing agencies provided information on their estimated costs, 
benefits, and transfers in the preambles to the rules. 
Table 2 below summarizes that information.  
 
                                                
25 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf for a copy of OMB Circular A-4. Transfers occur when 
wealth or income is redistributed without any direct change in aggregate social welfare (e.g., federal Medicare 
payments to doctors and hospitals).  
26 75 
Federal Register 24480.  
27 75 
Federal Register 24447. 
28 75 
Federal Register 29450. 
29 75 
Federal Register 69596. 
Congressional Research Service 
8 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Table 2. Cost, Benefit, and Transfer Estimates of PPPACA Final Rules 
Agency/Subject/Date 
Annual Costs 
Annual Benefits 
Annual Transfers 
HHS 
$39.8 million (paperwork 
HHS said the benefits were 
$1,250 million (from the 
costs). 
“not estimated.” 
federal government to 
Early retiree reinsurance 
eligible sponsors and for 
program  
the administration of the 
05/05/10 
program). 
IRS/EBSA/HHS 
$10.4 million (in 2010 
Qualitative benefits of 
$5,275 million (mid-range 
dol ars). Also, to the extent  expanding coverage options  estimate; range from 
Dependent coverage of 
that the rule results in 
for the 19-25 population 
$3,483 million to $6,895 
children who have not 
increased use of health care  (mid-range estimate of 0.65  million). If premiums 
attained age 26  
services, there will be 
million), which should 
increase, there will be a 
05/13/10 
additional costs to achieve 
decrease the cost-shifting 
transfer from individuals 
the health benefits. 
of uncompensated care 
with family coverage who 
onto those with insurance, 
do not have dependents 
increase preventive health 
ages 19 to 25 from those 
care, and result in a 
who do have such 
healthier population. Also, 
dependents.  
greater job mobility. 
IRS/EBSA/HHS 
$24.7 million (mid-range 
Qualitative benefits of plan 
Cost-sharing provisions 
estimate in 2010 dol ars; 
continuity; potentially 
may lead to transfers of 
Grandfathered health 
range of $21.2 million to 
slower rate of premium 
wealth from premium 
plans  
$26.9 million), due to the 
growth; incentives to 
payers overall to individuals 
06/17/10 
requirement to notify 
employers to continue 
using covered services. 
participants and 
coverage; greater certainty 
Subsequent changes could 
beneficiaries, and to 
about what changes can be 
lead to transfers from non-
maintain documents. 
made without affecting 
grandfathered to 
grandfather status. 
grandfathered plans. 
IRS/EBSA/HHS 
$4.9 million (in 2010 
Qualitative benefits of 
Smal  transfer from those 
dollars).  
expanded coverage for 
paying premiums in the 
Preexisting condition 
children with preexisting 
group market to those 
exclusions, lifetime and 
conditions and individuals 
obtaining the increased 
annual dol ar limits on 
who face rescissions, 
protections. 
benefits, rescissions, and 
lifetime limits, and annual 
patient protections  
limits as a result of high 
06/28/10 
health costs. Also, 
improved health outcomes, 
improved worker 
productivity, and reduced 
financial strain. 
IRS/EBSA/HHS 
Qualitative discussion of 
Qualitative benefits of 
Qualitative discussion of 
new costs to health care 
expanding coverage and 
transfers expected to the 
Coverage of preventive 
system when beneficiaries 
eliminating cost sharing, 
extent that costs previously 
services under PPACA 
increase use of preventive 
resulting in increased 
paid out-of-pocket now 
07/19/10 
services. Magnitude of 
access and utilization of 
covered by group health 
increased use depends on 
services, which are 
plans and insurers. Risk 
“price elasticity of demand”  expected to result in 
pooling will result in higher 
and percentage change in 
reduced illnesses, reduced 
average premiums. Rule 
prices facing those with 
morbidity and mortality, 
expected to result in small 
reduced cost sharing or 
increased productivity, and 
transfer from those who 
newly gaining coverage. 
savings from lower health 
use less preventive services 
care costs. 
to those who use more. 
Congressional Research Service 
9 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Agency/Subject/Date 
Annual Costs 
Annual Benefits 
Annual Transfers 
IRS/EBSA/HHS 
$51.6 million 
Qualitative benefits include 
Reversals estimated at 
a more uniform, rigorous, 
$24.4 million, part of which 
Internal claims and 
and consumer friendly 
is a transfer from plans and 
appeals and external 
system of claims and 
issuers to those receiving 
review processes 
appeals processing, which 
payments for denied 
07/23/10 
will lead to a range of 
benefits. 
direct and indirect benefits 
(e.g., providing benefits 
consistent with the 
established terms of plans). 
HHS/OCIIO 
$1,939,020 for reporting 
Qualitative benefits of 
$5 billion in federal funds 
and recordkeeping 
increasing access to health 
to contractors to aid in 
Pre-existing condition 
care and reduced financial 
administering the program 
insurance plan program 
strain for participants. Also 
from 07/01/10 to 12/31/13. 
07/30/10 
likely to improve health 
outcomes and worker 
productivity. 
HHS/CMS 
N/A 
N/A 
$440 million decrease in 
FY2011 operating payments 
Hospital inpatient 
and $21 million decrease in 
prospective payment 
FY2011 capital payments. 
systems for acute care 
Long-term care hospitals 
hospitals 
expected to have an 
08/16/10 
increase in payments of 
$22.5 million. 
HHS/CMS 
N/A 
N/A 
Net savings estimated at 
$960 million in calendar 
Updates the Home 
year 2011. 
Health Prospective 
Payment System outlier 
policy 
11/17/10 
HHS/CMS 
N/A N/A Increased 
expenditures 
of 
about in FY2011 from 
Hospital outpatient 
OPPS provisions of $3.2 
prospective payment 
billion, and $230 million 
systems 
from ASC provisions. 
11/24/10 
HHS/CMS 
N/A N/A PPACA 
provisions 
estimated to increase 
Payment policies under 
expenditures by $1.97 
the physicians fee 
billion. 
schedule 
11/29/10 
HHS/OCIIO 
Mid-range estimated costs 
Qualitative benefits of 
Mid-range estimated 
of $34.7 to $37.4 million 
increased transparency, 
transfers of $863.5 million 
Medical loss ratio 
per year in 2011 to 2013 
increased quality of medical  to $930 million in 2011 to 
requirements 
for capturing and reporting 
care, and improved health. 
2013 from shareholders or 
12/01/10 
data, and providing rebate 
stakeholders to enrollees. 
notifications. 
Source: CRS, using information provided in the preambles to the agencies’ rules. 
Notes: Unless otherwise indicated, estimates are in 2010 dol ars and reflect a 3% discount rate.
 
Congressional Research Service 
10 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Concluding Observations 
Although Congress sometimes specifically requires or permits federal agencies to issue 
regulations on particular issues, the agencies can also decide to issue regulations to accomplish 
statutory requirements when not directed to do so. The initial regulations pursuant to PPACA are 
a clear illustration of that principle. The legislation contained more than 40 provisions that either 
required or permitted federal agencies to issue regulations, but most of the final rules issued 
pursuant to PPACA during the first 8½ months after enactment were not specifically mentioned in 
the act. The agencies may be choosing to use rulemaking as opposed to other possible 
implementation mechanisms (e.g., guidance documents or policy memoranda) to carry out 
PPACA provisions because only regulations developed through the APA rulemaking process carry 
the force of law and can be binding on the public. If an agency attempts to bind the public 
through some mechanism other than a rule, the agency’s actions could be subject to judicial 
review and possible reversal. 
Similarly, although PPACA requires that certain final rules be issued without prior notice and 
comment,30 federal agencies are also doing so without such requirements. The agencies frequently 
invoked the “good cause” exception to notice and comment provided in the APA, stating that the 
requirements in PPACA that certain programs be quickly implemented made it impractical for 
them to develop and publish a proposed rule, take comments on the proposal, and then develop 
and publish the final rule. The agencies also frequently said that it was similarly impractical for 
them to wait 30 days after publication to put those rules into effect (as is also generally required 
by the APA).  
Although most of the PPACA-related final rules were issued without a prior opportunity for 
comment, the agencies did allow the public to comment on most of those rules after they were 
published. And even though the comment periods for these rules ended on or before the rules took 
effect, the agencies may still be persuaded to change them at some point in the future. 
Nevertheless, comments on final rules are generally believed to be less likely to result in changes 
to the rules than if comments were permitted prior to the final rules being published and made 
effective.31 Because the agencies said that they were using interim final rulemaking because of 
tight deadlines in PPACA for rulemaking and implementation, as those deadlines become longer, 
it is possible that the agencies may be more willing to permit full notice and comment 
rulemaking. 
Congressional Oversight Options 
Congress has a range of tools available to oversee the rules that federal agencies are expected to 
issue to implement PPACA, including oversight hearings and confirmation hearings for the heads 
of regulatory agencies. Individual Members of Congress may also participate in the rulemaking 
                                                
30 For example, Section 1104(b)(2) of PPACA requires that the Secretary of HHS promulgate two interim final rules. 
31 For example, although the Administrative Conference of the United States endorsed the use of interim final and 
direct final rulemaking, it also said that “prepromulgation comment is generally considered preferable because agencies 
are perceived by commenters as more likely to accept changes in a rule that has not been promulgated as a final rule—
and potential commenters are more likely to file comments in advance of the agency’s ‘final’ determination.” See 
“Recommendation 95-4, Procedures for Noncontroversial and Expedited Rulemaking,” available at 
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/admin/acus/305954.html. 
Congressional Research Service 
11 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
process by, among other things, meeting with agency officials and filing public comments.32 As 
one author indicated, 
[I]nvestigations conducted by congressional committees constitute another powerful device 
of formal political supervision.... The public legislative hearings, in which administrative 
action is carefully scrutinized and a commissioner or staff member is plied with questions, 
symbolizes the unparalleled sophistication of American congressional control over 
administrative action, in general and by [independent regulatory agencies], in particular. 
Individual oversight by representatives or senators also takes place. Through correspondence 
or meetings, the latter convey the concerns of their constituents.33 
Another option is the Congressional Review Act (CRA, 5 U.S.C. §§801-808), which was enacted 
in 1996 in an attempt to reestablish a measure of congressional authority over rulemaking 
“without at the same time requiring Congress to become a super regulatory agency.”34 The act 
generally requires federal agencies to submit all of their covered final rules to both houses of 
Congress and GAO before they can take effect.35 It also established expedited legislative 
procedures (primarily in the Senate) by which Congress may disapprove agencies’ final rules by 
enacting a joint resolution of disapproval.36 The definition of a covered rule in the CRA is quite 
broad, arguably including any type of document (e.g., legislative rules, policy statements, 
guidance, manuals, and memoranda) that the agency wishes to make binding on the affected 
public.37 After these rules are submitted, Congress can use the expedited procedures specified in 
the CRA (particularly in the Senate) to disapprove any of the rules. CRA resolutions of 
disapproval must be presented to the President for signature or veto. 
For a variety of reasons, however, the CRA has been used to disapprove only one rule in the 14 
years since it was enacted.38 Perhaps most notably, it is likely that a President would veto a 
resolution of disapproval to protect rules developed under his own administration, and it may be 
difficult for Congress to muster the two-thirds vote in both houses needed to overturn the veto. 
Congress can also use regular (i.e., non-CRA) legislative procedures to disapprove agencies’ 
rules, but such legislation may prove even more difficult to enact than a CRA resolution of 
                                                
32 In 
Sierra Club v. Costle (657 F.2d 298, D.C. Cir. 1981), the D.C. Circuit concluded (at 409) that it was “entirely 
proper for congressional representatives vigorously to represent the interests of their constituents before administrative 
agencies engaged in informal, general policy rulemaking, so long as the individual Members of Congress do not 
frustrate the intent of Congress as a whole as expressed in statute, nor undermine applicable rules of procedure.” 
33 Dominique Custos, “The Rulemaking Power of Independent Regulatory Agencies,” 
The American Journal of 
Comparative Law, vol. 54 (Fall 2006), p. 633.  
34 Joint statement of House and Senate Sponsors, 142 
Cong. Rec. E571, at E571 (daily ed. April 19, 1996); 142 
Cong. 
Rec. S3683, at S3683 (daily ed. April 18, 1996). 
35 If a rule is considered “major” (e.g., has a $100 million annual effect on the economy), then the CRA generally 
prohibits it from taking effect until 60 days after the date that it is submitted to Congress. 
36 For a detailed discussion of CRA procedures, see CRS Report RL31160, 
Disapproval of Regulations by Congress: 
Procedure Under the Congressional Review Act, by Richard S. Beth.  
37 For more on the potential scope of the definition of a “rule” under the CRA, see CRS Report RL30116, 
Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking: An Update and Assessment of The Congressional Review Act after a 
Decade, by Morton Rosenberg.  
38 The rule overturned in March 2001 was the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s ergonomics standard. 
This reversal was the result of a unique set of circumstances in which the incoming President (George W. Bush) did not 
veto the resolution disapproving the outgoing President’s (William J. Clinton’s) rule. See CRS Report RL30116, 
Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking: An Update and Assessment of The Congressional Review Act after a 
Decade, by Morton Rosenberg, for a description of several possible factors affecting the CRA’s use, and for other 
effects that the act may have on agency rulemaking.  
Congressional Research Service 
12 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
disapproval (primarily because of the lack of expedited procedures in the Senate), and if enacted 
may also be vetoed by the President. 
Although the CRA has been used only once to overturn an agency rule, Congress has regularly 
included provisions in the text of agencies’ appropriations bills directing or preventing the 
development of particular regulations. Such provisions include prohibitions on the finalization of 
particular proposed rules, restrictions on certain types of regulatory activity, and restrictions on 
implementation or enforcement of certain provisions.39 Appropriations provisions can also be 
used to prompt agencies to issue certain regulations, or to require that certain procedures be 
followed before or after their issuance. The inclusion of regulatory provisions in appropriations 
legislation as a matter of legislative strategy appears to be prompted by two factors: (1) 
Congress’s ability via its “power of the purse” to control agency action, and (2) the fact that 
appropriations bills are considered “must pass” legislation. Congress’s use of regulatory 
appropriations restrictions has fluctuated somewhat over time, and previous experience suggests 
that they may be somewhat less frequent when Congress and the President are of the same party.40 
 
                                                
39 See CRS Report RL34354, 
Congressional Influence on Rulemaking and Regulation Through Appropriations 
Restrictions, by Curtis W. Copeland. 
40 Ibid., p. 35. This report indicated that some appropriations restrictions were repeated every year for 10 years, some 
were repeated several years in a row but then stopped, and some appeared in only one appropriations bill. Some 
restrictions appeared to be intended to stop particular rules issued at the end of presidential administrations.  
Congressional Research Service 
13 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Appendix. Final Rules Implementing PPACA (as of 
December 7, 2010) 
Publication 
Department/Agency  
Date/Citation 
or Office 
Summary Dates 
May 5, 2010 
Department of Health and 
Interim final rule 
Effective on July 6, 2010. 
Human Services 
implementing the 
 
(HHS)/Centers for 
requirement in Section 
Comment period ended 
July 7, 2010. 
75 
Federal Register 24437  Medicare and Medicaid 
6402(a) of PPACA that 
Services (CMS) 
providers of medical or 
other items or services to 
include their National 
Provider Identifier (NPI) on 
all applications to enroll 
and on all claims for 
payment. The rule also 
requires physicians and 
eligible professionals to 
order and refer covered 
items to be enrolled in 
Medicare, and adds 
requirement to provide 
documentation on referrals 
to programs at high risk of 
waste and abuse. 
May 5, 2010 
HHS/Office of the 
Interim final rule 
Effective on May 10, 2010. 
Secretary 
implementing the 
The initial version of the 
 
requirement in Section 
website became available 
75 
Federal Register 24470 
1103(a) of PPACA to 
July 1, 2010. 
establish a website through 
which individuals and small 
Comment period ended 
businesses can obtain 
June 4, 2010. 
information about the 
insurance coverage options 
available in their state. The 
rule adopts the categories 
of information that will be 
collected and displayed, and 
the data required from 
issuers and requested from 
states, associations, and 
high risk pools. 
Congressional Research Service 
14 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Publication 
Department/Agency  
Date/Citation 
or Office 
Summary Dates 
May 5, 2010 
HHS/Office of the 
Interim final rule 
Effective on June 1, 2010. 
Secretary 
implementing the Early 
75 
Federal Register 24450 
Retiree Reinsurance 
Comment period ended 
Program in Section 1102 of 
June 4, 2010. 
PPACA. This temporary 
program (ends by January 
1, 2014) provides 
reimbursement to 
participating employment-
based plans for a portion of 
the cost of health benefits 
for early retirees and their 
spouses/dependents 
(certain claims between 
$15,000 and $90,000).  
May 13, 2010 
Department of the 
Interim final rule 
Effective on July 12, 2010. 
Treasury(Treasury)/Internal  implementing the 
The requirements generally 
75 
Federal Register 27122  Revenue Service (IRS); 
requirements in Section 
apply for plan years 
Department of Labor 
1001 of PPACA for group 
beginning on or after 
(DOL)/Employee Benefits 
health plans and health 
September 23, 2010. 
Security Administration 
insurance coverage in the 
(EBSA); HHS 
group and individual 
Comment period ended 
markets regarding 
August 11, 2010. 
dependent coverage of 
children who have not 
attained age 26. 
May 26, 2010 
HHS 
Interim final rule (required 
Effective on June 25, 2010. 
by Section 10501(l) of 
75 
Federal Register 2944
7 
PPACA) defining 
Comment period ended 
“underserved rural 
July 26, 2010. 
community” for purposes 
of the Rural Physician 
Training Grant Program in 
Section 749B of the Public 
Health Service Act. 
June 15, 2010 
Treasury/IRS 
Final and temporary rules 
Effective on June 15, 2010 
providing guidance on the 
The tax applies to 
75 
Federal Register 33683 
indoor tanning services 
payments after June 30, 
excise tax imposed by 
2010. 
Section 10907 of PPACA. 
No comments requested. 
June 17, 2010 
Treasury/IRS; DOL/EBSA; 
Interim final rule 
Effective on June 14, 2010, 
HHS 
implementing the rules for 
except that certain 
75 
Federal Register 34538 
group health plans and 
amendments are effective 
 
health insurance coverage 
July 12, 2010. 
in the group and individual 
markets regarding status as 
Comment period ended 
a “grandfathered” health 
August 10, 2010. 
plan (Section 1251 of 
PPACA). 
Congressional Research Service 
15 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Publication 
Department/Agency  
Date/Citation 
or Office 
Summary Dates 
June 28, 2010 
Treasury/IRS; DOL/EBSA; 
Interim final rule 
Effective on August 27, 
HHS 
implementing the rules for 
2010. Some of the 
75 
Federal Register 37188 
group health plans and 
requirements apply for plan 
health insurance coverage 
years starting on or after 
in the group and individual 
September 23, 2010, while 
markets regarding 
other requirements begin 
preexisting condition 
for plan years starting on 
exclusions, lifetime and 
or after January 1, 2014. 
annual dol ar limits on 
benefits, rescissions, and 
Comment period ended 
patient protections 
August 27, 2010. 
(Sections 2704, 2711, 2712, 
and 2719A of PPACA). 
July 19, 2010 
Treasury/IRS; DOL/EBSA; 
Interim final rule 
Effective on September 17, 
HHS 
implementing the 
2010. Applicable to group 
75 
Federal Register 41726 
requirements for group 
health plans and group 
health plans and health 
health insurers for plan 
insurance coverage in the 
years beginning on or after 
group and individual 
September 23, 2010. 
markets (Section 2713 of 
the Public Health Service 
Comment period ended 
Act as revised by PPACA). 
September 17, 2010. 
July 23, 2010 
Treasury/IRS; DOL/EBSA; 
Interim final rule 
Effective September 21, 
HHS 
implementing the 
2010. Applicable to group 
75 
Federal Register 43330 
requirements regarding 
health plans and group 
internal claims and appeals 
health insurers for plan 
and external review 
years beginning on or after 
processes for group health 
September 23, 2010. 
plans and health insurance 
coverage in the group and 
Comment period ended 
individual markets (Section 
September 21, 2010. 
2719 of the Public Health 
Service Act as revised by 
PPACA). 
July 30, 2010 
HHS/Office of Consumer 
Interim final rule 
Effective on July 30, 2010.  
Information and Insurance 
implementing the 
75 
Federal Register 45014  Oversight (OCIIO) 
requirement in Section 
Comment period ended 
1101 of PPACA regarding 
September 28, 2010. 
the establishment of a 
temporary high risk 
insurance pool program to 
provide coverage to 
uninsured individuals with 
pre-existing conditions.  
August 16, 2010 
HHS/CMS 
Final rule revising the 
Effective on October 1, 
Medicare hospital inpatient 
2010. (Proposed rule was 
75 
Federal Register 50042 
prospective payment 
published May 4, 2010.) 
systems for operating and 
capital-related costs of 
 
acute care hospitals to 
(among other things) 
implement certain 
provisions in PPACA. 
Congressional Research Service 
16 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
Publication 
Department/Agency  
Date/Citation 
or Office 
Summary Dates 
November 15, 2010 
HHS/CMS 
Final rule implementing 
Effective on December 15, 
Section 2503(a) of PPACA 
2010. (Proposed rule was 
75 
Federal Register 69591 
by withdrawing provisions 
published September 3, 
on upper reimbursement 
2010.) 
limits and other matters. 
November 17, 2010 
Treasury/IRS; DOL/EBSA; 
Interim final rule amending 
Effective on November 15, 
HHS/OCIIO 
the June 17, 2010, interim 
2010. 
75 
Federal Register 70114 
final rule on “grand-
fathered” health plans. The 
Comment period ended 
amendment permits certain  December 17, 2010. 
changes in policies, 
certificates, or contracts of 
insurance without loss of 
“grandfathered” status. 
November 17, 2010 
HHS/CMS 
Final rule that (among 
Effective on January 1, 
other things) updates the 
2011. (Proposed rule was 
75 
Federal Register 70372 
Home Health Prospective 
published July 23, 2010.) 
Payment System outlier 
policy in accordance with 
Section 3131 of PPACA. 
November 24, 2010 
HHS/CMS 
Final rule implementing 
Effective on January 1, 
PPACA provisions 
2011, except certain 
75 
Federal Register 71800 
regarding (1) the Medicare 
provisions effective on 
hospital outpatient 
December 2, 2010. Various 
prospective payment 
applicability dates.  
system, (2) the Medicare 
ambulatory surgical center 
 
payment system, (3) 
Comment period ends 
payments to hospitals for 
January 3, 2011. 
direct graduate medical 
education and indirect 
medical education costs, 
and (4) limitations on 
certain physician referrals 
to hospitals in which they 
have a financial interest. 
November 29, 2010 
HHS/CMS 
Final rule with comment 
Effective on January 1, 
period addressing changes 
2011.  
75 
Federal Register 73170 
to the physician fee 
schedule and other 
Comment period ends 
Medicare Part B policies. 
January 3, 2011. 
Among other things, the 
rule “addresses, 
implements, or discusses” 
provisions in PPACA. 
December 1, 2010 
HHS/OCIIO Interim 
final 
rule 
Effective on January 1, 
implementing medical loss 
2011.  
75 
Federal Register 74864 
ratio requirements for 
health insurers under 
Comment period ends 
Section 2718(a)-(c) of the 
January 31, 2011.  
Public Health Service Act 
as amended by PPACA. 
Source: CRS, using information provided in the preambles to the agencies’ rules. 
Congressional Research Service 
17 
Initial Final Rules Implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
 
 
Author Contact Information 
 Curtis W. Copeland 
   
Specialist in American National Government 
cwcopeland@crs.loc.gov, 7-0632 
 
 
Congressional Research Service 
18