29 C.F.R. Part 2590 — RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR GROUP HEALTH PLANS

§ 2590.606-1 General notice of continuation coverage. (a) General. Pursuant to section 606(a)(1) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (the Act), the administrator of a group health plan subject to the continuation coverage requirements of part 6 of title I of the Act shall provide, in accordance with this section, written notice to each covered employee and spouse of the covered employee (if any) of the right to continuation coverage provided under the plan. (b) Timing of notice. (1) The notice required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be furnished to each employee and each employee's spouse, not later than the earlier of: (i) The date that is 90 days after the date on which such individual's coverage under the plan commences, or, if later, the date that is 90 days after the date on which the plan first becomes subject to the continuation coverage requirements; or (ii) The first date on which the administrator is required, pursuant to § 2590.606-4(b), to furnish the covered employee, spouse, or dependent child of such employee notice of a qualified beneficiary's right to elect continuation coverage. (2) A notice that is furnished in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section shall, for purposes of section 606(a)(1) of the Act, be deemed to be provided at the time of commencement of coverage under the plan. (3) In any case in which an administrator is required to furnish a notice to a covered employee or spouse pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, the furnishing of a notice to such individual in accordance with § 2590.606-4(b) shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of this section. (c) Content of notice. The notice required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the average plan participant and shall contain the following information: (1) The name of the plan under which continuation coverage is available, and the name, address and telephone number of a party or parties from whom additional information about the plan and continuation coverage can be obtained; (2) A general description of the continuation coverage under the plan, including identification of the classes of individuals who may become qualified beneficiaries, the types of qualifying events that may give rise to the right to continuation coverage, the obligation of the employer to notify the plan administrator of the occurrence of certain qualifying events, the maximum period for which continuation coverage may be available, when and under what circumstances continuation coverage may be extended beyond the applicable maximum period, and the plan's requirements applicable to the payment of premiums for continuation coverage; (3) An explanation of the plan's requirements regarding the responsibility of a qualified beneficiary to notify the administrator of a qualifying event that is a divorce, legal separation, or a child's ceasing to be a dependent under the terms of the plan, and a description of the plan's procedures for providing such notice; (4) An explanation of the plan's requirements regarding the responsibility of qualified beneficiaries who are receiving continuation coverage to provide notice to the administrator of a determination by the Social Security Administration, under title II or XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq. or 1381 et seq.), that a qualified beneficiary is disabled, and a description of the plan's procedures for providing such notice; (5) An explanation of the importance of keeping the administrator informed of the current addresses of all participants or beneficiaries under the plan who are or may become qualified beneficiaries; and (6) A statement that the notice does not fully describe continuation coverage or other rights under the plan and that more complete information regarding such rights is available from the plan administrator and in the plan's SPD. (d) Single notice rule. A plan administrator may satisfy the requirement to provide notice in accordance with this section to a covered employee and the covered employee's spouse by furnishing a single notice addressed to both the covered employee and the covered employee's spouse, if, on the basis of the most recent information available to the plan, the covered employee's spouse resides at the same location as the covered employee, and the spouse's coverage under the plan commences on or after the date on which the covered employee's coverage commences, but not later than the date on which the notice required by this section is required to be provided to the covered employee. Nothing in this section shall be construed to create a requirement to provide a separate notice to dependent children who share a residence with a covered employee or a covered employee's spouse to whom notice is provided in accordance with this section. (e) Notice in summary plan description. A plan administrator may satisfy the requirement to provide notice in accordance with this section by including the information described in paragraphs (c)(1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this section in a summary plan description meeting the requirements of § 2520.102-3 of this chapter furnished in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section. (f) Delivery of notice. The notice required by this section shall be furnished in a manner consistent with the requirements of § 2520.104b-1 of this chapter, including paragraph (c) of that section relating to the use of electronic media. (g) Model notice. The appendix to this section contains a model notice that is intended to assist administrators in discharging the notice obligations of this section. Use of the model notice is not mandatory. The model notice reflects the requirements of this section as they would apply to single-employer group health plans and must be modified if used to provide notice with respect to other types of group health plans, such as multiemployer plans or plans established and maintained by employee organizations for their members. In order to use the model notice, administrators must appropriately add relevant information where indicated in the model notice, select among alternative language, and supplement the model notice to reflect applicable plan provisions. Items of information that are not applicable to a particular plan may be deleted. Use of the model notice, appropriately modified and supplemented, will be deemed to satisfy the notice content requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. (h) Applicability. This section shall apply to any notice obligation described in this section that arises on or after the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after November 26, 2004.

§ 2590.606-2 Notice requirement for employers. (a) General. Pursuant to section 606(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (the Act), except as otherwise provided herein, the employer of a covered employee under a group health plan subject to the continuation coverage requirements of part 6 of title I of the Act shall provide, in accordance with this section, notice to the administrator of the plan of the occurrence of a qualifying event that is the covered employee's death, termination of employment (other than by reason of gross misconduct), reduction in hours of employment, Medicare entitlement, or a proceeding in a case under title 11, United States Code, with respect to the employer from whose employment the covered employee retired at any time. (b) Timing of notice. The notice required by this section shall be furnished to the administrator of the plan— (1) In the case of a plan that provides, with respect to a qualifying event, pursuant to section 607(5) of the Act, that continuation coverage and the applicable period for providing notice under section 606(a)(2) of the Act shall commence on the date of loss of coverage, not later than 30 days after the date on which a qualified beneficiary loses coverage under the plan due to the qualifying event; (2) In the case of a multiemployer plan that provides, pursuant to section 606(a)(2) of the Act, for a longer period of time within which employers may provide notice of a qualifying event, not later than the end of the period provided pursuant to the plan's terms for such notice; and (3) In all other cases, not later than 30 days after the date on which the qualifying event occurred. (c) Content of notice. The notice required by this section shall include sufficient information to enable the administrator to determine the plan, the covered employee, the qualifying event, and the date of the qualifying event. (d) Multiemployer plan special rules. This section shall not apply to any employer that maintains a multiemployer plan, with respect to qualifying events affecting coverage under such plan, if the plan provides, pursuant to section 606(b) of the Act, that the administrator shall determine whether such a qualifying event has occurred. (e) Applicability. This section shall apply to any notice obligation described in this section that arises on or after the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after November 26, 2004.

§ 2590.606-3 Notice requirements for covered employees and qualified beneficiaries. (a) General. In accordance with the authority of sections 505 and 606(a)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (the Act), this section sets forth requirements for group health plans subject to the continuation coverage requirements of part 6 of title I of the Act with respect to the responsibility of covered employees and qualified beneficiaries to provide the following notices to administrators: (1) Notice of the occurrence of a qualifying event that is a divorce or legal separation of a covered employee from his or her spouse; (2) Notice of the occurrence of a qualifying event that is a beneficiary's ceasing to be covered under a plan as a dependent child of a participant; (3) Notice of the occurrence of a second qualifying event after a qualified beneficiary has become entitled to continuation coverage with a maximum duration of 18 (or 29) months; (4) Notice that a qualified beneficiary entitled to receive continuation coverage with a maximum duration of 18 months has been determined by the Social Security Administration, under title II or XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq. or 1381 et seq.) (SSA), to be disabled at any time during the first 60 days of continuation coverage; and (5) Notice that a qualified beneficiary, with respect to whom a notice described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section has been provided, has subsequently been determined by the Social Security Administration, under title II or XVI of the SSA to no longer be disabled. (b) Reasonable procedures. (1) A plan subject to the continuation coverage requirements shall establish reasonable procedures for the furnishing of the notices described in paragraph (a) of this section. (2) For purposes of this section, a plan's notice procedures shall be deemed reasonable only if such procedures: (i) Are described in the plan's summary plan description required by § 2520.102-3 of this chapter; (ii) Specify the individual or entity designated to receive such notices; (iii) Specify the means by which notice may be given; (iv) Describe the information concerning the qualifying event or determination of disability that the plan deems necessary in order to provide continuation coverage rights consistent with the requirements of the Act; and (v) Comply with the requirements of paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this section. (3) A plan's procedures will not fail to be reasonable, pursuant to this section, solely because the procedures require a covered employee or qualified beneficiary to utilize a specific form to provide notice to the administrator, provided that any such form is easily available, without cost, to covered employees and qualified beneficiaries. (4) If a plan has not established reasonable procedures for providing a notice required by this section, such notice shall be deemed to have been provided when a written or oral communication identifying a specific event is made in a manner reasonably calculated to bring the information to the attention of any of the following: (i) In the case of a single-employer plan, the person or organizational unit that customarily handles employee benefits matters of the employer; (ii) In the case of a plan to which more than one unaffiliated employer contributes, or which is established or maintained by an employee organization, either the joint board, association, committee, or other similar group (or any member of any such group) administering the plan, or the person or organizational unit to which claims for benefits under the plan customarily are referred; or (iii) In the case of a plan the benefits of which are provided or administered by an insurance company, insurance service, or other similar organization subject to regulation under the insurance laws of one or more States, the person or organizational unit that customarily handles claims for benefits under the plan or any officer of the insurance company, insurance service, or other similar organization. (c) Periods of time for providing notice. A plan may establish a reasonable period of time for furnishing any of the notices described in paragraph (a) of this section, provided that any time limit imposed by the plan with respect to a particular notice may not be shorter than the time limit described in this paragraph (c) with respect to that notice. (1) Time limits for notices of qualifying events. The period of time for furnishing a notice described in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section may not end before the date that is 60 days after the latest of: (i) The date on which the relevant qualifying event occurs; (ii) The date on which the qualified beneficiary loses (or would lose) coverage under the plan as a result of the qualifying event; or (iii) The date on which the qualified beneficiary is informed, through the furnishing of the plan's summary plan description or the notice described in § 2590.606-1, of both the responsibility to provide the notice and the plan's procedures for providing such notice to the administrator. (2) Time limits for notice of disability determination. (i) Subject to paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section, the period of time for furnishing the notice described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section may not end before the date that is 60 days after the latest of: (A) The date of the disability determination by the Social Security Administration; (B) The date on which a qualifying event occurs; (C) The date on which the qualified beneficiary loses (or would lose) coverage under the plan as a result of the qualifying event; or (D) The date on which the qualified beneficiary is informed, through the furnishing of the summary plan description or the notice described in § 2590.606-1, of both the responsibility to provide the notice and the plan's procedures for providing such notice to the administrator. (ii) Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, a plan may require the notice described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section to be furnished before the end of the first 18 months of continuation coverage. (3) Time limits for notice of change in disability status. The period of time for furnishing the notice described in paragraph (a)(5) of this section may not end before the date that is 30 days after the later of: (i) The date of the final determination by the Social Security Administration, under title II or XVI of the SSA, that the qualified beneficiary is no longer disabled; or (ii) The date on which the qualified beneficiary is informed, through the furnishing of the plan's summary plan description or the notice described in § 2590.606-1, of both the responsibility to provide the notice and the plan's procedures for providing such notice to the administrator. (d) Required contents of notice. (1) A plan may establish reasonable requirements for the content of any notice described in this section, provided that a plan may not deem a notice to have been provided untimely if such notice, although not containing all of the information required by the plan, is provided within the time limit established under the plan in conformity with paragraph (c) of this section, and the administrator is able to determine from such notice the plan, the covered employee and qualified beneficiary(ies), the qualifying event or disability, and the date on which the qualifying event (if any) occurred. (2) An administrator may require a notice that does not contain all of the information required by the plan to be supplemented with the additional information necessary to meet the plan's reasonable content requirements for such notice in order for the notice to be deemed to have been provided in accordance with this section. (e) Who may provide notice. With respect to each of the notice requirements of this section, any individual who is either the covered employee, a qualified beneficiary with respect to the qualifying event, or any representative acting on behalf of the covered employee or qualified beneficiary may provide the notice, and the provision of notice by one individual shall satisfy any responsibility to provide notice on behalf of all related qualified beneficiaries with respect to the qualifying event. (f) Plan provisions. To the extent that a plan provides a covered employee or qualified beneficiary a period of time longer than that specified in this section to provide notice to the administrator, the terms of the plan shall govern the time frame for such notice. (g) Additional rights to continuation coverage. Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude a plan from providing, in accordance with its terms, continuation coverage to a qualified beneficiary although a notice requirement of this section was not satisfied. (h) Applicability. This section shall apply to any notice obligation described in this section that arises on or after the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after November 26, 2004.

§ 2590.606-4 Notice requirements for plan administrators. (a) General. Pursuant to section 606(a)(4) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (the Act), the administrator of a group health plan subject to the continuation coverage requirements of Part 6 of title I of the Act shall provide, in accordance with this section, notice to each qualified beneficiary of the qualified beneficiary's rights to continuation coverage under the plan. (b) Notice of right to elect continuation coverage. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) or (3) of this section, upon receipt of a notice of qualifying event furnished in accordance with § 2590.606-2 or § 2590.606-3, the administrator shall furnish to each qualified beneficiary, not later than 14 days after receipt of the notice of qualifying event, a notice meeting the requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of this section. (2) In the case of a plan with respect to which an employer of a covered employee is also the administrator of the plan, except as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, if the employer is otherwise required to furnish a notice of a qualifying event to an administrator pursuant to § 2590.606-2, the administrator shall furnish to each qualified beneficiary a notice meeting the requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of this section not later than 44 days after: (i) In the case of a plan that provides, with respect to the qualifying event, that continuation coverage and the applicable period for providing notice under section 606(a)(2) of the Act shall commence with the date of loss of coverage, the date on which a qualified beneficiary loses coverage under the plan due to the qualifying event; or (ii) In all other cases, the date on which the qualifying event occurred. (3) In the case of a plan that is a multiemployer plan, a notice meeting the requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of this section shall be furnished not later than the later of: (i) The end of the time period provided in paragraph (b)(1) of this section; or (ii) The end of the time period provided in the terms of the plan for such purpose. (4) The notice required by this paragraph (b) shall be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the average plan participant and shall contain the following information: (i) The name of the plan under which continuation coverage is available; and the name, address and telephone number of the party responsible under the plan for the administration of continuation coverage benefits; (ii) Identification of the qualifying event; (iii) Identification, by status or name, of the qualified beneficiaries who are recognized by the plan as being entitled to elect continuation coverage with respect to the qualifying event, and the date on which coverage under the plan will terminate (or has terminated) unless continuation coverage is elected; (iv) A statement that each individual who is a qualified beneficiary with respect to the qualifying event has an independent right to elect continuation coverage, that a covered employee or a qualified beneficiary who is the spouse of the covered employee (or was the spouse of the covered employee on the day before the qualifying event occurred) may elect continuation coverage on behalf of all other qualified beneficiaries with respect to the qualifying event, and that a parent or legal guardian may elect continuation coverage on behalf of a minor child; (v) An explanation of the plan's procedures for electing continuation coverage, including an explanation of the time period during which the election must be made, and the date by which the election must be made; (vi) An explanation of the consequences of failing to elect or waiving continuation coverage, including an explanation that a qualified beneficiary's decision whether to elect continuation coverage will affect the future rights of qualified beneficiaries to portability of group health coverage, guaranteed access to individual health coverage, and special enrollment under part 7 of title I of the Act, with a reference to where a qualified beneficiary may obtain additional information about such rights; and a description of the plan's procedures for revoking a waiver of the right to continuation coverage before the date by which the election must be made; (vii) A description of the continuation coverage that will be made available under the plan, if elected, including the date on which such coverage will commence, either by providing a description of the coverage or by reference to the plan's summary plan description; (viii) An explanation of the maximum period for which continuation coverage will be available under the plan, if elected; an explanation of the continuation coverage termination date; and an explanation of any events that might cause continuation coverage to be terminated earlier than the end of the maximum period; (ix) A description of the circumstances (if any) under which the maximum period of continuation coverage may be extended due either to the occurrence of a second qualifying event or a determination by the Social Security Administration, under title II or XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq. or 1381 et seq.) (SSA), that the qualified beneficiary is disabled, and the length of any such extension; (x) In the case of a notice that offers continuation coverage with a maximum duration of less than 36 months, a description of the plan's requirements regarding the responsibility of qualified beneficiaries to provide notice of a second qualifying event and notice of a disability determination under the SSA, along with a description of the plan's procedures for providing such notices, including the times within which such notices must be provided and the consequences of failing to provide such notices. The notice shall also explain the responsibility of qualified beneficiaries to provide notice that a disabled qualified beneficiary has subsequently been determined to no longer be disabled; (xi) A description of the amount, if any, that each qualified beneficiary will be required to pay for continuation coverage; (xii) A description of the due dates for payments, the qualified beneficiaries' right to pay on a monthly basis, the grace periods for payment, the address to which payments should be sent, and the consequences of delayed payment and non-payment; (xiii) An explanation of the importance of keeping the administrator informed of the current addresses of all participants or beneficiaries under the plan who are or may become qualified beneficiaries; and (xiv) A statement that the notice does not fully describe continuation coverage or other rights under the plan, and that more complete information regarding such rights is available in the plan's summary plan description or from the plan administrator. (c) Notice of unavailability of continuation coverage. (1) In the event that an administrator receives a notice furnished in accordance with § 2590.606-3 relating to a qualifying event, second qualifying event, or determination of disability by the Social Security Administration regarding a covered employee, qualified beneficiary, or other individual and determines that the individual is not entitled to continuation coverage under part 6 of title I of the Act, the administrator shall provide to such individual an explanation as to why the individual is not entitled to continuation coverage. (2) The notice required by this paragraph (c) shall be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the average plan participant and shall be furnished by the administrator in accordance with the time frame set out in paragraph (b) of this section that would apply if the administrator received a notice of qualifying event and determined that the individual was entitled to continuation coverage. (d) Notice of termination of continuation coverage. (1) The administrator of a plan that is providing continuation coverage to one or more qualified beneficiaries with respect to a qualifying event shall provide, in accordance with this paragraph (d), notice to each such qualified beneficiary of any termination of continuation coverage that takes effect earlier than the end of the maximum period of continuation coverage applicable to such qualifying event. (2) The notice required by this paragraph (d) shall be written in a manner calculated to be understood by the average plan participant and shall contain the following information: (i) The reason that continuation coverage has terminated earlier than the end of the maximum period of continuation coverage applicable to such qualifying event; (ii) The date of termination of continuation coverage; and (iii) Any rights the qualified beneficiary may have under the plan or under applicable law to elect an alternative group or individual coverage, such as a conversion right. (3) The notice required by this paragraph (d) shall be furnished by the administrator as soon as practicable following the administrator's determination that continuation coverage shall terminate. (e) Special notice rules. The notices required by paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section shall be furnished to each qualified beneficiary or individual, except that: (1) An administrator may provide notice to a covered employee and the covered employee's spouse by furnishing a single notice addressed to both the covered employee and the covered employee's spouse, if, on the basis of the most recent information available to the plan, the covered employee's spouse resides at the same location as the covered employee; and (2) An administrator may provide notice to each qualified beneficiary who is the dependent child of a covered employee by furnishing a single notice to the covered employee or the covered employee's spouse, if, on the basis of the most recent information available to the plan, the dependent child resides at the same location as the individual to whom such notice is provided. (f) Delivery of notice. The notices required by this section shall be furnished in any manner consistent with the requirements of § 2520.104b-1 of this chapter, including paragraph (c) of that section relating to the use of electronic media. (g) Model notice. The appendix to this section contains a model notice that is intended to assist administrators in discharging the notice obligations of paragraph (b) of this section. Use of the model notice is not mandatory. The model notice reflects the requirements of this section as they would apply to single-employer group health plans and must be modified if used to provide notice with respect to other types of group health plans, such as multiemployer plans or plans established and maintained by employee organizations for their members. In order to use the model notice, administrators must appropriately add relevant information where indicated in the model notice, select among alternative language and supplement the model notice to reflect applicable plan provisions. Items of information that are not applicable to a particular plan may be deleted. Use of the model notice, appropriately modified and supplemented, will be deemed to satisfy the notice content requirements of paragraph (b)(4) of this section. (h) Applicability. This section shall apply to any notice obligation described in this section that arises on or after the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after November 26, 2004.

§ 2590.609-1 [Reserved]

§ 2590.609-2 National Medical Support Notice. (a) This section promulgates the National Medical Support Notice (the Notice), as mandated by section 401(b) of the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-200). If the Notice is appropriately completed and satisfies paragraphs (3) and (4) of section 609(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), the Notice is deemed to be a qualified medical child support order (QMCSO) pursuant to ERISA section 609(a)(5)(C). Section 609(a) of ERISA delineates the rights and obligations of the alternate recipient (child), the participant, and the group health plan under a QMCSO. A copy of the Notice is available on the Internet at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa. (b) For purposes of this section, a plan administrator shall find that a Notice is appropriately completed if it contains the name of an Issuing Agency, the name and mailing address (if any) of an employee who is a participant under the plan, the name and mailing address of one or more alternate recipient(s) (child(ren) of the participant) (or the name and address of a substituted official or agency which has been substituted for the mailing address of the alternate recipient(s)), and identifies an underlying child support order. (c)(1) Under section 609(a)(3)(A) of ERISA, in order to be qualified, a medical child support order must clearly specify the name and the last known mailing address (if any) of the participant and the name and mailing address of each alternate recipient covered by the order, except that, to the extent provided in the order, the name and mailing address of an official of a State or a political subdivision thereof may be substituted for the mailing address of any such alternate recipient. Section 609(a)(3)(B) of ERISA requires a reasonable description of the type of coverage to be provided to each such alternate recipient, or the manner in which such type of coverage is to be determined. Section 609(a)(3)(C) of ERISA requires that the order specify the period to which such order applies. (2) The Notice satisfies ERISA section 609(a)(3)(A) by including the necessary identifying information described in § 2590.609-2(b). (3) The Notice satisfies ERISA section 609(a)(3)(B) by having the Issuing Agency identify either the specific type of coverage or all available group health coverage. If an employer receives a Notice that does not designate either specific type(s) of coverage or all available coverage, the employer and plan administrator should assume that all are designated. The Notice further satisfies ERISA section 609(a)(3)(B) by instructing the plan administrator that if a group health plan has multiple options and the participant is not enrolled, the Issuing Agency will make a selection after the Notice is qualified, and, if the Issuing Agency does not respond within 20 days, the child will be enrolled under the plan's default option (if any). (4) Section 609(a)(3)(C) of ERISA is satisfied because the Notice specifies that the period of coverage may only end for the alternate recipient(s) when similarly situated dependents are no longer eligible for coverage under the terms of the plan, or upon the occurrence of certain specified events. (d)(1) Under ERISA section 609(a)(4), a qualified medical child support order may not require a plan to provide any type or form of benefit, or any option, not otherwise provided under the plan, except to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of a law relating to medical child support described in section 1908 of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1396g-1. (2) The Notice satisfies the conditions of ERISA section 609(a)(4) because it requires the plan to provide to an alternate recipient only those benefits that the plan provides to any dependent of a participant who is enrolled in the plan, and any other benefits that are necessary to meet the requirements of a State law described in such section 1908. (e) For the purposes of this section, an “Issuing Agency” is a State agency that administers the child support enforcement program under Part D of Title IV of the Social Security Act.

§ 2590.701-1 Basis and scope. (a) Statutory basis. This Subpart B implements Part 7 of Subtitle B of Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (hereinafter ERISA or the Act). (b) Scope. A group health plan or health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage may provide greater rights to participants and beneficiaries than those set forth in this Subpart B. This Subpart B sets forth minimum requirements for group health plans and group health insurance issuers offering group health insurance coverage concerning certain consumer protections of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), including special enrollment periods and the prohibition against discrimination based on a health factor, as amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act). Other consumer protection provisions, including other protections provided by the Affordable Care Act and the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, are set forth in Subpart C of this part.

§ 2590.701-2 Definitions. Unless otherwise provided, the definitions in this section govern in applying the provisions of §§ 2590.701 through 2590.734. Affiliation period means a period of time that must expire before health insurance coverage provided by an HMO becomes effective, and during which the HMO is not required to provide benefits. COBRA definitions: (1) COBRA means Title X of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, as amended. (2) COBRA continuation coverage means coverage, under a group health plan, that satisfies an applicable COBRA continuation provision. (3) COBRA continuation provision means sections 601-608 of the Act, section 4980B of the Internal Revenue Code (other than paragraph (f)(1) of such section 4980B insofar as it relates to pediatric vaccines), or Title XXII of the PHS Act. (4) Exhaustion of COBRA continuation coverage means that an individual's COBRA continuation coverage ceases for any reason other than either failure of the individual to pay premiums on a timely basis, or for cause (such as making a fraudulent claim or an intentional misrepresentation of a material fact in connection with the plan). An individual is considered to have exhausted COBRA continuation coverage if such coverage ceases— (i) Due to the failure of the employer or other responsible entity to remit premiums on a timely basis; (ii) When the individual no longer resides, lives, or works in the service area of an HMO or similar program (whether or not within the choice of the individual) and there is no other COBRA continuation coverage available to the individual; or (iii) When the individual incurs a claim that would meet or exceed a lifetime limit on all benefits and there is no other COBRA continuation coverage available to the individual. Condition means a medical condition. Creditable coverage means creditable coverage within the meaning of § 2590.701-4(a). Dependent means any individual who is or may become eligible for coverage under the terms of a group health plan because of a relationship to a participant. Enroll means to become covered for benefits under a group health plan (that is, when coverage becomes effective), without regard to when the individual may have completed or filed any forms that are required in order to become covered under the plan. For this purpose, an individual who has health coverage under a group health plan is enrolled in the plan regardless of whether the individual elects coverage, the individual is a dependent who becomes covered as a result of an election by a participant, or the individual becomes covered without an election. Enrollment date means the first day of coverage or, if there is a waiting period, the first day of the waiting period. If an individual receiving benefits under a group health plan changes benefit packages, or if the plan changes group health insurance issuers, the individual's enrollment date does not change. Excepted benefits means the benefits described as excepted in § 2590.732(c). First day of coverage means, in the case of an individual covered for benefits under a group health plan, the first day of coverage under the plan and, in the case of an individual covered by health insurance coverage in the individual market, the first day of coverage under the policy or contract. Genetic information has the meaning given the term in § 2590.702-1(a)(3) of this Part. Group health insurance coverage means health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan. Individual health insurance coverage reimbursed by the arrangements described in 29 CFR 2510.3-1(l) is not offered in connection with a group health plan, and is not group health insurance coverage, provided all the conditions in 29 CFR 2510.3-1(l) are satisfied. Group health plan or plan means a group health plan within the meaning of § 2590.732(a). Group market means the market for health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan. (However, certain very small plans may be treated as being in the individual market, rather than the group market; see the definition of individual market in this section.) Health insurance coverage means benefits consisting of medical care (provided directly, through insurance or reimbursement, or otherwise) under any hospital or medical service policy or certificate, hospital or medical service plan contract, or HMO contract offered by a health insurance issuer. Health insurance coverage includes group health insurance coverage, individual health insurance coverage, and short-term, limited-duration insurance. Health insurance issuer or issuer means an insurance company, insurance service, or insurance organization (including an HMO) that is required to be licensed to engage in the business of insurance in a State and that is subject to State law that regulates insurance (within the meaning of section 514(b)(2) of the Act). Such term does not include a group health plan. Health maintenance organization or HMO means— (1) A federally qualified health maintenance organization (as defined in section 1301(a) of the PHS Act); (2) An organization recognized under State law as a health maintenance organization; or (3) A similar organization regulated under State law for solvency in the same manner and to the same extent as such a health maintenance organization. Individual health insurance coverage means health insurance coverage offered to individuals in the individual market, but does not include short-term, limited-duration insurance. Individual health insurance coverage can include dependent coverage. Individual market means the market for health insurance coverage offered to individuals other than in connection with a group health plan. Unless a State elects otherwise in accordance with section 2791(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the PHS Act, such term also includes coverage offered in connection with a group health plan that has fewer than two participants who are current employees on the first day of the plan year. Internal Revenue Code means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Title 26, United States Code). Issuer means a health insurance issuer. Late enrollee means an individual whose enrollment in a plan is a late enrollment. Late enrollment means enrollment of an individual under a group health plan other than on the earliest date on which coverage can become effective for the individual under the terms of the plan; or through special enrollment. (For rules relating to special enrollment, see § 2590.701-6.) If an individual ceases to be eligible for coverage under a plan, and then subsequently becomes eligible for coverage under the plan, only the individual's most recent period of eligibility is taken into account in determining whether the individual is a late enrollee under the plan with respect to the most recent period of coverage. Similar rules apply if an individual again becomes eligible for coverage following a suspension of coverage that applied generally under the plan. Medical care means amounts paid for— (1) The diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or amounts paid for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body; (2) Transportation primarily for and essential to medical care referred to in paragraph (1) of this definition; and (3) Insurance covering medical care referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this definition. Medical condition or condition means any condition, whether physical or mental, including, but not limited to, any condition resulting from illness, injury (whether or not the injury is accidental), pregnancy, or congenital malformation. However, genetic information is not a condition. Participant means participant within the meaning of section 3(7) of the Act. Placement, or being placed, for adoption means the assumption and retention of a legal obligation for total or partial support of a child by a person with whom the child has been placed in anticipation of the child's adoption. The child's placement for adoption with such person ends upon the termination of such legal obligation. Plan year means the year that is designated as the plan year in the plan document of a group health plan, except that if the plan document does not designate a plan year or if there is no plan document, the plan year is— (1) The deductible or limit year used under the plan; (2) If the plan does not impose deductibles or limits on a yearly basis, then the plan year is the policy year; (3) If the plan does not impose deductibles or limits on a yearly basis, and either the plan is not insured or the insurance policy is not renewed on an annual basis, then the plan year is the employer's taxable year; or (4) In any other case, the plan year is the calendar year. Preexisting condition exclusion means a limitation or exclusion of benefits (including a denial of coverage) based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage (or if coverage is denied, the date of the denial) under a group health plan or group or individual health insurance coverage (or other coverage provided to Federally eligible individuals pursuant to 45 CFR part 148), whether or not any medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received before that day. A preexisting condition exclusion includes any limitation or exclusion of benefits (including a denial of coverage) applicable to an individual as a result of information relating to an individual's health status before the individual's effective date of coverage (or if coverage is denied, the date of the denial) under a group health plan, or group or individual health insurance coverage (or other coverage provided to Federally eligible individuals pursuant to 45 CFR part 148), such as a condition identified as a result of a pre-enrollment questionnaire or physical examination given to the individual, or review of medical records relating to the pre-enrollment period. Public health plan means public health plan within the meaning of § 2590.701-4(a)(1)(ix). Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) means the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201, et seq.). Short-term, limited-duration insurance means health insurance coverage provided pursuant to a policy, certificate, or contract of insurance with an issuer that meets the conditions of paragraph (1) of this definition. (1) Short-term, limited-duration insurance means health insurance coverage provided pursuant to a policy, certificate, or contract of insurance with an issuer that: (i) Has an expiration date specified in the policy, certificate, or contract of insurance that is no more than 3 months after the original effective date of the policy, certificate, or contract of insurance, and taking into account any renewals or extensions, has a duration no longer than 4 months in total. For purposes of this paragraph (1)(i), a renewal or extension includes the term of a new short-term, limited-duration insurance policy, certificate, or contract of insurance issued by the same issuer, or if the issuer is a member of a controlled group, any other issuer that is a member of such controlled group, to the same policyholder within the 12-month period beginning on the original effective date of the initial policy, certificate, or contract of insurance; and (ii) Displays prominently on the first page (in either paper or electronic form, including on a website) of the policy, certificate, or contract of insurance, and in any marketing, application, and enrollment materials (including reenrollment materials) provided to individuals at or before the time an individual has the opportunity to enroll (or reenroll) in the coverage, in at least 14-point font, the language in the following notice: (2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(i) of this definition, the term “controlled group” means any group treated as a single employer under section 52(a), 52(b), 414(m), or 414(o) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. (3) If any provision of this definition is held to be invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any entity or circumstance, or stayed pending further agency action, the provision shall be construed so as to continue to give the maximum effect to the provision permitted by law, along with other provisions not found invalid or unenforceable, including as applied to entities not similarly situated or to dissimilar circumstances, unless such holding is that the provision is invalid and unenforceable in all circumstances, in which event the provision shall be severable from the remainder of the definition and shall not affect the remainder thereof. Significant break in coverage means a significant break in coverage within the meaning of § 2590.701-4(b)(2)(iii). Special enrollment means enrollment in a group health plan or group health insurance coverage under the rights described in § 2590.701-6. State means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. State health benefits risk pool means a State health benefits risk pool within the meaning of § 2590.701-4(a)(1)(vii). Travel insurance means insurance coverage for personal risks incident to planned travel, which may include, but is not limited to, interruption or cancellation of trip or event, loss of baggage or personal effects, damages to accommodations or rental vehicles, and sickness, accident, disability, or death occurring during travel, provided that the health benefits are not offered on a stand-alone basis and are incidental to other coverage. For this purpose, the term travel insurance does not include major medical plans that provide comprehensive medical protection for travelers with trips lasting 6 months or longer, including, for example, those working overseas as an expatriate or military personnel being deployed. Waiting period means waiting period within the meaning of § 2590.715-2708(b).

§ 2590.701-3 Limitations on preexisting condition exclusion period. (a) Preexisting condition exclusion defined. (1) A preexisting condition exclusion means a preexisting condition exclusion within the meaning of § 2590.701-2. (2) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (a)(1) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the exclusion of benefits for any prosthesis if the body part was lost before the effective date of coverage is a preexisting condition exclusion because it operates to exclude benefits for a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage under the policy. The exclusion of benefits, therefore, is prohibited. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan provision excluding cosmetic surgery benefits for individuals injured before enrolling in the plan is a preexisting condition exclusion because it operates to exclude benefits relating to a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is prohibited. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the requirement to obtain advance approval of a treatment plan is a preexisting condition exclusion because it limits benefits for a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is prohibited. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, counting benefits for a specific condition provided under prior health coverage against a treatment limit for that condition is a preexisting condition exclusion because it operates to limit benefits for a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is prohibited. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, the requirement to be covered under the plan for 12 months to be eligible for pregnancy benefits is a subterfuge for a preexisting condition exclusion because it is designed to exclude benefits for a condition (pregnancy) that arose before the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is prohibited. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 6, the exclusion of coverage for treatment of congenital heart conditions is a preexisting condition exclusion because it operates to exclude benefits relating to a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is prohibited. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 7, the exclusion of coverage for treatment of cleft palate is not a preexisting condition exclusion because the exclusion applies regardless of when the condition arose relative to the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is not prohibited. (But see 45 CFR 147.150, which may require coverage of cleft palate as an essential health benefit for health insurance coverage in the individual or small group market, depending on the essential health benefits benchmark plan as defined in 45 CFR 156.20). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 8, the exclusion of coverage for treatment of cleft palate for individuals who have not been covered under the plan from the date of birth operates to exclude benefits in relation to a condition based on the fact that the condition was present before the effective date of coverage. The plan provision, therefore, is prohibited. (b) General rules. See § 2590.715-2704 for rules prohibiting the imposition of a preexisting condition exclusion.

§ 2590.701-4 Rules relating to creditable coverage. (a) General rules—(1) Creditable coverage. For purposes of this section, except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the term creditable coverage means coverage of an individual under any of the following: (i) A group health plan as defined in § 2590.732(a). (ii) Health insurance coverage as defined in § 2590.701-2 (whether or not the entity offering the coverage is subject to Part 7 of Subtitle B of Title I of the Act, and without regard to whether the coverage is offered in the group market, the individual market, or otherwise). (iii) Part A or B of Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (Medicare). (iv) Title XIX of the Social Security Act (Medicaid), other than coverage consisting solely of benefits under section 1928 of the Social Security Act (the program for distribution of pediatric vaccines). (v) Title 10 U.S.C. Chapter 55 (medical and dental care for members and certain former members of the uniformed services, and for their dependents; for purposes of Title 10 U.S.C. Chapter 55, uniformed services means the armed forces and the Commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and of the Public Health Service). (vi) A medical care program of the Indian Health Service or of a tribal organization. (vii) A State health benefits risk pool. For purposes of this section, a State health benefits risk pool means— (A) An organization qualifying under section 501(c)(26) of the Internal Revenue Code; (B) A qualified high risk pool described in section 2744(c)(2) of the PHS Act; or (C) Any other arrangement sponsored by a State, the membership composition of which is specified by the State and which is established and maintained primarily to provide health coverage for individuals who are residents of such State and who, by reason of the existence or history of a medical condition— (1) Are unable to acquire medical care coverage for such condition through insurance or from an HMO, or (2) Are able to acquire such coverage only at a rate which is substantially in excess of the rate for such coverage through the membership organization. (viii) A health plan offered under Title 5 U.S.C. Chapter 89 (the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program). (ix) A public health plan. For purposes of this section, a public health plan means any plan established or maintained by a State, the U.S. government, a foreign country, or any political subdivision of a State, the U.S. government, or a foreign country that provides health coverage to individuals who are enrolled in the plan. (x) A health benefit plan under section 5(e) of the Peace Corps Act (22 U.S.C. 2504(e)). (xi) Title XXI of the Social Security Act (State Children's Health Insurance Program). (2) Excluded coverage. Creditable coverage does not include coverage of solely excepted benefits (described in § 2590.732). (b) Counting creditable coverage rules superseded by prohibition on preexisting condition exclusion. See § 2590.715-2704 for rules prohibiting the imposition of a preexisting condition exclusion.

§ 2590.701-5 Evidence of creditable coverage. (a) In general. The rules for providing certificates of creditable coverage and demonstrating creditable coverage have been superseded by the prohibition on preexisting condition exclusions. See § 2590.715-2704 for rules prohibiting the imposition of a preexisting condition exclusion. (b) Applicability. The provisions of this section apply beginning December 31, 2014.

§ 2590.701-6 Special enrollment periods. (a) Special enrollment for certain individuals who lose coverage—(1) In general. A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, is required to permit current employees and dependents (as defined in § 2590.701-2) who are described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section to enroll for coverage under the terms of the plan if the conditions in paragraph (a)(3) of this section are satisfied. The special enrollment rights under this paragraph (a) apply without regard to the dates on which an individual would otherwise be able to enroll under the plan. (2) Individuals eligible for special enrollment—(i) When employee loses coverage. A current employee and any dependents (including the employee's spouse) each are eligible for special enrollment in any benefit package under the plan (subject to plan eligibility rules conditioning dependent enrollment on enrollment of the employee) if— (A) The employee and the dependents are otherwise eligible to enroll in the benefit package; (B) When coverage under the plan was previously offered, the employee had coverage under any group health plan or health insurance coverage; and (C) The employee satisfies the conditions of paragraph (a)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section and, if applicable, paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section. (ii) When dependent loses coverage. (A) A dependent of a current employee (including the employee's spouse) and the employee each are eligible for special enrollment in any benefit package under the plan (subject to plan eligibility rules conditioning dependent enrollment on enrollment of the employee) if— (1) The dependent and the employee are otherwise eligible to enroll in the benefit package; (2) When coverage under the plan was previously offered, the dependent had coverage under any group health plan or health insurance coverage; and (3) The dependent satisfies the conditions of paragraph (a)(3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section and, if applicable, paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section. (B) However, the plan or issuer is not required to enroll any other dependent unless that dependent satisfies the criteria of this paragraph (a)(2)(ii), or the employee satisfies the criteria of paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section. (iii) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (a)(2) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, because A satisfies the conditions for special enrollment under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, A, A's spouse, and A's dependent children are eligible for special enrollment under X's plan. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, because A and A's spouse were covered under Q when they did not enroll in P during open enrollment, they satisfy the conditions for special enrollment under paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. Consequently, A and A's spouse are eligible for special enrollment under P. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, because B's spouse satisfies the conditions for special enrollment under paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section, both B and B's spouse are eligible for special enrollment under X's plan. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, because A's spouse satisfies the conditions for special enrollment under paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section, both A and A's spouse can enroll in either benefit package under X's plan. Therefore, if A requests enrollment in accordance with the requirements of this section, the plan must allow A and A's spouse to enroll in the indemnity option. (3) Conditions for special enrollment—(i) Loss of eligibility for coverage. In the case of an employee or dependent who has coverage that is not COBRA continuation coverage, the conditions of this paragraph (a)(3)(i) are satisfied at the time the coverage is terminated as a result of loss of eligibility (regardless of whether the individual is eligible for or elects COBRA continuation coverage). Loss of eligibility under this paragraph (a)(3)(i) does not include a loss due to the failure of the employee or dependent to pay premiums on a timely basis or termination of coverage for cause (such as making a fraudulent claim or an intentional misrepresentation of a material fact in connection with the plan). Loss of eligibility for coverage under this paragraph (a)(3)(i) includes (but is not limited to)— (A) Loss of eligibility for coverage as a result of legal separation, divorce, cessation of dependent status (such as attaining the maximum age to be eligible as a dependent child under the plan), death of an employee, termination of employment, reduction in the number of hours of employment, and any loss of eligibility for coverage after a period that is measured by reference to any of the foregoing; (B) In the case of coverage offered through an HMO, or other arrangement, in the individual market that does not provide benefits to individuals who no longer reside, live, or work in a service area, loss of coverage because an individual no longer resides, lives, or works in the service area (whether or not within the choice of the individual); (C) In the case of coverage offered through an HMO, or other arrangement, in the group market that does not provide benefits to individuals who no longer reside, live, or work in a service area, loss of coverage because an individual no longer resides, lives, or works in the service area (whether or not within the choice of the individual), and no other benefit package is available to the individual; and (D) A situation in which a plan no longer offers any benefits to the class of similarly situated individuals (as described in § 2590.702(d)) that includes the individual. (ii) Termination of employer contributions. In the case of an employee or dependent who has coverage that is not COBRA continuation coverage, the conditions of this paragraph (a)(3)(ii) are satisfied at the time employer contributions towards the employee's or dependent's coverage terminate. Employer contributions include contributions by any current or former employer that was contributing to coverage for the employee or dependent. (iii) Exhaustion of COBRA continuation coverage. In the case of an employee or dependent who has coverage that is COBRA continuation coverage, the conditions of this paragraph (a)(3)(iii) are satisfied at the time the COBRA continuation coverage is exhausted. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(3)(iii), an individual who satisfies the conditions for special enrollment of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, does not enroll, and instead elects and exhausts COBRA continuation coverage satisfies the conditions of this paragraph (a)(3)(iii). (Exhaustion of COBRA continuation coverage is defined in § 2590.701-2.) (iv) Written statement. A plan may require an employee declining coverage (for the employee or any dependent of the employee) to state in writing whether the coverage is being declined due to other health coverage only if, at or before the time the employee declines coverage, the employee is provided with notice of the requirement to provide the statement (and the consequences of the employee's failure to provide the statement). If a plan requires such a statement, and an employee does not provide it, the plan is not required to provide special enrollment to the employee or any dependent of the employee under this paragraph (a)(3). A plan must treat an employee as having satisfied the plan requirement permitted under this paragraph (a)(3)(iv) if the employee provides a written statement that coverage was being declined because the employee or dependent had other coverage; a plan cannot require anything more for the employee to satisfy the plan's requirement to provide a written statement. (For example, the plan cannot require that the statement be notarized.) (v) The rules of this paragraph (a)(3) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, employer contributions towards D's coverage ceased on January 1 and the conditions of paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section are satisfied on this date (regardless of whether D elects to pay the total cost and continue coverage under Y's plan). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, A has experienced a loss of eligibility for coverage that satisfies paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, and has satisfied the other conditions for special enrollment under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section. Therefore, if A satisfies the other conditions of this paragraph (a), the plan must permit A to enroll in Option 2 as a special enrollee. (A may also be eligible to enroll in another group health plan, such as a plan maintained by the employer of A's spouse, as a special enrollee.) The outcome would be the same if Option 1 was terminated by an issuer and the plan made no other coverage available to A. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, C has satisfied the conditions for special enrollment under paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this section, and has satisfied the other conditions for special enrollment under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section. The special enrollment right that C had into Z's plan immediately after the loss of eligibility for coverage under X's plan was an offer of coverage under Z's plan. When C later exhausts COBRA coverage under X's plan, C has a second special enrollment right in Z's plan. (4) Applying for special enrollment and effective date of coverage. (i) A plan or issuer must allow an employee a period of at least 30 days after an event described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section to request enrollment (for the employee or the employee's dependent). (ii) Coverage must begin no later than the first day of the first calendar month beginning after the date the plan or issuer receives the request for special enrollment. (b) Special enrollment with respect to certain dependent beneficiaries—(1) In general. A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, that makes coverage available with respect to dependents is required to permit individuals described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section to be enrolled for coverage in a benefit package under the terms of the plan. Paragraph (b)(3) of this section describes the required special enrollment period and the date by which coverage must begin. The special enrollment rights under this paragraph (b) apply without regard to the dates on which an individual would otherwise be able to enroll under the plan. (2) Individuals eligible for special enrollment. An individual is described in this paragraph (b)(2) if the individual is otherwise eligible for coverage in a benefit package under the plan and if the individual is described in paragraph (b)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), or (vi) of this section. (i) Current employee only. A current employee is described in this paragraph (b)(2)(i) if a person becomes a dependent of the individual through marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. (ii) Spouse of a participant only. An individual is described in this paragraph (b)(2)(ii) if either— (A) The individual becomes the spouse of a participant; or (B) The individual is a spouse of a participant and a child becomes a dependent of the participant through birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. (iii) Current employee and spouse. A current employee and an individual who is or becomes a spouse of such an employee, are described in this paragraph (b)(2)(iii) if either— (A) The employee and the spouse become married; or (B) The employee and spouse are married and a child becomes a dependent of the employee through birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. (iv) Dependent of a participant only. An individual is described in this paragraph (b)(2)(iv) if the individual is a dependent (as defined in § 2590.701-2) of a participant and the individual has become a dependent of the participant through marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. (v) Current employee and a new dependent. A current employee and an individual who is a dependent of the employee, are described in this paragraph (b)(2)(v) if the individual becomes a dependent of the employee through marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. (vi) Current employee, spouse, and a new dependent. A current employee, the employee's spouse, and the employee's dependent are described in this paragraph (b)(2)(vi) if the dependent becomes a dependent of the employee through marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. (3) Applying for special enrollment and effective date of coverage—(i) Request. A plan or issuer must allow an individual a period of at least 30 days after the date of the marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption (or, if dependent coverage is not generally made available at the time of the marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption, a period of at least 30 days after the date the plan makes dependent coverage generally available) to request enrollment (for the individual or the individual's dependent). (ii) Reasonable procedures for special enrollment. [Reserved] (iii) Date coverage must begin—(A) Marriage. In the case of marriage, coverage must begin no later than the first day of the first calendar month beginning after the date the plan or issuer receives the request for special enrollment. (B) Birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. Coverage must begin in the case of a dependent's birth on the date of birth and in the case of a dependent's adoption or placement for adoption no later than the date of such adoption or placement for adoption (or, if dependent coverage is not made generally available at the time of the birth, adoption, or placement for adoption, the date the plan makes dependent coverage available). (4) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (b) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the conditions for special enrollment of an employee with a spouse and new dependent under paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section are satisfied. If A satisfies the conditions of paragraph (b)(3) of this section for requesting enrollment timely, the plan will satisfy this paragraph (b) if it allows A to enroll either with employee-only coverage, with employee-plus-spouse coverage (for A and B), or with family coverage (for A, B, and C). The plan must allow whatever coverage is chosen to begin on March 15, the date of C's birth. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, D and E satisfy the conditions for special enrollment under paragraphs (b)(2)(v) and (b)(3) of this section. Therefore, the plan must allow D and E to enroll in the indemnity coverage, effective as of the date of the placement for adoption. (c) Notice of special enrollment. At or before the time an employee is initially offered the opportunity to enroll in a group health plan, the plan must furnish the employee with a notice of special enrollment that complies with the requirements of this paragraph (c). (1) Description of special enrollment rights. The notice of special enrollment must include a description of special enrollment rights. The following model language may be used to satisfy this requirement: If you are declining enrollment for yourself or your dependents (including your spouse) because of other health insurance or group health plan coverage, you may be able to enroll yourself and your dependents in this plan if you or your dependents lose eligibility for that other coverage (or if the employer stops contributing towards your or your dependents' other coverage). However, you must request enrollment within [insert “30 days” or any longer period that applies under the plan] after your or your dependents' other coverage ends (or after the employer stops contributing toward the other coverage). In addition, if you have a new dependent as a result of marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption, you may be able to enroll yourself and your dependents. However, you must request enrollment within [insert “30 days” or any longer period that applies under the plan] after the marriage, birth, adoption, or placement for adoption. To request special enrollment or obtain more information, contact [insert the name, title, telephone number, and any additional contact information of the appropriate plan representative]. (2) Additional information that may be required. The notice of special enrollment must also include, if applicable, the notice described in paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this section (the notice required to be furnished to an individual declining coverage if the plan requires the reason for declining coverage to be in writing). (d) Treatment of special enrollees. (1) If an individual requests enrollment while the individual is entitled to special enrollment under either paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, the individual is a special enrollee, even if the request for enrollment coincides with a late enrollment opportunity under the plan. Therefore, the individual cannot be treated as a late enrollee. (2) Special enrollees must be offered all the benefit packages available to similarly situated individuals who enroll when first eligible. For this purpose, any difference in benefits or cost-sharing requirements for different individuals constitutes a different benefit package. In addition, a special enrollee cannot be required to pay more for coverage than a similarly situated individual who enrolls in the same coverage when first eligible. (3) The rules of this section are illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, B is a special enrollee. Therefore, even though B's request for enrollment coincides with an open enrollment period, B's coverage is required to be made effective no later than December 1 (rather than the plan's January 1 effective date for late enrollees).

§ 2590.701-7 HMO affiliation period as an alternative to a preexisting condition exclusion. The rules for HMO affiliation periods have been superseded by the prohibition on preexisting condition exclusions. See § 2590.715-2704 for rules prohibiting the imposition of a preexisting condition exclusion.

§ 2590.701-8 Interaction With the Family and Medical Leave Act. [Reserved]

§ 2590.702 Prohibiting discrimination against participants and beneficiaries based on a health factor. (a) Health factors. (1) The term health factor means, in relation to an individual, any of the following health status-related factors: (i) Health status; (ii) Medical condition (including both physical and mental illnesses), as defined in § 2590.701-2; (iii) Claims experience; (iv) Receipt of health care; (v) Medical history; (vi) Genetic information, as defined in § 2590.702-1(a)(3) of this Part. (vii) Evidence of insurability; or (viii) Disability. (2) Evidence of insurability includes— (i) Conditions arising out of acts of domestic violence; and (ii) Participation in activities such as motorcycling, snowmobiling, all-terrain vehicle riding, horseback riding, skiing, and other similar activities. (3) The decision whether health coverage is elected for an individual (including the time chosen to enroll, such as under special enrollment or late enrollment) is not, itself, within the scope of any health factor. (However, under § 2590.701-6, a plan or issuer must treat special enrollees the same as similarly situated individuals who are enrolled when first eligible.) (b) Prohibited discrimination in rules for eligibility—(1) In general. (i) A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, may not establish any rule for eligibility (including continued eligibility) of any individual to enroll for benefits under the terms of the plan or group health insurance coverage that discriminates based on any health factor that relates to that individual or a dependent of that individual. This rule is subject to the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this section (explaining how this rule applies to benefits), paragraph (d) of this section (containing rules for establishing groups of similarly situated individuals), paragraph (e) of this section (relating to nonconfinement, actively-at-work, and other service requirements), paragraph (f) of this section (relating to wellness programs), and paragraph (g) of this section (permitting favorable treatment of individuals with adverse health factors). (ii) For purposes of this section, rules for eligibility include, but are not limited to, rules relating to— (A) Enrollment; (B) The effective date of coverage; (C) Waiting (or affiliation) periods; (D) Late and special enrollment; (E) Eligibility for benefit packages (including rules for individuals to change their selection among benefit packages); (F) Benefits (including rules relating to covered benefits, benefit restrictions, and cost-sharing mechanisms such as coinsurance, copayments, and deductibles), as described in paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section; (G) Continued eligibility; and (H) Terminating coverage (including disenrollment) of any individual under the plan. (iii) The rules of this paragraph (b)(1) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the requirement to pass a physical examination in order to enroll in the plan is a rule for eligibility that discriminates based on one or more health factors and thus violates this paragraph (b)(1). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the requirement to provide evidence of good health in order to be eligible for late enrollment in the HMO option is a rule for eligibility that discriminates based on one or more health factors and thus violates this paragraph (b)(1). However, if the plan did not require evidence of good health but limited late enrollees to the HMO option, the plan's rules for eligibility would not discriminate based on any health factor, and thus would not violate this paragraph (b)(1), because the time an individual chooses to enroll is not, itself, within the scope of any health factor. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, excluding from the plan individuals who participate in recreational activities, such as motorcycling, is a rule for eligibility that discriminates based on one more health factors and thus violates this paragraph (b)(1). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, the issuer's exclusion of A and A's dependents from coverage is a rule for eligibility that discriminates based on one or more health factors, and thus violates this paragraph (b)(1). (If the employer is a small employer under 45 CFR 144.103 (generally, an employer with 50 or fewer employees), the issuer also may violate 45 CFR 146.150, which requires issuers to offer all the policies they sell in the small group market on a guaranteed available basis to all small employers and to accept every eligible individual in every small employer group.) If the plan provides coverage through this policy and does not provide equivalent coverage for A and A's dependents through other means, the plan will also violate this paragraph (b)(1). (2) Application to benefits—(i) General rule. (A) Under this section, a group health plan or group health insurance issuer is not required to provide coverage for any particular benefit to any group of similarly situated individuals. (B) However, benefits provided under a plan must be uniformly available to all similarly situated individuals (as described in paragraph (d) of this section). Likewise, any restriction on a benefit or benefits must apply uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and must not be directed at individual participants or beneficiaries based on any health factor of the participants or beneficiaries (determined based on all the relevant facts and circumstances). Thus, for example, a plan may limit or exclude benefits in relation to a specific disease or condition, limit or exclude benefits for certain types of treatments or drugs, or limit or exclude benefits based on a determination of whether the benefits are experimental or not medically necessary, but only if the benefit limitation or exclusion applies uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries based on any health factor of the participants or beneficiaries. In addition, a plan or issuer may require the satisfaction of a deductible, copayment, coinsurance, or other cost-sharing requirement in order to obtain a benefit if the limit or cost-sharing requirement applies uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries based on any health factor of the participants or beneficiaries. In the case of a cost-sharing requirement, see also paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, which permits variances in the application of a cost-sharing mechanism made available under a wellness program. (Whether any plan provision or practice with respect to benefits complies with this paragraph (b)(2)(i) does not affect whether the provision or practice is permitted under ERISA, the Affordable Care Act (including the requirements related to essential health benefits), the Americans with Disabilities Act, or any other law, whether State or Federal.) (C) For purposes of this paragraph (b)(2)(i), a plan amendment applicable to all individuals in one or more groups of similarly situated individuals under the plan and made effective no earlier than the first day of the first plan year after the amendment is adopted is not considered to be directed at any individual participants or beneficiaries. (D) The rules of this paragraph (b)(2)(i) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the limit does not violate this paragraph (b)(2)(i) because coverage of the specific, non-essential health benefit up to $10,000 is available uniformly to each participant and beneficiary under the plan and because the limit is applied uniformly to all participants and beneficiaries and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (ii) Conclusion. The facts of this Example 2 strongly suggest that the plan modification is directed at B based on B's claim. Absent outweighing evidence to the contrary, the plan violates this paragraph (b)(2)(i). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the issuer violates this paragraph (b)(2)(i) because benefits for C's condition are available to other individuals in the group of similarly situated individuals that includes C but are not available to C. Thus, the benefits are not uniformly available to all similarly situated individuals. Even though the exclusionary rider is made effective the first day of the next plan year, because the rider does not apply to all similarly situated individuals, the issuer violates this paragraph (b)(2)(i). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, the limit does not violate this paragraph (b)(2)(i) because $2,000 of benefits for the treatment of TMJ are available uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and a plan may limit benefits covered in relation to a specific disease or condition if the limit applies uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (However, applying a lifetime limit on TMJ may violate § 2590.715-2711, if TMJ coverage is an essential health benefit, depending on the essential health benefits benchmark plan as defined in 45 CFR 156.20. This example does not address whether the plan provision is permissible under any other applicable law, including PHS Act section 2711 or the Americans with Disabilities Act.) (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, the lower lifetime limit for participants and beneficiaries with a congenital heart defect violates this paragraph (b)(2)(i) because benefits under the plan are not uniformly available to all similarly situated individuals and the plan's lifetime limit on benefits does not apply uniformly to all similarly situated individuals. Additionally, this plan provision is prohibited under § 2590.715-2711 because it imposes a lifetime limit on essential health benefits. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 6, the exclusion from coverage of drugs not listed on the drug formulary does not violate this paragraph (b)(2)(i) because benefits for prescription drugs listed on the formulary are uniformly available to all similarly situated individuals and because the exclusion of drugs not listed on the formulary applies uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 7, imposing different deductible and coinsurance requirements for prenatal doctor visits and other visits does not violate this paragraph (b)(2)(i) because a plan may establish different deductibles or coinsurance requirements for different services if the deductible or coinsurance requirement is applied uniformly to all similarly situated individuals and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (ii) Exception for wellness programs. A group health plan or group health insurance issuer may vary benefits, including cost-sharing mechanisms (such as a deductible, copayment, or coinsurance), based on whether an individual has met the standards of a wellness program that satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. (iii) Specific rule relating to source-of-injury exclusions. (A) If a group health plan or group health insurance coverage generally provides benefits for a type of injury, the plan or issuer may not deny benefits otherwise provided for treatment of the injury if the injury results from an act of domestic violence or a medical condition (including both physical and mental health conditions). This rule applies in the case of an injury resulting from a medical condition even if the condition is not diagnosed before the injury. (B) The rules of this paragraph (b)(2)(iii) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the suicide attempt is the result of a medical condition (depression). Accordingly, the denial of benefits for the treatments of D's injuries violates the requirements of this paragraph (b)(2)(iii) because the plan provision excludes benefits for treatment of an injury resulting from a medical condition. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan provision that denies benefits based on the source of an injury does not restrict benefits based on an act of domestic violence or any medical condition. Therefore, the provision is permissible under this paragraph (b)(2)(iii) and does not violate this section. (However, if the plan did not allow E to enroll in the plan (or applied different rules for eligibility to E) because E frequently participates in bungee jumping, the plan would violate paragraph (b)(1) of this section.) (c) Prohibited discrimination in premiums or contributions—(1) In general. (i) A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, may not require an individual, as a condition of enrollment or continued enrollment under the plan or group health insurance coverage, to pay a premium or contribution that is greater than the premium or contribution for a similarly situated individual (described in paragraph (d) of this section) enrolled in the plan or group health insurance coverage based on any health factor that relates to the individual or a dependent of the individual. (ii) Discounts, rebates, payments in kind, and any other premium differential mechanisms are taken into account in determining an individual's premium or contribution rate. (For rules relating to cost-sharing mechanisms, see paragraph (b)(2) of this section (addressing benefits).) (2) Rules relating to premium rates—(i) Group rating based on health factors not restricted under this section. Nothing in this section restricts the aggregate amount that an employer may be charged for coverage under a group health plan. But see § 2590.702-1(b) of this Part, which prohibits adjustments in group premium or contribution rates based on genetic information. (ii) List billing based on a health factor prohibited. However, a group health insurance issuer, or a group health plan, may not quote or charge an employer (or an individual) a different premium for an individual in a group of similarly situated individuals based on a health factor. (But see paragraph (g) of this section permitting favorable treatment of individuals with adverse health factors.) (iii) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (c)(2) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the issuer does not violate the provisions of this paragraph (c)(2) because the issuer blends the rate so that the employer is not quoted a higher rate for F than for a similarly situated individual based on F's claims experience. (However, if the issuer used genetic information in computing the group rate, it would violate § 2590.702-1(b) of this Part.) (3) Exception for wellness programs. Notwithstanding paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section, a plan or issuer may vary the amount of premium or contribution it requires similarly situated individuals to pay based on whether an individual has met the standards of a wellness program that satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. (d) Similarly situated individuals. The requirements of this section apply only within a group of individuals who are treated as similarly situated individuals. A plan or issuer may treat participants as a group of similarly situated individuals separate from beneficiaries. In addition, participants may be treated as two or more distinct groups of similarly situated individuals and beneficiaries may be treated as two or more distinct groups of similarly situated individuals in accordance with the rules of this paragraph (d). Moreover, if individuals have a choice of two or more benefit packages, individuals choosing one benefit package may be treated as one or more groups of similarly situated individuals distinct from individuals choosing another benefit package. (1) Participants. Subject to paragraph (d)(3) of this section, a plan or issuer may treat participants as two or more distinct groups of similarly situated individuals if the distinction between or among the groups of participants is based on a bona fide employment-based classification consistent with the employer's usual business practice. Whether an employment-based classification is bona fide is determined on the basis of all the relevant facts and circumstances. Relevant facts and circumstances include whether the employer uses the classification for purposes independent of qualification for health coverage (for example, determining eligibility for other employee benefits or determining other terms of employment). Subject to paragraph (d)(3) of this section, examples of classifications that, based on all the relevant facts and circumstances, may be bona fide include full-time versus part-time status, different geographic location, membership in a collective bargaining unit, date of hire, length of service, current employee versus former employee status, and different occupations. However, a classification based on any health factor is not a bona fide employment-based classification, unless the requirements of paragraph (g) of this section are satisfied (permitting favorable treatment of individuals with adverse health factors). (2) Beneficiaries. (i) Subject to paragraph (d)(3) of this section, a plan or issuer may treat beneficiaries as two or more distinct groups of similarly situated individuals if the distinction between or among the groups of beneficiaries is based on any of the following factors: (A) A bona fide employment-based classification of the participant through whom the beneficiary is receiving coverage; (B) Relationship to the participant (for example, as a spouse or as a dependent child); (C) Marital status; (D) With respect to children of a participant, age or student status; or (E) Any other factor if the factor is not a health factor. (ii) Paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section does not prevent more favorable treatment of individuals with adverse health factors in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section. (3) Discrimination directed at individuals. Notwithstanding paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section, if the creation or modification of an employment or coverage classification is directed at individual participants or beneficiaries based on any health factor of the participants or beneficiaries, the classification is not permitted under this paragraph (d), unless it is permitted under paragraph (g) of this section (permitting favorable treatment of individuals with adverse health factors). Thus, if an employer modified an employment-based classification to single out, based on a health factor, individual participants and beneficiaries and deny them health coverage, the new classification would not be permitted under this section. (4) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (d) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, treating the full-time and part-time employees as two separate groups of similarly situated individuals is permitted under this paragraph (d) because the classification is bona fide and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, treating spouses and children differently by imposing an age limitation on children, but not on spouses, is permitted under this paragraph (d). Specifically, the distinction between spouses and children is permitted under paragraph (d)(2) of this section and is not prohibited under paragraph (d)(3) of this section because it is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. It is also permissible to treat children who are under age 26 (or full-time students under age 29) as a group of similarly situated individuals separate from those who are age 26 or older (or age 29 or older if they are not full-time students) because the classification is permitted under paragraph (d)(2) of this section and is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the classification is permitted under this paragraph (d) because there is a distinction based on a bona fide employment-based classification consistent with the employer's usual business practice and the distinction is not directed at individual participants and beneficiaries. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, imposing additional eligibility requirements on former employees is permitted because a classification that distinguishes between current and former employees is a bona fide employment-based classification that is permitted under this paragraph (d), provided that it is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. In addition, it is permissible to distinguish between former employees who satisfy the service requirement and those who do not, provided that the distinction is not directed at individual participants or beneficiaries. (However, former employees who do not satisfy the eligibility criteria may, nonetheless, be eligible for continued coverage pursuant to a COBRA continuation provision or similar State law.) (ii) Conclusion. Under the facts of this Example 5, changing the coverage classification for G based on the existing employment classification for G is not permitted under this paragraph (d) because the creation of the new coverage classification for G is directed at G based on one or more health factors. (e) Nonconfinement and actively-at-work provisions—(1) Nonconfinement provisions—(i) General rule. Under the rules of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a plan or issuer may not establish a rule for eligibility (as described in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section) or set any individual's premium or contribution rate based on whether an individual is confined to a hospital or other health care institution. In addition, under the rules of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, a plan or issuer may not establish a rule for eligibility or set any individual's premium or contribution rate based on an individual's ability to engage in normal life activities, except to the extent permitted under paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) and (3) of this section (permitting plans and issuers, under certain circumstances, to distinguish among employees based on the performance of services). (ii) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (e)(1) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the plan violates this paragraph (e)(1) because the plan delays the effective date of coverage for dependents based on confinement to a hospital or other health care institution. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, Issuer N violates this paragraph (e)(1) because the group health insurance coverage restricts benefits (a rule for eligibility under paragraph (b)(1)) based on whether a dependent is confined to a hospital or other health care institution that is covered under an extension of benefits clause from a previous issuer. State law cannot change the obligation of Issuer N under this section. However, under State law Issuer M may also be responsible for providing benefits to such a dependent. In a case in which Issuer N has an obligation under this section to provide benefits and Issuer M has an obligation under State law to provide benefits, any State laws designed to prevent more than 100% reimbursement, such as State coordination-of-benefits laws, continue to apply. (2) Actively-at-work and continuous service provisions—(i) General rule. (A) Under the rules of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section and subject to the exception for the first day of work described in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, a plan or issuer may not establish a rule for eligibility (as described in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section) or set any individual's premium or contribution rate based on whether an individual is actively at work (including whether an individual is continuously employed), unless absence from work due to any health factor (such as being absent from work on sick leave) is treated, for purposes of the plan or health insurance coverage, as being actively at work. (B) The rules of this paragraph (e)(2)(i) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the plan violates this paragraph (e)(2) (and thus also violates paragraph (b) of this section). However, the plan would not violate paragraph (e)(2) or (b) of this section if, under the plan, an absence due to any health factor is considered being actively at work. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan violates this paragraph (e)(2) (and thus also paragraph (b) of this section) because the 90-day continuous service requirement is a rule for eligibility based on whether an individual is actively at work. However, the plan would not violate this paragraph (e)(2) or paragraph (b) of this section if, under the plan, an absence due to any health factor is not considered an absence for purposes of measuring 90 days of continuous service. (In addition, any eligibility provision that is time-based must comply with the requirements of PHS Act section 2708 and its implementing regulations.) (ii) Exception for the first day of work. (A) Notwithstanding the general rule in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section, a plan or issuer may establish a rule for eligibility that requires an individual to begin work for the employer sponsoring the plan (or, in the case of a multiemployer plan, to begin a job in covered employment) before coverage becomes effective, provided that such a rule for eligibility applies regardless of the reason for the absence. (B) The rules of this paragraph (e)(2)(ii) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the plan provision does not violate this section. However, if coverage for individuals who do not report to work on the first day they were scheduled to work for a reason unrelated to a health factor (such as vacation or bereavement) becomes effective on the first day they were scheduled to work, then the plan would violate this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan provision does not violate this section. However, as in Example 1, if coverage for individuals absent from work for reasons unrelated to a health factor became effective despite their absence, then the plan would violate this section. (3) Relationship to plan provisions defining similarly situated individuals. (i) Notwithstanding the rules of paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section, a plan or issuer may establish rules for eligibility or set any individual's premium or contribution rate in accordance with the rules relating to similarly situated individuals in paragraph (d) of this section. Accordingly, a plan or issuer may distinguish in rules for eligibility under the plan between full-time and part-time employees, between permanent and temporary or seasonal employees, between current and former employees, and between employees currently performing services and employees no longer performing services for the employer, subject to paragraph (d) of this section. However, other Federal or State laws (including the COBRA continuation provisions and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) may require an employee or the employee's dependents to be offered coverage and set limits on the premium or contribution rate even though the employee is not performing services. (ii) The rules of this paragraph (e)(3) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the plan provisions do not violate this section. However, if the plan treated individuals performing services for the employer for 30 or more hours per week, individuals on vacation leave, and individuals on bereavement leave as a group of similarly situated individuals separate from individuals on sick leave, the plan would violate this paragraph (e) (and thus also would violate paragraph (b) of this section) because groups of similarly situated individuals cannot be established based on a health factor (including the taking of sick leave) under paragraph (d) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan provision does not violate this section because, under the rules for similarly situated individuals allowing full-time employees to be treated differently than part-time employees, employees who work at least 250 hours in a three-month period can be treated differently than employees who fail to work 250 hours in that period. The result would be the same if the plan permitted individuals to apply excess hours from previous periods to satisfy the requirement for the current quarter. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the plan provision terminating B's coverage upon B's termination of employment does not violate this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, the plan provision terminating C's coverage upon the cessation of C's performance of services does not violate this section. (f) Nondiscriminatory wellness programs—in general. A wellness program is a program of health promotion or disease prevention. Paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (c)(3) of this section provide exceptions to the general prohibitions against discrimination based on a health factor for plan provisions that vary benefits (including cost-sharing mechanisms) or the premium or contribution for similarly situated individuals in connection with a wellness program that satisfies the requirements of this paragraph (f). (1) Definitions. The definitions in this paragraph (f)(1) govern in applying the provisions of this paragraph (f). (i) Reward. Except where expressly provided otherwise, references in this section to an individual obtaining a reward include both obtaining a reward (such as a discount or rebate of a premium or contribution, a waiver of all or part of a cost-sharing mechanism, an additional benefit, or any financial or other incentive) and avoiding a penalty (such as the absence of a premium surcharge or other financial or nonfinancial disincentive). References in this section to a plan providing a reward include both providing a reward (such as a discount or rebate of a premium or contribution, a waiver of all or part of a cost-sharing mechanism, an additional benefit, or any financial or other incentive) and imposing a penalty (such as a surcharge or other financial or nonfinancial disincentive). (ii) Participatory wellness programs. If none of the conditions for obtaining a reward under a wellness program is based on an individual satisfying a standard that is related to a health factor (or if a wellness program does not provide a reward), the wellness program is a participatory wellness program. Examples of participatory wellness programs are: (A) A program that reimburses employees for all or part of the cost for membership in a fitness center. (B) A diagnostic testing program that provides a reward for participation in that program and does not base any part of the reward on outcomes. (C) A program that encourages preventive care through the waiver of the copayment or deductible requirement under a group health plan for the costs of, for example, prenatal care or well-baby visits. (Note that, with respect to non-grandfathered plans, § 2590.715-2713 of this part requires benefits for certain preventive health services without the imposition of cost sharing.) (D) A program that reimburses employees for the costs of participating, or that otherwise provides a reward for participating, in a smoking cessation program without regard to whether the employee quits smoking. (E) A program that provides a reward to employees for attending a monthly, no-cost health education seminar. (F) A program that provides a reward to employees who complete a health risk assessment regarding current health status, without any further action (educational or otherwise) required by the employee with regard to the health issues identified as part of the assessment. (See also § 2590.702-1 for rules prohibiting collection of genetic information.) (iii) Health-contingent wellness programs. A health-contingent wellness program is a program that requires an individual to satisfy a standard related to a health factor to obtain a reward (or requires an individual to undertake more than a similarly situated individual based on a health factor in order to obtain the same reward). A health-contingent wellness program may be an activity-only wellness program or an outcome-based wellness program. (iv) Activity-only wellness programs. An activity-only wellness program is a type of health-contingent wellness program that requires an individual to perform or complete an activity related to a health factor in order to obtain a reward but does not require the individual to attain or maintain a specific health outcome. Examples include walking, diet, or exercise programs, which some individuals may be unable to participate in or complete (or have difficulty participating in or completing) due to a health factor, such as severe asthma, pregnancy, or a recent surgery. See paragraph (f)(3) of this section for requirements applicable to activity-only wellness programs. (v) Outcome-based wellness programs. An outcome-based wellness program is a type of health-contingent wellness program that requires an individual to attain or maintain a specific health outcome (such as not smoking or attaining certain results on biometric screenings) in order to obtain a reward. To comply with the rules of this paragraph (f), an outcome-based wellness program typically has two tiers. That is, for individuals who do not attain or maintain the specific health outcome, compliance with an educational program or an activity may be offered as an alternative to achieve the same reward. This alternative pathway, however, does not mean that the overall program, which has an outcome-based component, is not an outcome-based wellness program. That is, if a measurement, test, or screening is used as part of an initial standard and individuals who meet the standard are granted the reward, the program is considered an outcome-based wellness program. For example, if a wellness program tests individuals for specified medical conditions or risk factors (including biometric screening such as testing for high cholesterol, high blood pressure, abnormal body mass index, or high glucose level) and provides a reward to individuals identified as within a normal or healthy range for these medical conditions or risk factors, while requiring individuals who are identified as outside the normal or healthy range (or at risk) to take additional steps (such as meeting with a health coach, taking a health or fitness course, adhering to a health improvement action plan, complying with a walking or exercise program, or complying with a health care provider's plan of care) to obtain the same reward, the program is an outcome-based wellness program. See paragraph (f)(4) of this section for requirements applicable to outcome-based wellness programs. (2) Requirement for participatory wellness programs. A participatory wellness program, as described in paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this section, does not violate the provisions of this section only if participation in the program is made available to all similarly situated individuals, regardless of health status. (3) Requirements for activity-only wellness programs. A health-contingent wellness program that is an activity-only wellness program, as described in paragraph (f)(1)(iv) of this section, does not violate the provisions of this section only if all of the following requirements are satisfied: (i) Frequency of opportunity to qualify. The program must give individuals eligible for the program the opportunity to qualify for the reward under the program at least once per year. (ii) Size of reward. The reward for the activity-only wellness program, together with the reward for other health-contingent wellness programs with respect to the plan, must not exceed the applicable percentage (as defined in paragraph (f)(5) of this section) of the total cost of employee-only coverage under the plan. However, if, in addition to employees, any class of dependents (such as spouses, or spouses and dependent children) may participate in the wellness program, the reward must not exceed the applicable percentage of the total cost of the coverage in which an employee and any dependents are enrolled. For purposes of this paragraph (f)(3)(ii), the cost of coverage is determined based on the total amount of employer and employee contributions towards the cost of coverage for the benefit package under which the employee is (or the employee and any dependents are) receiving coverage. (iii) Reasonable design. The program must be reasonably designed to promote health or prevent disease. A program satisfies this standard if it has a reasonable chance of improving the health of, or preventing disease in, participating individuals, and it is not overly burdensome, is not a subterfuge for discriminating based on a health factor, and is not highly suspect in the method chosen to promote health or prevent disease. This determination is based on all the relevant facts and circumstances. (iv) Uniform availability and reasonable alternative standards. The full reward under the activity-only wellness program must be available to all similarly situated individuals. (A) Under this paragraph (f)(3)(iv), a reward under an activity-only wellness program is not available to all similarly situated individuals for a period unless the program meets both of the following requirements: (1) The program allows a reasonable alternative standard (or waiver of the otherwise applicable standard) for obtaining the reward for any individual for whom, for that period, it is unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition to satisfy the otherwise applicable standard; and (2) The program allows a reasonable alternative standard (or waiver of the otherwise applicable standard) for obtaining the reward for any individual for whom, for that period, it is medically inadvisable to attempt to satisfy the otherwise applicable standard. (B) While plans and issuers are not required to determine a particular reasonable alternative standard in advance of an individual's request for one, if an individual is described in either paragraph (f)(3)(iv)(A)(1) or (2) of this section, a reasonable alternative standard must be furnished by the plan or issuer upon the individual's request or the condition for obtaining the reward must be waived. (C) All the facts and circumstances are taken into account in determining whether a plan or issuer has furnished a reasonable alternative standard, including but not limited to the following: (1) If the reasonable alternative standard is completion of an educational program, the plan or issuer must make the educational program available or assist the employee in finding such a program (instead of requiring an individual to find such a program unassisted), and may not require an individual to pay for the cost of the program. (2) The time commitment required must be reasonable (for example, requiring attendance nightly at a one-hour class would be unreasonable). (3) If the reasonable alternative standard is a diet program, the plan or issuer is not required to pay for the cost of food but must pay any membership or participation fee. (4) If an individual's personal physician states that a plan standard (including, if applicable, the recommendations of the plan's medical professional) is not medically appropriate for that individual, the plan or issuer must provide a reasonable alternative standard that accommodates the recommendations of the individual's personal physician with regard to medical appropriateness. Plans and issuers may impose standard cost sharing under the plan or coverage for medical items and services furnished pursuant to the physician's recommendations. (D) To the extent that a reasonable alternative standard under an activity-only wellness program is, itself, an activity-only wellness program, it must comply with the requirements of this paragraph (f)(3) in the same manner as if it were an initial program standard. (Thus, for example, if a plan or issuer provides a walking program as a reasonable alternative standard to a running program, individuals for whom it is unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition to complete the walking program (or for whom it is medically inadvisable to attempt to complete the walking program) must be provided a reasonable alternative standard to the walking program.) To the extent that a reasonable alternative standard under an activity-only wellness program is, itself, an outcome-based wellness program, it must comply with the requirements of paragraph (f)(4) of this section, including paragraph (f)(4)(iv)(D). (E) If reasonable under the circumstances, a plan or issuer may seek verification, such as a statement from an individual's personal physician, that a health factor makes it unreasonably difficult for the individual to satisfy, or medically inadvisable for the individual to attempt to satisfy, the otherwise applicable standard of an activity-only wellness program. Plans and issuers may seek verification with respect to requests for a reasonable alternative standard for which it is reasonable to determine that medical judgment is required to evaluate the validity of the request. (v) Notice of availability of reasonable alternative standard. The plan or issuer must disclose in all plan materials describing the terms of an activity-only wellness program the availability of a reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward (and, if applicable, the possibility of waiver of the otherwise applicable standard), including contact information for obtaining a reasonable alternative standard and a statement that recommendations of an individual's personal physician will be accommodated. If plan materials merely mention that such a program is available, without describing its terms, this disclosure is not required. Sample language is provided in paragraph (f)(6) of this section, as well as in certain examples of this section. (vi) Example. The provisions of this paragraph (f)(3) are illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, the program satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this section because the walking program is reasonably designed to promote health and prevent disease. The program satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(3)(iv) of this section because the reward under the program is available to all similarly situated individuals. It accommodates individuals for whom it is unreasonably difficult to participate in the walking program due to a medical condition (or for whom it would be medically inadvisable to attempt to participate) by providing them with the reward even if they do not participate in the walking program (that is, by waiving the condition). The plan also complies with the disclosure requirement of paragraph (f)(3)(v) of this section. Thus, the plan satisfies paragraphs (f)(3)(iii), (iv), and (v) of this section. (4) Requirements for outcome-based wellness programs. A health-contingent wellness program that is an outcome-based wellness program, as described in paragraph (f)(1)(v) of this section, does not violate the provisions of this section only if all of the following requirements are satisfied: (i) Frequency of opportunity to qualify. The program must give individuals eligible for the program the opportunity to qualify for the reward under the program at least once per year. (ii) Size of reward. The reward for the outcome-based wellness program, together with the reward for other health-contingent wellness programs with respect to the plan, must not exceed the applicable percentage (as defined in paragraph (f)(5) of this section) of the total cost of employee-only coverage under the plan. However, if, in addition to employees, any class of dependents (such as spouses, or spouses and dependent children) may participate in the wellness program, the reward must not exceed the applicable percentage of the total cost of the coverage in which an employee and any dependents are enrolled. For purposes of this paragraph (f)(4)(ii), the cost of coverage is determined based on the total amount of employer and employee contributions towards the cost of coverage for the benefit package under which the employee is (or the employee and any dependents are) receiving coverage. (iii) Reasonable design. The program must be reasonably designed to promote health or prevent disease. A program satisfies this standard if it has a reasonable chance of improving the health of, or preventing disease in, participating individuals, and it is not overly burdensome, is not a subterfuge for discriminating based on a health factor, and is not highly suspect in the method chosen to promote health or prevent disease. This determination is based on all the relevant facts and circumstances. To ensure that an outcome-based wellness program is reasonably designed to improve health and does not act as a subterfuge for underwriting or reducing benefits based on a health factor, a reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward must be provided to any individual who does not meet the initial standard based on a measurement, test, or screening that is related to a health factor, as explained in paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section. (iv) Uniform availability and reasonable alternative standards. The full reward under the outcome-based wellness program must be available to all similarly situated individuals. (A) Under this paragraph (f)(4)(iv), a reward under an outcome-based wellness program is not available to all similarly situated individuals for a period unless the program allows a reasonable alternative standard (or waiver of the otherwise applicable standard) for obtaining the reward for any individual who does not meet the initial standard based on the measurement, test, or screening, as described in this paragraph (f)(4)(iv). (B) While plans and issuers are not required to determine a particular reasonable alternative standard in advance of an individual's request for one, if an individual is described in paragraph (f)(4)(iv)(A) of this section, a reasonable alternative standard must be furnished by the plan or issuer upon the individual's request or the condition for obtaining the reward must be waived. (C) All the facts and circumstances are taken into account in determining whether a plan or issuer has furnished a reasonable alternative standard, including but not limited to the following: (1) If the reasonable alternative standard is completion of an educational program, the plan or issuer must make the educational program available or assist the employee in finding such a program (instead of requiring an individual to find such a program unassisted), and may not require an individual to pay for the cost of the program. (2) The time commitment required must be reasonable (for example, requiring attendance nightly at a one-hour class would be unreasonable). (3) If the reasonable alternative standard is a diet program, the plan or issuer is not required to pay for the cost of food but must pay any membership or participation fee. (4) If an individual's personal physician states that a plan standard (including, if applicable, the recommendations of the plan's medical professional) is not medically appropriate for that individual, the plan or issuer must provide a reasonable alternative standard that accommodates the recommendations of the individual's personal physician with regard to medical appropriateness. Plans and issuers may impose standard cost sharing under the plan or coverage for medical items and services furnished pursuant to the physician's recommendations. (D) To the extent that a reasonable alternative standard under an outcome-based wellness program is, itself, an activity-only wellness program, it must comply with the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section in the same manner as if it were an initial program standard. To the extent that a reasonable alternative standard under an outcome-based wellness program is, itself, another outcome-based wellness program, it must comply with the requirements of this paragraph (f)(4), subject to the following special provisions: (1) The reasonable alternative standard cannot be a requirement to meet a different level of the same standard without additional time to comply that takes into account the individual's circumstances. For example, if the initial standard is to achieve a BMI less than 30, the reasonable alternative standard cannot be to achieve a BMI less than 31 on that same date. However, if the initial standard is to achieve a BMI less than 30, a reasonable alternative standard for the individual could be to reduce the individual's BMI by a small amount or small percentage, over a realistic period of time, such as within a year. (2) An individual must be given the opportunity to comply with the recommendations of the individual's personal physician as a second reasonable alternative standard to meeting the reasonable alternative standard defined by the plan or issuer, but only if the physician joins in the request. The individual can make a request to involve a personal physician's recommendations at any time and the personal physician can adjust the physician's recommendations at any time, consistent with medical appropriateness. (E) It is not reasonable to seek verification, such as a statement from an individual's personal physician, under an outcome-based wellness program that a health factor makes it unreasonably difficult for the individual to satisfy, or medically inadvisable for the individual to attempt to satisfy, the otherwise applicable standard as a condition of providing a reasonable alternative to the initial standard. However, if a plan or issuer provides an alternative standard to the otherwise applicable measurement, test, or screening that involves an activity that is related to a health factor, then the rules of paragraph (f)(3) of this section for activity-only wellness programs apply to that component of the wellness program and the plan or issuer may, if reasonable under the circumstances, seek verification that it is unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition for an individual to perform or complete the activity (or it is medically inadvisable to attempt to perform or complete the activity). (For example, if an outcome-based wellness program requires participants to maintain a certain healthy weight and provides a diet and exercise program for individuals who do not meet the targeted weight, a plan or issuer may seek verification, as described in paragraph (f)(3)(iv)(D) of this section, if reasonable under the circumstances, that a second reasonable alternative standard is needed for certain individuals because, for those individuals, it would be unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition to comply, or medically inadvisable to attempt to comply, with the diet and exercise program, due to a medical condition.) (v) Notice of availability of reasonable alternative standard. The plan or issuer must disclose in all plan materials describing the terms of an outcome-based wellness program, and in any disclosure that an individual did not satisfy an initial outcome-based standard, the availability of a reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward (and, if applicable, the possibility of waiver of the otherwise applicable standard), including contact information for obtaining a reasonable alternative standard and a statement that recommendations of an individual's personal physician will be accommodated. If plan materials merely mention that such a program is available, without describing its terms, this disclosure is not required. Sample language is provided in paragraph (f)(6) of this section, as well as in certain examples of this section. (vi) Examples. The provisions of this paragraph (f)(4) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the program is an outcome-based wellness program because the initial standard requires an individual to attain or maintain a specific health outcome (a certain cholesterol level) to obtain a reward. The program satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section because the cholesterol program is reasonably designed to promote health and prevent disease. The program satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section because it makes available to all participants who do not meet the cholesterol standard a reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward. Lastly, the plan also discloses in all materials describing the terms of the program and in any disclosure that an individual did not satisfy the initial outcome-based standard the availability of a reasonable alternative standard (including contact information and the individual's ability to involve his or her personal physician), as required by paragraph (f)(4)(v) of this section. Thus, the program satisfies the requirements of paragraphs (f)(4)(iii), (iv), and (v) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the wellness program does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section because the program does not accommodate the recommendations of the participant's personal physician with regard to medical appropriateness, as required under paragraph (f)(4)(iv)(C)(3) of this section. Thus, the program is not reasonably designed under paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section and is not available to all similarly situated individuals under paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section. The notice also does not provide all the content required under paragraph (f)(4)(v) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the wellness program satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section because the participant's personal physician may modify the action plan determined by the wellness program's physician or nurse practitioner at any time if the physician states that the recommendations are not medically appropriate, as required under paragraph (f)(4)(iv)(C)(3) of this section. Thus, the program is reasonably designed under paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section and is available to all similarly situated individuals under paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section. The notice, which includes a statement that recommendations of an individual's personal physician will be accommodated, also complies with paragraph (f)(4)(v) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, the program is an outcome-based wellness program because the initial standard requires an individual to attain or maintain a specific health outcome (a certain BMI level) to obtain a reward. The program satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section because it is reasonably designed to promote health and prevent disease. The program also satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section because it makes available to all individuals who do not satisfy the BMI standard a reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward (in this case, a walking program that is not unreasonably burdensome or impractical for individuals to comply with and that is otherwise reasonably designed based on all the relevant facts and circumstances). In addition, the walking program is, itself, an activity-only standard and the plan complies with the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section (including the requirement of paragraph (f)(3)(iv) that, if there are individuals for whom it is unreasonably difficult due to a medical condition to comply, or for whom it is medically inadvisable to attempt to comply, with the walking program, the plan provide a reasonable alternative to those individuals). Moreover, the plan satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f)(4)(v) of this section because it discloses, in all materials describing the terms of the program and in any disclosure that an individual did not satisfy the initial outcome-based standard, the availability of a reasonable alternative standard (including contact information and the individual's option to involve his or her personal physician) to qualify for the reward or the possibility of waiver of the otherwise applicable standard. Thus, the program satisfies the requirements of paragraphs (f)(4)(iii), (iv), and (v) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, the reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward (the alternative BMI standard requiring a one-point reduction) does not make the program unreasonable under paragraph (f)(4)(iii) or (iv) of this section because the program complies with paragraph (f)(4)(iv)(C)(4) of this section by allowing a second reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward (compliance with the recommendations of the participant's personal physician, which can be changed or adjusted at any time). Accordingly, the program continues to satisfy the applicable requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 6, the premium differential satisfies the requirements of paragraphs (f)(4)(iii), (iv), and (v). The program is an outcome-based wellness program because the initial standard for obtaining a reward is dependent on the results of a health risk assessment (a measurement, test, or screening). The program is reasonably designed under paragraph (f)(4)(iii) because the plan provides a reasonable alternative standard (as required under paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section) to qualify for the reward to all tobacco users (a smoking cessation program). The plan discloses, in all materials describing the terms of the program, the availability of the reasonable alternative standard (including contact information and the individual's option to involve his or her personal physician). Thus, the program satisfies the requirements of paragraphs (f)(4)(iii), (iv), and (v) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 7, the program is not reasonably designed under paragraph (f)(4)(iii) of this section and does not provide a reasonable alternative standard as required under paragraph (f)(4)(iv) of this section. The plan cannot cease to provide a reasonable alternative standard merely because the participant did not stop smoking after participating in a smoking cessation program. The plan must continue to offer a reasonable alternative standard whether it is the same or different (such as a new recommendation from F's personal physician or a new nicotine replacement therapy). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 8, the requirement for F to find and pay for F's own smoking cessation program means that the alternative program is not reasonable. Accordingly, the plan has not offered a reasonable alternative standard that complies with paragraphs (f)(4)(iii) and (iv) of this section and the program fails to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section. (5) Applicable percentage. (i) For purposes of this paragraph (f), the applicable percentage is 30 percent, except that the applicable percentage is increased by an additional 20 percentage points (to 50 percent) to the extent that the additional percentage is in connection with a program designed to prevent or reduce tobacco use. (ii) The rules of this paragraph (f)(5) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the reward for the wellness program, $600, does not exceed the applicable percentage of 30 percent of the total annual cost of employee-only coverage, $1,800. ($6,000 × 30% = $1,800.) (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the reward for the wellness program (absence of a $1,000 surcharge), does not exceed the applicable percentage of 50 percent of the total annual cost of employee-only coverage, $3,000. ($6,000 × 50% = $3,000.) (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the total of all rewards (including absence of a surcharge for participating in the tobacco program) is $2,600 ($600 + $2,000 = $2,600), which does not exceed the applicable percentage of 50 percent of the total annual cost of employee-only coverage ($3,000); and, tested separately, the $600 reward for the wellness program unrelated to tobacco use does not exceed the applicable percentage of 30 percent of the total annual cost of employee-only coverage ($1,800). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, even though the total reward for all wellness programs under the plan is $1,750 ($250 + $1,500 = $1,750, which exceeds the applicable percentage of 30 percent of the cost of the annual premium for employee-only coverage ($5,000 × 30% = $1,500)), only the reward offered for compliance with the health-contingent wellness program ($1,500) is taken into account in determining whether the rules of this paragraph (f)(5) are met. (The $250 reward is offered in connection with a participatory wellness program and therefore is not taken into account.) Accordingly, the health-contingent wellness program offers a reward that does not exceed the applicable percentage of 30 percent of the total annual cost of employee-only coverage. (6) Sample language. The following language, or substantially similar language, can be used to satisfy the notice requirement of paragraphs (f)(3)(v) or (f)(4)(v) of this section: “Your health plan is committed to helping you achieve your best health. Rewards for participating in a wellness program are available to all employees. If you think you might be unable to meet a standard for a reward under this wellness program, you might qualify for an opportunity to earn the same reward by different means. Contact us at [insert contact information] and we will work with you (and, if you wish, with your doctor) to find a wellness program with the same reward that is right for you in light of your health status.” (g) More favorable treatment of individuals with adverse health factors permitted—(1) In rules for eligibility. (i) Nothing in this section prevents a group health plan or group health insurance issuer from establishing more favorable rules for eligibility (described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section) for individuals with an adverse health factor, such as disability, than for individuals without the adverse health factor. Moreover, nothing in this section prevents a plan or issuer from charging a higher premium or contribution with respect to individuals with an adverse health factor if they would not be eligible for the coverage were it not for the adverse health factor. (However, other laws, including State insurance laws, may set or limit premium rates; these laws are not affected by this section.) (ii) The rules of this paragraph (g)(1) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the plan provision allowing coverage for disabled dependent children beyond age 26 satisfies this paragraph (g)(1) (and thus does not violate this section). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan provision allowing extended coverage for disabled employees and their families satisfies this paragraph (g)(1) (and thus does not violate this section). In addition, the plan is permitted, under this paragraph (g)(1), to charge the disabled employees a higher premium during the extended period of coverage. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the plan provision allowing extended COBRA continuation coverage for disabled individuals satisfies this paragraph (g)(1) (and thus does not violate this section). In addition, the plan is permitted, under this paragraph (g)(1), to charge the disabled individuals a higher premium for the extended coverage if the individuals would not be eligible for COBRA continuation coverage were it not for the disability. (Similarly, if the plan provided an extended period of coverage for disabled individuals pursuant to State law or plan provision rather than pursuant to a COBRA continuation coverage provision, the plan could likewise charge the disabled individuals a higher premium for the extended coverage.) (2) In premiums or contributions. (i) Nothing in this section prevents a group health plan or group health insurance issuer from charging individuals a premium or contribution that is less than the premium (or contribution) for similarly situated individuals if the lower charge is based on an adverse health factor, such as disability. (ii) The rules of this paragraph (g)(2) are illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, the plan provision waiving premium payment for disabled employees is permitted under this paragraph (g)(2) (and thus does not violate this section). (h) No effect on other laws. Compliance with this section is not determinative of compliance with any other provision of the Act (including the COBRA continuation provisions) or any other State or Federal law, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act. Therefore, although the rules of this section would not prohibit a plan or issuer from treating one group of similarly situated individuals differently from another (such as providing different benefit packages to current and former employees), other Federal or State laws may require that two separate groups of similarly situated individuals be treated the same for certain purposes (such as making the same benefit package available to COBRA qualified beneficiaries as is made available to active employees). In addition, although this section generally does not impose new disclosure obligations on plans and issuers, this section does not affect any other laws, including those that require accurate disclosures and prohibit intentional misrepresentation. (i) Applicability dates. This section applies for plan years beginning on or after July 1, 2007.

§ 2590.702-1 Additional requirements prohibiting discrimination based on genetic information. (a) Definitions. Unless otherwise provided, the definitions in this paragraph (a) govern in applying the provisions of this section. (1) Collect means, with respect to information, to request, require, or purchase such information. (2) Family member means, with respect to an individual— (i) A dependent (as defined for purposes of § 2590.701-2 of this Part) of the individual; or (ii) Any other person who is a first-degree, second-degree, third-degree, or fourth-degree relative of the individual or of a dependent of the individual. Relatives by affinity (such as by marriage or adoption) are treated the same as relatives by consanguinity (that is, relatives who share a common biological ancestor). In determining the degree of the relationship, relatives by less than full consanguinity (such as half-siblings, who share only one parent) are treated the same as relatives by full consanguinity (such as siblings who share both parents). (A) First-degree relatives include parents, spouses, siblings, and children. (B) Second-degree relatives include grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nephews, and nieces. (C) Third-degree relatives include great-grandparents, great-grandchildren, great aunts, great uncles, and first cousins. (D) Fourth-degree relatives include great-great grandparents, great-great grandchildren, and children of first cousins. (3) Genetic information means— (i) Subject to paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (a)(3)(iii) of this section, with respect to an individual, information about— (A) The individual's genetic tests (as defined in paragraph (a)(5) of this section); (B) The genetic tests of family members of the individual; (C) The manifestation (as defined in paragraph (a)(6) of this section) of a disease or disorder in family members of the individual; or (D) Any request for, or receipt of, genetic services (as defined in paragraph (a)(4) of this section), or participation in clinical research which includes genetic services, by the individual or any family member of the individual. (ii) The term genetic information does not include information about the sex or age of any individual. (iii) The term genetic information includes— (A) With respect to a pregnant woman (or a family member of the pregnant woman), genetic information of any fetus carried by the pregnant woman; and (B) With respect to an individual (or a family member of the individual) who is utilizing an assisted reproductive technology, genetic information of any embryo legally held by the individual or family member. (4) Genetic services means— (i) A genetic test, as defined in paragraph (a)(5) of this section; (ii) Genetic counseling (including obtaining, interpreting, or assessing genetic information); or (iii) Genetic education. (5)(i) Genetic test means an analysis of human DNA, RNA, chromosomes, proteins, or metabolites, if the analysis detects genotypes, mutations, or chromosomal changes. However, a genetic test does not include an analysis of proteins or metabolites that is directly related to a manifested disease, disorder, or pathological condition. Accordingly, a test to determine whether an individual has a BRCA1 or BRCA2 variant is a genetic test. Similarly, a test to determine whether an individual has a genetic variant associated with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer is a genetic test. However, an HIV test, complete blood count, cholesterol test, liver function test, or test for the presence of alcohol or drugs is not a genetic test. (ii) The rules of this paragraph (a)(5) are illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, the PKU screening is a genetic test with respect to A because the screening is an analysis of metabolites that detects a genetic mutation. (6)(i) Manifestation or manifested means, with respect to a disease, disorder, or pathological condition, that an individual has been or could reasonably be diagnosed with the disease, disorder, or pathological condition by a health care professional with appropriate training and expertise in the field of medicine involved. For purposes of this section, a disease, disorder, or pathological condition is not manifested if a diagnosis is based principally on genetic information. (ii) The rules of this paragraph (a)(6) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, A has been diagnosed by a health care professional with appropriate training and expertise in the field of medicine involved. The diagnosis is not based principally on genetic information. Thus, Type 2 diabetes is manifested with respect to A. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, because B has no signs or symptoms of colorectal cancer, B has not been and could not reasonably be diagnosed with HNPCC. Thus, HNPCC is not manifested with respect to B. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, HNPCC is manifested with respect to B because a health care professional with appropriate training and expertise in the field of medicine involved has made a diagnosis that is not based principally on genetic information. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, C is not and could not reasonably be diagnosed with Huntington's Disease by a health care professional with appropriate training and expertise. Therefore, Huntington's Disease is not manifested with respect to C. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, C could reasonably be diagnosed with Huntington's Disease by a health care professional with appropriate training and expertise. Therefore, Huntington's Disease is manifested with respect to C. (7) Underwriting purposes has the meaning given in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. (b) No group-based discrimination based on genetic information—(1) In general. For purposes of this section, a group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, must not adjust premium or contribution amounts for the plan, or any group of similarly situated individuals under the plan, on the basis of genetic information. For this purpose, “similarly situated individuals” are those described in § 2590.702(d) of this Part. (2) Rule of construction. Nothing in paragraph (b)(1) of this section (or in paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this section) limits the ability of a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan to increase the premium for a group health plan or a group of similarly situated individuals under the plan based on the manifestation of a disease or disorder of an individual who is enrolled in the plan. In such a case, however, the manifestation of a disease or disorder in one individual cannot also be used as genetic information about other group members to further increase the premium for a group health plan or a group of similarly situated individuals under the plan. (3) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (b) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the issuer violates the provisions of this paragraph (b) because the issuer adjusts the premium based on genetic information. However, if the adjustment related solely to claims experience, the adjustment would not violate the requirements of this section (nor would it violate the requirements of paragraph (c) of § 2590.702 of this Part, which prohibits discrimination in individual premiums or contributions based on a health factor but permits increases in the group rate based on a health factor). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the issuer violates the provisions of this paragraph (b) because, by taking the likelihood that A's children may develop polycystic kidney disease into account in computing the rate for the plan, the issuer adjusts the premium based on genetic information relating to a condition that has not been manifested in A's children. However, it is permissible for the issuer to increase the premium based on A's claims experience. (c) Limitation on requesting or requiring genetic testing—(1) General rule. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (c), a group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, must not request or require an individual or a family member of the individual to undergo a genetic test. (2) Health care professional may recommend a genetic test. Nothing in paragraph (c)(1) of this section limits the authority of a health care professional who is providing health care services to an individual to request that the individual undergo a genetic test. (3) Examples. The rules of paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the physician is a health care professional who is providing health care services to A. Therefore, the physician's recommendation that A undergo the genetic test does not violate this paragraph (c). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, even though the physician is employed by the HMO, the physician is nonetheless a health care professional who is providing health care services to B. Therefore, the physician's recommendation that B undergo the genetic test does not violate this paragraph (c). (4) Determination regarding payment—(i) In general. As provided in this paragraph (c)(4), nothing in paragraph (c)(1) of this section precludes a plan or issuer from obtaining and using the results of a genetic test in making a determination regarding payment. For this purpose, “payment” has the meaning given such term in 45 CFR 164.501 of the privacy regulations issued under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Thus, if a plan or issuer conditions payment for an item or service based on its medical appropriateness and the medical appropriateness of the item or service depends on the genetic makeup of a patient, then the plan or issuer is permitted to condition payment for the item or service on the outcome of a genetic test. The plan or issuer may also refuse payment if the patient does not undergo the genetic test. (ii) Limitation. A plan or issuer is permitted to request only the minimum amount of information necessary to make a determination regarding payment. The minimum amount of information necessary is determined in accordance with the minimum necessary standard in 45 CFR 164.502(b) of the privacy regulations issued under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. (iii) Examples. See paragraph (e) of this section for examples illustrating the rules of this paragraph (c)(4), as well as other provisions of this section. (5) Research exception. Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(1) of this section, a plan or issuer may request, but not require, that a participant or beneficiary undergo a genetic test if all of the conditions of this paragraph (c)(5) are met: (i) Research in accordance with Federal regulations and applicable State or local law or regulations. The plan or issuer makes the request pursuant to research, as defined in 45 CFR 46.102(d), that complies with 45 CFR Part 46 or equivalent Federal regulations, and any applicable State or local law or regulations for the protection of human subjects in research. (ii) Written request for participation in research. The plan or issuer makes the request in writing, and the request clearly indicates to each participant or beneficiary (or, in the case of a minor child, to the legal guardian of the beneficiary) that— (A) Compliance with the request is voluntary; and (B) Noncompliance will have no effect on eligibility for benefits (as described in § 2590.702(b)(1) of this Part) or premium or contribution amounts. (iii) Prohibition on underwriting. No genetic information collected or acquired under this paragraph (c)(5) can be used for underwriting purposes (as described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section). (iv) Notice to Federal agencies. The plan or issuer completes a copy of the “Notice of Research Exception under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act” authorized by the Secretary and provides the notice to the address specified in the instructions thereto. (d) Prohibitions on collection of genetic information—(1) For underwriting purposes—(i) General rule. A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, must not collect (as defined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section) genetic information for underwriting purposes. See paragraph (e) of this section for examples illustrating the rules of this paragraph (d)(1), as well as other provisions of this section. (ii) Underwriting purposes defined. Subject to paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section, underwriting purposes means, with respect to any group health plan, or health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan— (A) Rules for, or determination of, eligibility (including enrollment and continued eligibility) for benefits under the plan or coverage as described in § 2590.702(b)(1)(ii) of this Part (including changes in deductibles or other cost-sharing mechanisms in return for activities such as completing a health risk assessment or participating in a wellness program); (B) The computation of premium or contribution amounts under the plan or coverage (including discounts, rebates, payments in kind, or other premium differential mechanisms in return for activities such as completing a health risk assessment or participating in a wellness program); (C) The application of any preexisting condition exclusion under the plan or coverage; and (D) Other activities related to the creation, renewal, or replacement of a contract of health insurance or health benefits. (iii) Medical appropriateness. If an individual seeks a benefit under a group health plan or health insurance coverage, the plan or coverage may limit or exclude the benefit based on whether the benefit is medically appropriate, and the determination of whether the benefit is medically appropriate is not within the meaning of underwriting purposes. Accordingly, if an individual seeks a benefit under the plan and the plan or issuer conditions the benefit based on its medical appropriateness and the medical appropriateness of the benefit depends on genetic information of the individual, then the plan or issuer is permitted to condition the benefit on the genetic information. A plan or issuer is permitted to request only the minimum amount of genetic information necessary to determine medical appropriateness. The plan or issuer may deny the benefit if the patient does not provide the genetic information required to determine medical appropriateness. If an individual is not seeking a benefit, the medical appropriateness exception of this paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to the definition of underwriting purposes does not apply. See paragraph (e) of this section for examples illustrating the medical appropriateness provisions of this paragraph (d)(1)(iii), as well as other provisions of this section. (2) Prior to or in connection with enrollment—(i) In general. A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, must not collect genetic information with respect to any individual prior to that individual's effective date of coverage under that plan or coverage, nor in connection with the rules for eligibility (as defined in § 2590.702(b)(1)(ii) of this Part) that apply to that individual. Whether or not an individual's information is collected prior to that individual's effective date of coverage is determined at the time of collection. (ii) Incidental collection exception—(A) In general. If a group health plan, or a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in connection with a group health plan, obtains genetic information incidental to the collection of other information concerning any individual, the collection is not a violation of this paragraph (d)(2), as long as the collection is not for underwriting purposes in violation of paragraph (d)(1) of this section. (B) Limitation. The incidental collection exception of this paragraph (d)(2)(ii) does not apply in connection with any collection where it is reasonable to anticipate that health information will be received, unless the collection explicitly states that genetic information should not be provided. (3) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (d) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the health risk assessment includes a request for genetic information (that is, the individual's family medical history). Because completing the health risk assessment results in a premium reduction, the request for genetic information is for underwriting purposes. Consequently, the request violates the prohibition on the collection of genetic information in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the request is not for underwriting purposes, nor is it prior to or in connection with enrollment. Therefore, it does not violate the prohibition on the collection of genetic information in this paragraph (d). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, because the health risk assessment includes a request for genetic information (that is, the individual's family medical history), and requests the information prior to enrollment, the request violates the prohibition on the collection of genetic information in paragraph (d)(2) of this section. Moreover, because it is a request for genetic information, it is not an incidental collection under paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, the request for information about an individual's family medical history could result in the individual being eligible for benefits for which the individual would not otherwise be eligible. Therefore, the questions about family medical history on the health risk assessment are a request for genetic information for underwriting purposes and are prohibited under this paragraph (d). Although the plan conditions eligibility for the disease management program based on determinations of medical appropriateness, the exception for determinations of medical appropriateness does not apply because the individual is not seeking benefits. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, no genetic information is collected in connection with the first HRA, which offers a reward, and no benefits or other rewards are conditioned on the request for genetic information in the second HRA. Consequently, the request for genetic information in the second HRA is not for underwriting purposes, and the two HRAs do not violate the prohibition on the collection of genetic information in this paragraph (d). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 6, the plan's request for medical information does not explicitly state that genetic information should not be provided. Therefore, any genetic information collected in response to the question is not within the incidental collection exception and is prohibited under this paragraph (d). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 7, the plan's request for medical information explicitly states that genetic information should not be provided. Therefore, any genetic information collected in response to the question is within the incidental collection exception. However, the plan may not use any genetic information it obtains incidentally for underwriting purposes. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 8, M's request for health information explicitly stated that genetic information should not be provided. Therefore, the collection of genetic information was within the incidental collection exception. However, M may not use the genetic information it obtained incidentally for underwriting purposes. (e) Examples regarding determinations of medical appropriateness. The application of the rules of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section to plan or issuer determinations of medical appropriateness is illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, under the rules of paragraph (c)(4) of this section the issuer is permitted to request only the minimum amount of information necessary to make a decision regarding payment. Because the results of the test are not necessary for the issuer to make a decision regarding the payment of A's claim, the issuer's request for the results of the genetic test violates paragraph (c) of this section. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan does not violate paragraphs (c) or (d) of this section. Under paragraph (c), the plan is permitted to request and use the results of a genetic test to make a determination regarding payment, provided the plan requests only the minimum amount of information necessary. Because the medical appropriateness of the mammogram depends on the genetic makeup of the patient, the minimum amount of information necessary includes the results of the genetic test. Similarly, the plan does not violate paragraph (d) of this section because the plan is permitted to request genetic information in making a determination regarding the medical appropriateness of a claim if the genetic information is necessary to make the determination (and if the genetic information is not used for underwriting purposes). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the plan does not violate paragraph (c) of this section if it conditions future payments for the tamoxifen prescription on C's undergoing a genetic test to determine what genetic markers C has for making the CYP2D6 enzyme. Nor does the plan violate paragraph (c) of this section if the plan refuses future payment if the results of the genetic test indicate that tamoxifen is not medically appropriate for C. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 4, the plan may condition benefits under the disease management program upon a showing by an individual that the individual is at risk for diabetes, even if such showing may involve genetic information, provided that the plan requests genetic information only when necessary to make a determination regarding whether the disease management program is medically appropriate for the individual and only requests the minimum amount of information necessary to make that determination. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, the plan violates the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) of this section because the requests for genetic information are not limited to those situations in which it is necessary to make a determination regarding whether the disease management program is medically appropriate for the individuals. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 6, because the enhanced benefits include benefits not related to the determination of medical appropriateness, making available the enhanced benefits is within the meaning of underwriting purposes. Accordingly, the plan may not request or require genetic information (including family history information) in determining eligibility for enhanced benefits under the program because such a request would be for underwriting purposes and would violate paragraph (d)(1) of this section. (f) Applicability date. This section applies for plan years beginning on or after December 7, 2009.

§ 2590.702-2 Special rule allowing integration of Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs) and other account-based group health plans with individual health insurance coverage and Medicare and prohibiting discrimination in HRAs and other account-based group health plans. (a) Scope. This section applies to health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) and other account-based group health plans, as defined in § 2590.715-2711(d)(6)(i) of this part. For ease of reference, the term “HRA” is used in this section to include other account-based group health plans. For related regulations, see 26 CFR 1.36B-2(c)(3)(i) and (c)(5), 29 CFR 2510.3-1(l), and 45 CFR 155.420. (b) Purpose. This section provides the conditions that an HRA must satisfy in order to be integrated with individual health insurance coverage for purposes of Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) sections 2711 and 2713 and § 2590.715-2711(d)(4) of this part (referred to as an individual coverage HRA). This section also allows an individual coverage HRA to be integrated with Medicare for purposes of PHS Act sections 2711 and 2713 and § 2590.715-2711(d)(4), subject to the conditions provided in this section (see paragraph (e) of this section). Some of the conditions set forth in this section specifically relate to compliance with PHS Act sections 2711 and 2713 and some relate to the effect of having or being offered an individual coverage HRA on eligibility for the premium tax credit under section 36B of the Code. In addition, this section provides conditions that an individual coverage HRA must satisfy in order to comply with the nondiscrimination provisions in ERISA section 702 and PHS Act section 2705 (which is incorporated in ERISA section 715) and that are consistent with the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148 (124 Stat. 119 (2010)), and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Public Law 111-152 (124 Stat. 1029 (2010)), each as amended, that are designed to create a competitive individual market. These conditions are intended to prevent an HRA plan sponsor from intentionally or unintentionally, directly or indirectly, steering any participants or dependents with adverse health factors away from its traditional group health plan, if any, and toward individual health insurance coverage. (c) General rule. An HRA will be considered to be integrated with individual health insurance coverage for purposes of PHS Act sections 2711 and 2713 and § 2590.715-2711(d)(4) of this part and will not be considered to discriminate in violation of ERISA section 702 and PHS Act section 2705 solely because it is integrated with individual health insurance coverage, provided that the conditions of this paragraph (c) are satisfied. See paragraph (e) of this section for how these conditions apply to an individual coverage HRA integrated with Medicare. For purposes of this section, medical care expenses means medical care expenses as defined in § 2590.715-2711(d)(6)(ii) of this part and Exchange means Exchange as defined in 45 CFR 155.20. (1) Enrollment in individual health insurance coverage—(i) In general. The HRA must require that the participant and any dependent(s) are enrolled in individual health insurance coverage that is subject to and complies with the requirements in PHS Act sections 2711 (and § 2590.715-2711(a)(2) of this part) and PHS Act section 2713 (and § 2590.715-2713(a)(1) of this part), for each month that the individual(s) are covered by the HRA. For purposes of this paragraph (c), all individual health insurance coverage, except for individual health insurance coverage that consists solely of excepted benefits, is treated as being subject to and complying with PHS Act sections 2711 and 2713. References to individual health insurance coverage in this paragraph (c) do not include individual health insurance coverage that consists solely of excepted benefits. (ii) Forfeiture. The HRA must provide that if any individual covered by the HRA ceases to be covered by individual health insurance coverage, the HRA will not reimburse medical care expenses that are incurred by that individual after the individual health insurance coverage ceases. In addition, if the participant and all dependents covered by the participant's HRA cease to be covered by individual health insurance coverage, the participant must forfeit the HRA. In either case, the HRA must reimburse medical care expenses incurred by the individual prior to the cessation of individual health insurance coverage to the extent the medical care expenses are otherwise covered by the HRA, but the HRA may limit the period to submit medical care expenses for reimbursement to a reasonable specified time period. If a participant or dependent loses coverage under the HRA for a reason other than cessation of individual health insurance coverage, COBRA and other continuation coverage requirements may apply. (iii) Grace periods and retroactive termination of individual health insurance coverage. In the event an individual is initially enrolled in individual health insurance coverage and subsequently timely fails to pay premiums for the coverage, with the result that the individual is in a grace period, the individual is considered to be enrolled in individual health insurance coverage for purposes of this paragraph (c)(1) and the individual coverage HRA must reimburse medical care expenses incurred by the individual during that time period to the extent the medical care expenses are otherwise covered by the HRA. If the individual fails to pay the applicable premium(s) by the end of the grace period and the coverage is cancelled or terminated, including retroactively, or if the individual health insurance coverage is cancelled or terminated retroactively for some other reason (for example, a rescission), an individual coverage HRA must require that a participant notify the HRA that coverage has been cancelled or terminated and the date on which the cancellation or termination is effective. After the individual coverage HRA has received the notice of cancellation or termination, the HRA may not reimburse medical care expenses incurred on and after the date the individual health insurance coverage was cancelled or terminated, which is considered to be the date of termination of coverage under the HRA. (2) No traditional group health plan may be offered to same participants. To the extent a plan sponsor offers any class of employees (as defined in paragraph (d) of this section) an individual coverage HRA, the plan sponsor may not also offer a traditional group health plan to the same class of employees, except as provided in paragraph (d)(5) of this section. For purposes of this section, a traditional group health plan is any group health plan other than either an account-based group health plan or a group health plan that consists solely of excepted benefits. Therefore, a plan sponsor may not offer a choice between an individual coverage HRA or a traditional group health plan to any participant or dependent. (3) Same terms requirement—(i) In general. If a plan sponsor offers an individual coverage HRA to a class of employees described in paragraph (d) of this section, the HRA must be offered on the same terms to all participants within the class, except as provided in paragraphs (c)(3)(ii) through (vi) and (d)(5) of this section. (ii) Carryover amounts, salary reduction arrangements, and transfer amounts. Amounts that are not used to reimburse medical care expenses for any plan year that are made available to participants in later plan years are disregarded for purposes of determining whether an HRA is offered on the same terms, provided that the method for determining whether participants have access to unused amounts in future years, and the methodology and formula for determining the amounts of unused funds which they may access in future years, is the same for all participants in a class of employees. In addition, the ability to pay the portion of the premium for individual health insurance coverage that is not covered by the HRA, if any, by using a salary reduction arrangement under section 125 of the Code is considered to be a term of the HRA for purposes of this paragraph (c)(3). Therefore, an HRA is not provided on the same terms unless the salary reduction arrangement, if made available to any participant in a class of employees, is made available on the same terms to all participants (other than former employees, as defined in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section) in the class of employees. Further, to the extent that a participant in an individual coverage HRA was previously covered by another HRA and the current individual coverage HRA makes available amounts that were not used to reimburse medical care expenses under the prior HRA (transferred amounts), the transferred amounts are disregarded for purposes of determining whether the HRA is offered on the same terms, provided that if the HRA makes available transferred amounts, it does so on the same terms for all participants in the class of employees. (iii) Permitted variation. An HRA does not fail to be provided on the same terms solely because the maximum dollar amount made available to participants in a class of employees to reimburse medical care expenses for any plan year increases in accordance with paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(A) or (B) of this section. (A) Variation due to number of dependents. An HRA does not fail to be provided on the same terms to participants in a class of employees solely because the maximum dollar amount made available to those participants to reimburse medical care expenses for any plan year increases as the number of the participant's dependents who are covered under the HRA increases, so long as the same maximum dollar amount attributable to the increase in family size is made available to all participants in that class of employees with the same number of dependents covered by the HRA. (B) Variation due to age. An HRA does not fail to be provided on the same terms to participants in a class of employees solely because the maximum dollar amount made available under the terms of the HRA to those participants to reimburse medical care expenses for any plan year increases as the age of the participant increases, so long as the requirements in paragraphs (c)(3)(iii)(B)(1) and (2) of this section are satisfied. For the purpose of this paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(B), the plan sponsor may determine the age of the participant using any reasonable method for a plan year, so long as the plan sponsor determines each participant's age for the purpose of this paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(B) using the same method for all participants in the class of employees for the plan year and the method is determined prior to the plan year. (1) The same maximum dollar amount attributable to the increase in age is made available to all participants who are the same age. (2) The maximum dollar amount made available to the oldest participant(s) is not more than three times the maximum dollar amount made available to the youngest participant(s). (iv) Former employees. An HRA does not fail to be treated as provided on the same terms if the plan sponsor offers the HRA to some, but not all, former employees within a class of employees. However, if a plan sponsor offers the HRA to one or more former employees within a class of employees, the HRA must be offered to the former employee(s) on the same terms as to all other employees within the class, except as provided in paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section. For purposes of this section, a former employee is an employee who is no longer performing services for the employer. (v) New employees or new dependents. For a participant whose coverage under the HRA becomes effective later than the first day of the plan year, the HRA does not fail to be treated as being provided on the same terms to the participant if the maximum dollar amount made available to the participant either is the same as the maximum dollar amount made available to participants in the participant's class of employees whose coverage became effective as of the first day of the plan year, or is pro-rated consistent with the portion of the plan year in which the participant is covered by the HRA. Similarly, if the HRA provides for variation in the maximum amount made available to participants in a class of employees based on the number of a participant's dependents covered by the HRA, and the number of a participant's dependents covered by the HRA changes during a plan year (either increasing or decreasing), the HRA does not fail to be treated as being provided on the same terms to the participant if the maximum dollar amount made available to the participant either is the same as the maximum dollar amount made available to participants in the participant's class of employees who had the same number of dependents covered by the HRA on the first day of the plan year or is pro-rated for the remainder of the plan year after the change in the number of the participant's dependents covered by the HRA consistent with the portion of the plan year in which that number of dependents are covered by the HRA. The method the HRA uses to determine amounts made available for participants whose coverage under the HRA is effective later than the first day of the plan year or who have changes in the number of dependents covered by the HRA during a plan year must be the same for all participants in the class of employees and the method must be determined prior to the beginning of the plan year. (vi) HSA-compatible HRAs. An HRA does not fail to be treated as provided on the same terms if the plan sponsor offers participants in a class of employees a choice between an HSA-compatible individual coverage HRA and an individual coverage HRA that is not HSA compatible, provided both types of HRAs are offered to all participants in the class of employees on the same terms. For the purpose of this paragraph (c)(3)(vi), an HSA-compatible individual coverage HRA is an individual coverage HRA that is limited in accordance with applicable guidance under section 223 of the Code such that an individual covered by such an HRA is not disqualified from being an eligible individual under section 223 of the Code. (vii) Examples. The following examples illustrate the provisions of this paragraph (c)(3), without taking into account the provisions of paragraph (d) of this section. In each example, the HRA is an individual coverage HRA that has a calendar year plan year and may reimburse any medical care expenses, including premiums for individual health insurance coverage (except as provided in paragraph (c)(3)(vii)(E) of this section (Example 5)). Further, in each example, assume the HRA is offered on the same terms, except as otherwise specified in the example and that no participants or dependents are Medicare beneficiaries. (A) Example 1: Carryover amounts permitted—(1) Facts. For 2020 and again for 2021, Plan Sponsor A offers all employees $7,000 each in an HRA, and the HRA provides that amounts that are unused at the end of a plan year may be carried over to the next plan year, with no restrictions on the use of the carryover amounts compared to the use of newly available amounts. At the end of 2020, some employees have used all of the funds in their HRAs, while other employees have balances remaining that range from $500 to $1,750 that are carried over to 2021 for those employees. (2) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of this paragraph (c)(3) is satisfied in this paragraph (c)(3)(vii)(A) (Example 1) for 2020 because Plan Sponsor A offers all employees the same amount, $7,000, in an HRA for that year. The same terms requirement is also satisfied for 2021 because Plan Sponsor A again offers all employees the same amount for that year, and the carryover amounts that some employees have are disregarded in applying the same terms requirement because the amount of the carryover for each employee (that employee's balance) and each employee's access to the carryover amounts is based on the same terms. (B) Example 2: Employees hired after the first day of the plan year—(1) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor B offers all employees employed on January 1, 2020, $7,000 each in an HRA for the plan year. Employees hired after January 1, 2020, are eligible to enroll in the HRA with an effective date of the first day of the month following their date of hire, as long as they have enrolled in individual health insurance coverage effective on or before that date, and the amount offered to these employees is pro-rated based on the number of months remaining in the plan year, including the month which includes their coverage effective date. (2) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of this paragraph (c)(3) is satisfied in this paragraph (c)(3)(vii)(B) (Example 2) for 2020 because Plan Sponsor B offers all employees employed on the first day of the plan year the same amount, $7,000, in an HRA for that plan year and all employees hired after January 1, 2020, a pro-rata amount based on the portion of the plan year during which they are enrolled in the HRA. (C) Example 3: HRA amounts offered vary based on number of dependents—(1) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor C offers its employees the following amounts in an HRA: $1,500, if the employee is the only individual covered by the HRA; $3,500, if the employee and one dependent are covered by the HRA; and $5,000, if the employee and more than one dependent are covered by the HRA. (2) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of this paragraph (c)(3) is satisfied in this paragraph (c)(3)(vii)(C) (Example 3) because paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(A) of this section allows the maximum dollar amount made available in an HRA to increase as the number of the participant's dependents covered by the HRA increases and Plan Sponsor C makes the same amount available to each employee with the same number of dependents covered by the HRA. (D) Example 4: HRA amounts offered vary based on increases in employees' ages—(1) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor D offers its employees the following amounts in an HRA: $1,000 each for employees age 25 to 35; $2,000 each for employees age 36 to 45; $2,500 each for employees age 46 to 55; and $4,000 each for employees over age 55. (2) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of this paragraph (c)(3) is not satisfied in this paragraph (c)(3)(vii)(D) (Example 4) because the terms of the HRA provide the oldest participants (those over age 55) with more than three times the amount made available to the youngest participants (those ages 25 to 35), in violation of paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(B)(2) of this section. (E) Example 5: Application of same terms requirement to premium only HRA—(1) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor E offers its employees an HRA that reimburses only premiums for individual health insurance coverage, up to $10,000 for the year. Employee A enrolls in individual health insurance coverage with a $5,000 premium for the year and is reimbursed $5,000 from the HRA. Employee B enrolls in individual health insurance coverage with an $8,000 premium for the year and is reimbursed $8,000 from the HRA. (2) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of this paragraph (c)(3) is satisfied in this paragraph (c)(3)(vii)(E) (Example 5) because Plan Sponsor E offers the HRA on the same terms to all employees, notwithstanding that some employees receive a greater amount of reimbursement than others based on the cost of the individual health insurance coverage selected by the employee. (4) Opt out. Under the terms of the HRA, a participant who is otherwise eligible for coverage must be permitted to opt out of and waive future reimbursements on behalf of the participant and all dependents eligible for the HRA from the HRA once, and only once, with respect to each plan year. The HRA may establish timeframes for enrollment in (and opting out of) the HRA but, in general, the opportunity to opt out must be provided in advance of the first day of the plan year. For participants who become eligible to participate in the HRA on a date other than the first day of the plan year (or who become eligible fewer than 90 days prior to the plan year or for whom the notice under paragraph (c)(6) of this section is required to be provided as set forth in paragraph (c)(6)(i)(C) of this section), or for a dependent who newly becomes eligible during the plan year, this opportunity must be provided during the applicable HRA enrollment period(s) established by the HRA for these individuals. Further, under the terms of the HRA, upon termination of employment, for a participant who is covered by the HRA, either the remaining amounts in the HRA must be forfeited or the participant must be permitted to permanently opt out of and waive future reimbursements from the HRA on behalf of the participant and all dependents covered by the HRA. (5) Reasonable procedures for coverage substantiation—(i) Substantiation of individual health insurance coverage for the plan year. The HRA must implement, and comply with, reasonable procedures to substantiate that participants and each dependent covered by the HRA are, or will be, enrolled in individual health insurance coverage for the plan year (or for the portion of the plan year the individual is covered by the HRA, if applicable). The HRA may establish the date by which this substantiation must be provided, but, in general, the date may be no later than the first day of the plan year. However, for a participant who is not eligible to participate in the HRA on the first day of the plan year (or who becomes eligible fewer than 90 days prior to the plan year or for whom the notice under paragraph (c)(6) of this section is required to be provided as set forth in paragraph (c)(6)(i)(C) of this section), the HRA may establish the date by which this substantiation must be provided, but that date may be no later than the date the HRA coverage begins. Similarly, for a participant who adds a new dependent during the plan year, the HRA may establish the date by which this substantiation must be provided, but the date may be no later than the date the HRA coverage for the new dependent begins; however, to the extent the dependent's coverage under the HRA is effective retroactively, the HRA may establish a reasonable time by which this substantiation is required, but must require it be provided before the HRA will reimburse any medical care expense for the newly added dependent. The reasonable procedures an HRA may use to implement the substantiation requirement set forth in this paragraph (c)(5)(i) may include a requirement that a participant substantiate enrollment by providing either: (A) A document from a third party (for example, the issuer or an Exchange) showing that the participant and any dependents covered by the HRA are, or will be, enrolled in individual health insurance coverage (for example, an insurance card or an explanation of benefits document pertaining to the relevant time period or documentation from the Exchange showing that the individual has completed the application and plan selection); or (B) An attestation by the participant stating that the participant and dependent(s) covered by the HRA are, or will be, enrolled in individual health insurance coverage, the date coverage began or will begin, and the name of the provider of the coverage. (ii) Coverage substantiation with each request for reimbursement of medical care expenses. Following the initial substantiation of coverage, with each new request for reimbursement of an incurred medical care expense for the same plan year, the HRA may not reimburse a participant for any medical care expenses unless, prior to each reimbursement, the participant substantiates that the individual on whose behalf medical care expenses are requested to be reimbursed continues to be enrolled in individual health insurance coverage for the month during which the medical care expenses were incurred. The HRA must implement, and comply with, reasonable procedures to satisfy this requirement. This substantiation may be in the form of a written attestation by the participant, which may be part of the form used to request reimbursement, or a document from a third party (for example, a health insurance issuer) showing that the participant or the dependent, if applicable, are or were enrolled in individual health insurance coverage for the applicable month. (iii) Reliance on substantiation. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(5), an HRA may rely on the participant's documentation or attestation unless the HRA, its plan sponsor, or any other entity acting in an official capacity on behalf of the HRA has actual knowledge that any individual covered by the HRA is not, or will not be, enrolled in individual health insurance coverage for the plan year (or applicable portion of the plan year) or the month, as applicable. (6) Notice requirement—(i) Timing. The HRA must provide a written notice to each participant: (A) At least 90 calendar days before the beginning of each plan year for any participant who is not described in either paragraph (c)(6)(i)(B) or (C) of this section; (B) No later than the date on which the HRA may first take effect for the participant, for any participant who is not eligible to participate at the beginning of the plan year (or is not eligible to participate at the time the notice is provided at least 90 calendar days before the beginning of the plan year pursuant to paragraph (c)(6)(i)(A) of this section); or (C) No later than the date on which the HRA may first take effect for the participant, for any participant who is employed by an employer that is first established less than 120 days before the beginning of the first plan year of the HRA; this paragraph (c)(6)(i)(C) applies only with respect to the first plan year of the HRA. (ii) Content. The notice must include all the information described in this paragraph (c)(6)(ii) (and may include any additional information that does not conflict with that information). To the extent that the Departments of the Treasury, Labor and Health and Human Services provide model notice language for certain elements of this required notice, HRAs are permitted, but not required, to use the model language. (A) A description of the terms of the HRA, including the maximum dollar amount available for each participant (including the self-only HRA amount available for the plan year (or the maximum dollar amount available for the plan year if the HRA provides for reimbursements up to a single dollar amount regardless of whether a participant has self-only or other than self-only coverage)), any rules regarding the proration of the maximum dollar amount applicable to any participant (or dependent, if applicable) who is not eligible to participate in the HRA for the entire plan year, whether (and which of) the participant's dependents are eligible for the HRA, a statement that there are different kinds of HRAs (including a qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement) and the HRA being offered is an individual coverage HRA, a statement that the HRA requires the participant and any covered dependents to be enrolled in individual health insurance coverage (or Medicare Part A and B or Medicare Part C, if applicable), a statement that the coverage in which the participant and any covered dependents must be enrolled cannot be short-term, limited-duration insurance or consist solely of excepted benefits, a statement that individual health insurance coverage in which the participant and any covered dependents are enrolled is not subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act if the conditions under § 2510.3-1(l) of this chapter are satisfied, the date as of which coverage under the HRA may first become effective (both for participants whose coverage will become effective on the first day of the plan year and for participants whose HRA coverage may become effective at a later date), the dates on which the HRA plan year begins and ends, and the dates on which the amounts newly made available under the HRA will be made available. (B) A statement of the right of the participant to opt out of and waive future reimbursements from the HRA, as set forth under paragraph (c)(4) of this section. (C) A description of the potential availability of the premium tax credit if the participant opts out of and waives future reimbursements from the HRA and the HRA is not affordable for one or more months under 26 CFR 1.36B-2(c)(5), a statement that even if the participant opts out of and waives future reimbursements from an HRA, the offer will prohibit the participant (and, potentially, the participant's dependents) from receiving a premium tax credit for the participant's coverage (or the dependent's coverage, if applicable) on an Exchange for any month that the HRA is affordable under 26 CFR 1.36B-2(c)(5), a statement describing how the participant may find assistance with determining affordability, a statement that, if the participant is a former employee, the offer of the HRA does not render the participant (or the participant's dependents, if applicable) ineligible for the premium tax credit regardless of whether it is affordable under 26 CFR 1.36B-2(c)(5), and a statement that if the participant or dependent is enrolled in Medicare, he or she is ineligible for the premium tax credit without regard to the offer or acceptance of the HRA; (D) A statement that if the participant accepts the HRA, the participant may not claim a premium tax credit for the participant's Exchange coverage for any month the HRA may be used to reimburse medical care expenses of the participant, and a premium tax credit may not be claimed for the Exchange coverage of the participant's dependents for any month the HRA may be used to reimburse medical care expenses of the dependents. (E) A statement that the participant must inform any Exchange to which the participant applies for advance payments of the premium tax credit of the availability of the HRA; the self-only HRA amount available for the HRA plan year (or the maximum dollar amount available for the plan year if the HRA provides for reimbursements up to a single dollar amount regardless of whether a participant has self-only or other than self-only coverage) as set forth in the written notice in accordance with paragraph (c)(6)(ii)(A) of this section; whether the HRA is also available to the participant's dependents and if so, which ones; the date as of which coverage under the HRA may first become effective; the date on which the plan year begins and the date on which it ends; and whether the participant is a current employee or former employee. (F) A statement that the participant should retain the written notice because it may be needed to determine whether the participant is allowed a premium tax credit on the participant's individual income tax return. (G) A statement that the HRA may not reimburse any medical care expense unless the substantiation requirement set forth in paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this section is satisfied and a statement that the participant must also provide the substantiation required by paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section. (H) A statement that if the individual health insurance coverage (or coverage under Medicare Part A and B or Medicare Part C) of a participant or dependent ceases, the HRA will not reimburse any medical care expenses that are incurred by the participant or dependent, as applicable, after the coverage ceases, and a statement that the participant must inform the HRA if the participant's or dependent's individual health insurance coverage (or coverage under Medicare Part A and B or Medicare Part C) is cancelled or terminated retroactively and the date on which the cancellation or termination is effective. (I) The contact information (including a phone number) for an individual or a group of individuals who participants may contact in order to receive additional information regarding the HRA. The plan sponsor may determine which individual or group of individuals is best suited to be the specified contact. (J) A statement of availability of a special enrollment period to enroll in or change individual health insurance coverage, through or outside of an Exchange, for the participant and any dependents who newly gain access to the HRA and are not already covered by the HRA. (d) Classes of employees—(1) In general. This paragraph (d) sets forth the rules for determining classes of employees. Paragraph (d)(2) of this section sets forth the specific classes of employees; paragraph (d)(3) of this section sets forth a minimum class size requirement that applies in certain circumstances; paragraph (d)(4) of this section sets forth rules regarding the definition of “full-time employees,” “part-time employees,” and “seasonal employees”; paragraph (d)(5) of this section sets forth a special rule for new hires; and paragraph (d)(6) of this section addresses student premium reduction arrangements. For purposes of this section, including determining classes under this paragraph (d), the employer is the common law employer and is determined without regard to the rules under sections 414(b), (c), (m), and (o) of the Code that would treat the common law employer as a single employer with certain other entities. (2) List of classes. Participants may be treated as belonging to a class of employees based on whether they are, or are not, included in the classes described in this paragraph (d)(2). If the individual coverage HRA is offered to former employees, former employees are considered to be in the same class in which they were included immediately before separation from service. Before each plan year, a plan sponsor must determine for the plan year which classes of employees it intends to treat separately and the definition of the relevant class(es) it will apply, to the extent these regulations permit a choice. After the classes and the definitions of the classes are established for a plan year, a plan sponsor may not make changes to the classes of employees or the definitions of those relevant classes with respect to that plan year. (i) Full-time employees, defined at the election of the plan sponsor to mean either full-time employees under section 4980H of the Code (and 26 CFR 54.4980H-1(a)(21)) or employees who are not part-time employees (as described in 26 CFR 1.105-11(c)(2)(iii)(C)); (ii) Part-time employees, defined at the election of the plan sponsor to mean either employees who are not full-time employees under section 4980H of the Code (and under 26 CFR 54.4980H-1(a)(21) (which defines full-time employee)) or employees who are part-time employees as described in 26 CFR 1.105-11(c)(2)(iii)(C); (iii) Employees who are paid on a salary basis; (iv) Non-salaried employees (such as, for example, hourly employees); (v) Employees whose primary site of employment is in the same rating area as defined in 45 CFR 147.102(b); (vi) Seasonal employees, defined at the election of the plan sponsor to mean seasonal employees as described in either 26 CFR 54.4980H-1(a)(38) or 26 CFR 1.105-11(c)(2)(iii)(C); (vii) Employees included in a unit of employees covered by a particular collective bargaining agreement (or an appropriate related participation agreement) in which the plan sponsor participates (as described in 26 CFR 1.105-11(c)(2)(iii)(D)); (viii) Employees who have not satisfied a waiting period for coverage (if the waiting period complies with § 2590.715-2708 of this part); (ix) Non-resident aliens with no U.S.-based income (as described in 26 CFR 1.105-11(c)(2)(iii)(E)); (x) Employees who, under all the facts and circumstances, are employees of an entity that hired the employees for temporary placement at an entity that is not the common law employer of the employees and that is not treated as a single employer with the entity that hired the employees for temporary placement under section 414(b), (c), (m), or (o) of the Code; or (xi) A group of participants described as a combination of two or more of the classes of employees set forth in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (x) of this section. (3) Minimum class size requirement—(i) In general. If a class of employees is subject to the minimum class size requirement as set forth in this paragraph (d)(3), the class must consist of at least a minimum number of employees (as described in paragraphs (d)(3)(iii) and (iv) of this section), otherwise, the plan sponsor may not treat that class as a separate class of employees. Paragraph (d)(3)(ii) of this section sets forth the circumstances in which the minimum class size requirement applies to a class of employees, paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of this section sets forth the rules for determining the applicable class size minimum, and paragraph (d)(3)(iv) of this section sets forth the rules for a plan sponsor to determine if it satisfies the minimum class size requirement with respect to a class of employees. (ii) Circumstances in which minimum class size requirement applies. (A) The minimum class size requirement applies only if a plan sponsor offers a traditional group health plan to one or more classes of employees and offers an individual coverage HRA to one or more other classes of employees. (B) The minimum class size requirement does not apply to a class of employees offered a traditional group health plan or a class of employees offered no coverage. (C) The minimum class size requirement applies to a class of employees offered an individual coverage HRA if the class is full-time employees, part-time employees, salaried employees, non-salaried employees, or employees whose primary site of employment is in the same rating area (described in paragraph (d)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) of this section, respectively, and referred to collectively as the applicable classes or individually as an applicable class), except that: (1) In the case of the class of employees whose primary site of employment is in the same rating area (as described in paragraph (d)(2)(v) of this section), the minimum class size requirement does not apply if the geographic area defining the class is a State or a combination of two or more entire States; and (2) In the case of the classes of employees that are full-time employees and part-time employees (as described in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section, respectively), the minimum class size requirement applies only to those classes (and the classes are only applicable classes) if the employees in one such class are offered a traditional group health plan while the employees in the other such class are offered an individual coverage HRA. In such a case, the minimum class size requirement applies only to the class offered an individual coverage HRA. (D) A class of employees offered an individual coverage HRA is also subject to the minimum class size requirement if the class is a class of employees created by combining at least one of the applicable classes (as defined in paragraph (d)(3)(ii)(C) of this section) with any other class, except that the minimum class size requirement shall not apply to a class that is the result of a combination of one of the applicable classes and a class of employees who have not satisfied a waiting period (as described in paragraph (d)(2)(viii) of this section). (iii) Determination of the applicable class size minimum—(A) In general. The minimum number of employees that must be in a class of employees that is subject to the minimum class size requirement (the applicable class size minimum) is determined prior to the beginning of the plan year for each plan year of the individual coverage HRA and is: (1) 10, for an employer with fewer than 100 employees; (2) A number, rounded down to a whole number, equal to 10 percent of the total number of employees, for an employer with 100 to 200 employees; and (3) 20, for an employer with more than 200 employees. (B) Determining employer size. For purposes of this paragraph (d)(3), the number of employees of an employer is determined in advance of the plan year of the HRA based on the number of employees that the employer reasonably expects to employ on the first day of the plan year. (iv) Determining if a class satisfies the applicable class size minimum. For purposes of this paragraph (d)(3), whether a class of employees satisfies the applicable class size minimum for a plan year of the individual coverage HRA is based on the number of employees in the class offered the individual coverage HRA as of the first day of the plan year. Therefore, this determination is not based on the number of employees that actually enroll in the individual coverage HRA, and this determination is not affected by changes in the number of employees in the class during the plan year. (4) Consistency requirement. For any plan year, a plan sponsor may define “full-time employee,” “part-time employee,” and “seasonal employee” in accordance with the relevant provisions of sections 105(h) or 4980H of the Code, as set forth in paragraphs (d)(2)(i), (ii), and (vi) of this section, if: (i) To the extent applicable under the HRA for the plan year, each of the three classes of employees are defined in accordance with section 105(h) of the Code or each of the three classes of employees are defined in accordance with section 4980H of the Code for the plan year; and (ii) The HRA plan document sets forth the applicable definitions prior to the beginning of the plan year to which the definitions will apply. (5) Special rule for new hires—(i) In general. Notwithstanding paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section, a plan sponsor that offers a traditional group health plan to a class of employees may prospectively offer the employees in that class of employees who are hired on or after a certain future date (the new hire date) an individual coverage HRA (with this group of employees referred to as the new hire subclass), while continuing to offer employees in that class of employees who are hired before the new hire date a traditional group health plan (with the rule set forth in this sentence referred to as the special rule for new hires). For the new hire subclass, the individual coverage HRA must be offered on the same terms to all participants within the subclass, in accordance with paragraph (c)(3) of this section. In accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section, a plan sponsor may not offer a choice between an individual coverage HRA or a traditional group health plan to any employee in the new hire subclass or to any employee in the class who is not a member of the new hire subclass. (ii) New hire date. A plan sponsor may set the new hire date for a class of employees prospectively as any date on or after January 1, 2020. A plan sponsor may set different new hire dates prospectively for separate classes of employees. (iii) Discontinuation of use of special rule for new hires and multiple applications of the special rule for new hires. A plan sponsor may discontinue use of the special rule for new hires at any time for any class of employees. In that case, the new hire subclass is no longer treated as a separate subclass of employees. In the event a plan sponsor applies the special rule for new hires to a class of employees and later discontinues use of the rule to the class of employees, the plan sponsor may later apply the rule if the application of the rule would be permitted under the rules for initial application of the special rule for new hires. If a plan sponsor, in accordance with the requirements for the special rule for new hires, applies the rule to a class of employees subsequent to any prior application and discontinuance of the rule to that class, the new hire date must be prospective. (iv) Application of the minimum class size requirement under the special rule for new hires. The minimum class size requirement set forth in paragraph (d)(3) of this section does not apply to the new hire subclass. However, if a plan sponsor subdivides the new hire subclass subsequent to creating the new hire subclass, the minimum class size requirement set forth in paragraph (d)(3) of this section applies to any class of employees created by subdividing the new hire subclass, if the minimum class size requirement otherwise applies. (6) Student employees offered student premium reduction arrangements. For purposes of this section, if an institution of higher education (as defined in the Higher Education Act of 1965) offers a student employee a student premium reduction arrangement, the employee is not considered to be part of the class of employees to which the employee would otherwise belong. For the purpose of this paragraph (d)(6) and paragraph (f)(1) of this section, a student premium reduction arrangement is defined as any program offered by an institution of higher education under which the cost of insured or self-insured student health coverage is reduced for certain students through a credit, offset, reimbursement, stipend or similar arrangement. A student employee offered a student premium reduction arrangement is also not counted for purposes of determining the applicable class size minimum under paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of this section. If a student employee is not offered a student premium reduction arrangement (including if the student employee is offered an individual coverage HRA instead), the student employee is considered to be part of the class of employees to which the employee otherwise belongs and is counted for purposes of determining the applicable class size minimum under paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of this section. (e) Integration of Individual Coverage HRAs with Medicare—(1) General rule. An individual coverage HRA will be considered to be integrated with Medicare (and deemed to comply with PHS Act sections 2711 and 2713 and § 2590.715-2711(d)(4) of this part), provided that the conditions of paragraph (c) of this section are satisfied, subject to paragraph (e)(2) of this section. Nothing in this section requires that a participant and his or her dependents all have the same type of coverage; therefore, an individual coverage HRA may be integrated with Medicare for some individuals and with individual health insurance coverage for others, including, for example, a participant enrolled in Medicare Part A and B or Part C and his or her dependents enrolled in individual health insurance coverage. (2) Application of conditions in paragraph (c) of this section—(i) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, in applying the conditions of paragraph (c) of this section with respect to integration with Medicare, a reference to “individual health insurance coverage” is deemed to refer to coverage under Medicare Part A and B or Part C. References in this section to integration of an HRA with Medicare refer to integration of an individual coverage HRA with Medicare Part A and B or Part C. (ii) Exceptions. For purposes of the statement regarding ERISA under the notice content element under paragraph (c)(6)(ii)(A) of this section and the statement regarding the availability of a special enrollment period under the notice content element under paragraph (c)(6)(ii)(J) of this section, the term individual health insurance coverage means only individual health insurance coverage and does not also mean coverage under Medicare Part A and B or Part C. (f) Examples—(1) Examples regarding classes and the minimum class size requirement. The following examples illustrate the provisions of paragraph (c)(3) of this section, taking into account the provisions of paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) and (d)(6) of this section. In each example, the HRA is an individual coverage HRA that may reimburse any medical care expenses, including premiums for individual health insurance coverage and it is assumed that no participants or dependents are Medicare beneficiaries. (i) Example 1: Collectively bargained employees offered traditional group health plan; non-collectively bargained employees offered HRA—(A) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor A offers its employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement a traditional group health plan (as required by the collective bargaining agreement) and all other employees (non-collectively bargained employees) each an HRA on the same terms. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(i) (Example 1) because collectively bargained and non-collectively bargained employees may be treated as different classes of employees, one of which may be offered a traditional group health plan and the other of which may be offered an individual coverage HRA, and Plan Sponsor A offers the HRA on the same terms to all participants who are non-collectively bargained employees. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to this paragraph (f)(1)(i) (Example 1) even though Plan Sponsor A offers one class a traditional group health plan and one class the HRA because collectively bargained and non-collectively bargained employees are not applicable classes that are subject to the minimum class size requirement. (ii) Example 2: Collectively bargained employees in one unit offered traditional group health plan and in another unit offered HRA—(A) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor B offers its employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement with Local 100 a traditional group health plan (as required by the collective bargaining agreement), and its employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement with Local 200 each an HRA on the same terms (as required by the collective bargaining agreement). (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(ii) (Example 2) because the employees covered by the collective bargaining agreements with the two separate bargaining units (Local 100 and Local 200) may be treated as two different classes of employees and Plan Sponsor B offers an HRA on the same terms to the participants covered by the agreement with Local 200. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to this paragraph (f)(1)(ii) (Example 2) even though Plan Sponsor B offers the Local 100 employees a traditional group health plan and the Local 200 employees an HRA because collectively bargained employees are not applicable classes that are subject to the minimum class size requirement. (iii) Example 3: Employees in a waiting period offered no coverage; other employees offered an HRA—(A) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor C offers its employees who have completed a waiting period that complies with the requirements for waiting periods in § 2590.715-2708 of this part each an HRA on the same terms and does not offer coverage to its employees who have not completed the waiting period. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(iii) (Example 3) because employees who have completed a waiting period and employees who have not completed a waiting period may be treated as different classes and Plan Sponsor C offers the HRA on the same terms to all participants who have completed the waiting period. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to this paragraph (f)(1)(iii) (Example 3) because Plan Sponsor C does not offer at least one class of employees a traditional group health plan and because the class of employees who have not completed a waiting period and the class of employees who have completed a waiting period are not applicable classes that are subject to the minimum class size requirement. (iv) Example 4: Employees in a waiting period offered an HRA; other employees offered a traditional group health plan—(A) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor D offers its employees who have completed a waiting period that complies with the requirements for waiting periods in § 2590.715-2708 of this part a traditional group health plan and offers its employees who have not completed the waiting period each an HRA on the same terms. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(iv) (Example 4) because employees who have completed a waiting period and employees who have not completed a waiting period may be treated as different classes and Plan Sponsor D offers an HRA on the same terms to all participants who have not completed the waiting period. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to this paragraph (f)(1)(iv) (Example 4) even though Plan Sponsor D offers employees who have completed a waiting period a traditional group health plan and employees who have not completed a waiting period an HRA because the class of employees who have not completed a waiting period is not an applicable class that is subject to the minimum class size requirement (nor is the class made up of employees who have completed the waiting period). (v) Example 5: Staffing firm employees temporarily placed with customers offered an HRA; other employees offered a traditional group health plan—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor E is a staffing firm that places certain of its employees on temporary assignments with customers that are not the common law employers of Plan Sponsor E's employees or treated as a single employer with Plan Sponsor E under section 414(b), (c), (m), or (o) of the Code (unrelated entities); other employees work in Plan Sponsor E's office managing the staffing business (non-temporary employees). For 2020, Plan Sponsor E offers its employees who are on temporary assignments with customers each an HRA on the same terms. All other employees are offered a traditional group health plan. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(v) (Example 5) because the employees who are hired for temporary placement at an unrelated entity and non-temporary employees of Plan Sponsor E may be treated as different classes of employees and Plan Sponsor E offers an HRA on the same terms to all participants temporarily placed with customers. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to this paragraph (f)(1)(v) (Example 5) even though Plan Sponsor E offers one class a traditional group health plan and one class the HRA because the class of employees hired for temporary placement is not an applicable class that is subject to the minimum class size requirement (nor is the class made up of non-temporary employees). (vi) Example 6: Staffing firm employees temporarily placed with customers in rating area 1 offered an HRA; other employees offered a traditional group health plan—(A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (f)(1)(v) of this section (Example 5), except that Plan Sponsor E has work sites in rating area 1 and rating area 2, and it offers its 10 employees on temporary assignments with a work site in rating area 1 an HRA on the same terms. Plan Sponsor E has 200 other employees in rating areas 1 and 2, including its non-temporary employees in rating areas 1 and 2 and its employees on temporary assignments with a work site in rating area 2, all of whom are offered a traditional group health plan. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is not satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(vi) (Example 6) because, even though the employees who are temporarily placed with customers generally may be treated as employees of a different class, because Plan Sponsor E is also using a rating area to identify the class offered the HRA (which is an applicable class for the minimum class size requirement) and is offering one class the HRA and another class the traditional group health plan, the minimum class size requirement applies to the class offered the HRA, and the class offered the HRA fails to satisfy the minimum class size requirement. Because Plan Sponsor E employs 210 employees, the applicable class size minimum is 20, and the HRA is offered to only 10 employees. (vii) Example 7: Employees in State 1 offered traditional group health plan; employees in State 2 offered HRA—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor F employs 45 employees whose work site is in State 1 and 7 employees whose primary site of employment is in State 2. For 2020, Plan Sponsor F offers its 45 employees in State 1 a traditional group health plan, and each of its 7 employees in State 2 an HRA on the same terms. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(vii) (Example 7) because Plan Sponsor F offers the HRA on the same terms to all employees with a work site in State 2 and that class is a permissible class under paragraph (d) of this section. This is because employees whose work sites are in different rating areas may be considered different classes and a plan sponsor may create a class of employees by combining classes of employees, including by combining employees whose work site is in one rating area with employees whose work site is in a different rating area, or by combining all employees whose work site is in a state. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to this paragraph (f)(1)(vii) (Example 7) because the minimum class size requirement does not apply if the geographic area defining a class of employees is a state or a combination of two or more entire states. (viii) Example 8: Full-time seasonal employees offered HRA; all other full-time employees offered traditional group health plan; part-time employees offered no coverage—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor G employs 6 full-time seasonal employees, 75 full-time employees who are not seasonal employees, and 5 part-time employees. For 2020, Plan Sponsor G offers each of its 6 full-time seasonal employees an HRA on the same terms, its 75 full-time employees who are not seasonal employees a traditional group health plan, and offers no coverage to its 5 part-time employees. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(viii) (Example 8) because full-time seasonal employees and full-time employees who are not seasonal employees may be considered different classes and Plan Sponsor G offers the HRA on the same terms to all full-time seasonal employees. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to the class offered the HRA in this paragraph (f)(1)(viii) (Example 8) because part-time employees are not offered coverage and full-time employees are not an applicable class subject to the minimum class size requirement if part-time employees are not offered coverage. (ix) Example 9: Full-time employees in rating area 1 offered traditional group health plan; full-time employees in rating area 2 offered HRA; part-time employees offered no coverage—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor H employs 17 full-time employees and 10 part-time employees whose work site is in rating area 1 and 552 full-time employees whose work site is in rating area 2. For 2020, Plan Sponsor H offers its 17 full-time employees in rating area 1 a traditional group health plan and each of its 552 full-time employees in rating area 2 an HRA on the same terms. Plan Sponsor H offers no coverage to its 10 part-time employees in rating area 1. Plan Sponsor H reasonably expects to employ 569 employees on the first day of the HRA plan year. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(ix) (Example 9) because employees whose work sites are in different rating areas may be considered different classes and Plan Sponsor H offers the HRA on the same terms to all full-time employees in rating area 2. The minimum class size requirement applies to the class offered the HRA in this paragraph (f)(1)(ix) (Example 9) because the minimum class size requirement applies to a class based on a geographic area unless the geographic area is a state or a combination of two or more entire states. However, the minimum class size requirement applies only to the class offered the HRA, and Plan Sponsor H offers the HRA to the 552 full-time employees in rating area 2 on the first day of the plan year, satisfying the minimum class size requirement (because the applicable class size minimum for Plan Sponsor H is 20). (x) Example 10: Employees in rating area 1 offered HRA; employees in rating area 2 offered traditional group health plan—(A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (f)(1)(ix) of this section (Example 9) except that Plan Sponsor H offers its 17 full-time employees in rating area 1 the HRA and offers its 552 full-time employees in rating area 2 the traditional group health plan. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is not satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(x) (Example 10) because, even though employees whose work sites are in different rating areas generally may be considered different classes and Plan Sponsor H offers the HRA on the same terms to all participants in rating area 1, the HRA fails to satisfy the minimum class size requirement. Specifically, the minimum class size requirement applies to this paragraph (f)(1)(x) (Example 10) because the minimum class size requirement applies to a class based on a geographic area unless the geographic area is a state or a combination of two or more entire states. Further, the applicable class size minimum for Plan Sponsor H is 20 employees, and the HRA is only offered to the 17 full-time employees in rating area 1 on the first day of the HRA plan year. (xi) Example 11: Employees in State 1 and rating area 1 of State 2 offered HRA; employees in all other rating areas of State 2 offered traditional group health plan—(A) Facts. For 2020, Plan Sponsor I offers an HRA on the same terms to a total of 200 employees it employs with work sites in State 1 and in rating area 1 of State 2. Plan Sponsor I offers a traditional group health plan to its 150 employees with work sites in other rating areas in State 2. Plan Sponsor I reasonably expects to employ 350 employees on the first day of the HRA plan year. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xi) (Example 11). Plan Sponsor I may treat all of the employees with a work site in State 1 and rating area 1 of State 2 as a class of employees because employees whose work sites are in different rating areas may be considered different classes and a plan sponsor may create a class of employees by combining classes of employees, including by combining employees whose work site is in one rating area with a class of employees whose work site is in a different rating area. The minimum class size requirement applies to the class of employees offered the HRA (made up of employees in State 1 and in rating area 1 of State 2) because the minimum class size requirement applies to a class based on a geographic area unless the geographic area is a state or a combination of two or more entire states. In this case, the class is made up of a state plus a rating area which is not the entire state. However, this class satisfies the minimum class size requirement because the applicable class size minimum for Plan Sponsor I is 20, and Plan Sponsor I offered the HRA to 200 employees on the first day of the plan year. (xii) Example 12: Salaried employees offered a traditional group health plan; hourly employees offered an HRA—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor J has 163 salaried employees and 14 hourly employees. For 2020, Plan Sponsor J offers its 163 salaried employees a traditional group health plan and each of its 14 hourly employees an HRA on the same terms. Plan Sponsor J reasonably expects to employ 177 employees on the first day of the HRA plan year. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is not satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xii) (Example 12) because, even though salaried and hourly employees generally may be considered different classes and Plan Sponsor J offers the HRA on the same terms to all hourly employees, the HRA fails to satisfy the minimum class size requirement. Specifically, the minimum class size requirement applies in this paragraph (f)(1)(xii) (Example 12) because employees who are paid on a salaried basis and employees who are not paid on a salaried basis are applicable classes subject to the minimum class size requirement. Because Plan Sponsor J reasonably expects to employ between 100 and 200 employees on the first day of the plan year, the applicable class size minimum is 10 percent, rounded down to a whole number. Ten percent of 177 total employees, rounded down to a whole number is 17, and the HRA is offered to only 14 hourly employees. (xiii) Example 13: Part-time employees and full-time employees offered different HRAs; no traditional group health plan offered—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor K has 50 full-time employees and 7 part-time employees. For 2020, Plan Sponsor K offers its 50 full-time employees $2,000 each in an HRA otherwise provided on the same terms and each of its 7 part-time employees $500 in an HRA otherwise provided on the same terms. Plan Sponsor K reasonably expects to employ 57 employees on the first day of the HRA plan year. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xiii) (Example 13) because full-time employees and part-time employees may be treated as different classes and Plan Sponsor K offers an HRA on the same terms to all the participants in each class. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to either the full-time class or the part-time class because (although in certain circumstances the minimum class size requirement applies to a class of full-time employees and a class of part-time employees) Plan Sponsor K does not offer any class of employees a traditional group health plan, and the minimum class size requirement applies only when, among other things, at least one class of employees is offered a traditional group health plan while another class is offered an HRA. (xiv) Example 14: No employees offered an HRA—(A) Facts. The facts are the same facts as in paragraph (f)(1)(xiii) of this section (Example 13), except that Plan Sponsor K offers its full-time employees a traditional group health plan and does not offer any group health plan (either a traditional group health plan or an HRA) to its part-time employees. (B) Conclusion. The regulations set forth under this section do not apply to Plan Sponsor K because Plan Sponsor K does not offer an individual coverage HRA to any employee. (xv) Example 15: Full-time employees offered traditional group health plan; part-time employees offered HRA—(A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (f)(1)(xiii) of this section (Example 13), except that Plan Sponsor K offers its full-time employees a traditional group health plan and offers each of its part-time employees $500 in an HRA and otherwise on the same terms. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is not satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xv) (Example 15) because, even though the full-time employees and the part-time employees generally may be treated as different classes, in this paragraph (f)(1)(xv) (Example 15), the minimum class size requirement applies to the part-time employees, and it is not satisfied. Specifically, the minimum class size requirement applies to the part-time employees because that requirement applies to an applicable class offered an HRA when one class is offered a traditional group health plan while another class is offered an HRA, and to the part-time and full-time employee classes when one of those classes is offered a traditional group health plan while the other is offered an HRA. Because Plan Sponsor K reasonably expects to employ fewer than 100 employees on the first day of the HRA plan year, the applicable class size minimum for Plan Sponsor K is 10 employees, but Plan Sponsor K offered the HRA only to its 7 part-time employees. (xvi) Example 16: Satisfying minimum class size requirement based on employees offered HRA—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor L employs 78 full-time employees and 12 part-time employees. For 2020, Plan Sponsor L offers its 78 full-time employees a traditional group health plan and each of its 12 part-times employees an HRA on the same terms. Only 6 part-time employees enroll in the HRA. Plan Sponsor L reasonably expects to employ fewer than 100 employees on the first day of the HRA plan year. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xvi) (Example 16) because full-time employees and part-time employees may be treated as different classes, Plan Sponsor L offers an HRA on the same terms to all the participants in the part-time class, and the minimum class size requirement is satisfied. Specifically, whether a class of employees satisfies the applicable class size minimum is determined as of the first day of the plan year based on the number of employees in a class that is offered an HRA, not on the number of employees who enroll in the HRA. The applicable class size minimum for Plan Sponsor L is 10 employees, and Plan Sponsor L offered the HRA to its 12 part-time employees. (xvii) Example 17: Student employees offered student premium reduction arrangements and same terms requirement—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor M is an institution of higher education that offers each of its part-time employees an HRA on the same terms, except that it offers its part-time employees who are student employees a student premium reduction arrangement, and the student premium reduction arrangement provides different amounts to different part-time student employees. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xvii) (Example 17) because Plan Sponsor M offers the HRA on the same terms to its part-time employees who are not students and because the part-time student employees offered a student premium reduction arrangement (and their varying HRAs) are not taken into account as part-time employees for purposes of determining whether a class of employees is offered an HRA on the same terms. (xiii) Example 18: Student employees offered student premium reduction arrangements and minimum class size requirement—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor N is an institution of higher education with 25 hourly employees. Plan Sponsor N offers 15 of its hourly employees, who are student employees, a student premium reduction arrangement and it wants to offer its other 10 hourly employees an HRA for 2022. Plan Sponsor N offers its salaried employees a traditional group health plan. Plan Sponsor N reasonably expects to have 250 employees on the first day of the 2022 HRA plan year, 15 of which will have offers of student premium reduction arrangements. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is not satisfied in this paragraph (f)(1)(xviii) (Example 18). The minimum class size requirement will apply to the class of hourly employees to which Plan Sponsor N wants to offer the HRA because Plan Sponsor N offers a class of employees a traditional group health plan and another class the HRA, and the minimum class size requirement generally applies to a class of hourly employees offered an HRA. Plan Sponsor N's applicable class size minimum is 20 because Plan Sponsor N reasonably expects to employ 235 employees on the first day of the plan year (250 employees minus 15 employees receiving a student premium reduction arrangement). Plan Sponsor N may not offer the HRA to its hourly employees because the 10 employees offered the HRA as of the first day of the plan year does not satisfy the applicable class size minimum. (2) Examples regarding special rule for new hires. The following examples illustrate the provisions of paragraph (c)(3) of this section, taking into account the provisions of paragraph (d) of this section, in particular the special rule for new hires under paragraph (d)(5) of this section. In each example, the HRA is an individual coverage HRA that has a calendar year plan year and may reimburse any medical care expenses, including premiums for individual health insurance coverage. The examples also assume that no participants or dependents are Medicare beneficiaries. (i) Example 1: Application of special rule for new hires to all employees—(A) Facts. For 2021, Plan Sponsor A offers all employees a traditional group health plan. For 2022, Plan Sponsor A offers all employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, an HRA on the same terms and continues to offer the traditional group health plan to employees hired before that date. On the first day of the 2022 plan year, Plan Sponsor A has 2 new hires who are offered the HRA. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(2)(i) (Example 1) because, under the special rule for new hires in paragraph (d)(5) of this section, the employees newly hired on and after January 1, 2022, may be treated as a new hire subclass, Plan Sponsor A offers the HRA on the same terms to all participants in the new hire subclass, and the minimum class size requirement does not apply to the new hire subclass. (ii) Example 2: Application of special rule for new hires to full-time employees—(A) Facts. For 2021, Plan Sponsor B offers a traditional group health plan to its full-time employees and does not offer any coverage to its part-time employees. For 2022, Plan Sponsor B offers full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, an HRA on the same terms, continues to offer its full-time employees hired before that date a traditional group health plan, and continues to offer no coverage to its part-time employees. On the first day of the 2022 plan year, Plan Sponsor B has 2 new hire, full-time employees who are offered the HRA. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(2)(ii) (Example 2) because, under the special rule for new hires in paragraph (d)(5) of this section, the full-time employees newly hired on and after January 1, 2022, may be treated as a new hire subclass and Plan Sponsor B offers the HRA on the same terms to all participants in the new hire subclass. The minimum class size requirement does not apply to the new hire subclass. (iii) Example 3: Special rule for new hires impermissibly applied retroactively—(A) Facts. For 2025, Plan Sponsor C offers a traditional group health plan to its full-time employees. For 2026, Plan Sponsor C wants to offer an HRA to its full-time employees hired on and after January 1, 2023, while continuing to offer a traditional group health plan to its full-time employees hired before January 1, 2023. (B) Conclusion. The special rule for new hires under paragraph (d)(5) of this section does not apply in this paragraph (f)(2)(iii) (Example 3) because the rule must be applied prospectively. That is, Plan Sponsor C may not, in 2026, choose to apply the special rule for new hires retroactive to 2023. If Plan Sponsor C were to offer an HRA in this way, it would fail to satisfy the conditions under paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section because the new hire subclass would not be treated as a subclass for purposes of applying those rules and, therefore, all full-time employees would be treated as one class to which either a traditional group health plan or an HRA could be offered, but not both. (iv) Example 4: Permissible second application of the special rule for new hires to the same class of employees—(A) Facts. For 2021, Plan Sponsor D offers all of its full-time employees a traditional group health plan. For 2022, Plan Sponsor D applies the special rule for new hires and offers an HRA on the same terms to all employees hired on and after January 1, 2022, and continues to offer a traditional group health plan to full-time employees hired before that date. For 2025, Plan Sponsor D discontinues use of the special rule for new hires, and again offers all full-time employees a traditional group health plan. In 2030, Plan Sponsor D decides to apply the special rule for new hires to the full-time employee class again, offering an HRA to all full-time employees hired on and after January 1, 2030, on the same terms, while continuing to offer employees hired before that date a traditional group health plan. (B) Conclusion. Plan Sponsor D has permissibly applied the special rule for new hires and is in compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section. (v) Example 5: Impermissible second application of the special rule for new hires to the same class of employees—(A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (f)(2)(iv) of this section (Example 4), except that for 2025, Plan Sponsor D discontinues use of the special rule for new hires by offering all full-time employees an HRA on the same terms. Further, for 2030, Plan Sponsor D wants to continue to offer an HRA on the same terms to all full-time employees hired before January 1, 2030, and to offer all full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2030, an HRA in a different amount. (B) Conclusion. Plan Sponsor D may not apply the special rule for new hires for 2030 to the class of full-time employees being offered an HRA because the special rule for new hires may only be applied to a class that is being offered a traditional group health plan. (vi) Example 6: New full-time employees offered different HRAs in different rating areas—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor E has work sites in rating area 1, rating area 2, and rating area 3. For 2021, Plan Sponsor E offers its full-time employees a traditional group health plan. For 2022, Plan Sponsor E offers its full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, in rating area 1 an HRA of $3,000, its full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, in rating area 2 an HRA of $5,000, and its full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, in rating area 3 an HRA of $7,000. Within each class offered an HRA, Plan Sponsor E offers the HRA on the same terms. Plan Sponsor E offers its full-time employees hired prior to January 1, 2022, in each of those classes a traditional group health plan. On the first day of the 2022 plan year, there is one new hire, full-time employee in rating area 1, three new hire, full-time employees in rating area 2, and 10 new hire-full-time employees in rating area 3. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(2)(vi) (Example 6) because, under the special rule for new hires in paragraph (d)(5) of this section, the full-time employees in each of the three rating areas newly hired on and after January 1, 2022, may be treated as three new hire subclasses and Plan Sponsor E offers the HRA on the same terms to all participants in the new hire subclasses. Further, the minimum class size requirement does not apply to the new hire subclasses. (vii) Example 7: New full-time employee class subdivided based on rating area—(A) Facts. Plan Sponsor F offers its full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, an HRA on the same terms and it continues to offer its full-time employees hired before that date a traditional group health plan. Plan Sponsor F offers no coverage to its part-time employees. For the 2025 plan year, Plan Sponsor F wants to subdivide the full-time new hire subclass so that those whose work site is in rating area 1 will be offered the traditional group health plan and those whose work site is in rating area 2 will continue to receive the HRA. Plan Sponsor F reasonably expects to employ 219 employees on January 1, 2025. As of January 1, 2025, Plan Sponsor F has 15 full-time employees whose work site in in rating area 2 and who were hired between January 1, 2022, and January 1, 2025. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is not satisfied in this paragraph (f)(2)(vii) (Example 7) because the new hire subclass has been subdivided in a manner that is subject to the minimum class size requirement, and the class offered the HRA fails to satisfy the minimum class size requirement. Specifically, once the new hire subclass is subdivided the general rules for applying the minimum class size requirement apply to the employees offered the HRA in the new hire subclass. In this case, because the subdivision of the new hire full-time subclass is based on rating areas; a class based on rating areas is an applicable class subject to the minimum class size requirement; and the employees in one rating area are to be offered the HRA, while the employees in the other rating area are offered the traditional group health plan, the minimum class size requirement would apply on and after the date of the subdivision. Further, the minimum class size requirement would not be satisfied, because the applicable class size minimum for Plan Sponsor F would be 20, and only 15 employees in rating area 2 would be offered the HRA. (viii) Example 8: New full-time employee class subdivided based on state—(A) Facts. The facts are the same as in paragraph (f)(2)(vii) of this section (Example 7), except that for the 2025 plan year, Plan Sponsor F intends to subdivide the new hire, full-time class so that those in State 1 will be offered the traditional group health plan and those in State 2 will each be offered an HRA on the same terms. (B) Conclusion. The same terms requirement of paragraph (c)(3) of this section is satisfied in this paragraph (f)(2)(viii) (Example 8) because even though the new hire subclass has been subdivided, it has been subdivided in a manner that is not subject to the minimum class size requirement as the subdivision is based on the entire state. (ix) Example 9: New full-time employees and part-time employees offered HRA—(A) Facts. In 2021, Plan Sponsor G offers its full-time employees a traditional group health plan and does not offer coverage to its part-time employees. For the 2022 plan year, Plan Sponsor G offers its full-time employees hired on or after January 1, 2022, and all of its part-time employees, including those hired before January 1, 2022, and those hired on and after January 1, 2022, an HRA on the same terms, and it continues to offer its full-time employees hired before January 1, 2022, a traditional group health plan. (B) Conclusion. The minimum class size requirement applies to the part-time employees offered the HRA in 2022 because the class is being offered an HRA; the special rule for new hires does not apply (because this class was not previously offered a traditional group health plan) and so it is not a new hire subclass exempt from the minimum class size requirement; another class of employees (that is, full-time hired before January 1, 2022) are being offered a traditional group health plan; and the part-time employee class is generally an applicable classes that is subject to the minimum class size requirement. However, because the full-time, new hire subclass is based on the special rule for new hires, the minimum class size requirement does not apply to full-time new hires offered an HRA in 2022. (g) Applicability date. This section applies to plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2020.

§ 2590.703 Guaranteed renewability in multiemployer plans and multiple employer welfare arrangements. [Reserved]

§ 2590.711 Standards relating to benefits for mothers and newborns. (a) Hospital length of stay—(1) General rule. Except as provided in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, a group health plan, or a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, that provides benefits for a hospital length of stay in connection with childbirth for a mother or her newborn may not restrict benefits for the stay to less than— (i) 48 hours following a vaginal delivery; or (ii) 96 hours following a delivery by cesarean section. (2) When stay begins—(i) Delivery in a hospital. If delivery occurs in a hospital, the hospital length of stay for the mother or newborn child begins at the time of delivery (or in the case of multiple births, at the time of the last delivery). (ii) Delivery outside a hospital. If delivery occurs outside a hospital, the hospital length of stay begins at the time the mother or newborn is admitted as a hospital inpatient in connection with childbirth. The determination of whether an admission is in connection with childbirth is a medical decision to be made by the attending provider. (3) Examples. The rules of paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, the group health plan provides benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth and is subject to the requirements of this section, as follows: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the 48-hour period described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section ends at 6 a.m. on June 14. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the 48-hour period described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section ends at 7 p.m. on October 3. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the hospital length-of-stay requirements of this section do not apply to the child's admission to the hospital because the admission is not in connection with childbirth. (4) Authorization not required—(i) In general. A plan or issuer is prohibited from requiring that a physician or other health care provider obtain authorization from the plan or issuer for prescribing the hospital length of stay specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. (See also paragraphs (b)(2) and (c)(3) of this section for rules and examples regarding other authorization and certain notice requirements.) (ii) Example. The rule of this paragraph (a)(4) is illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, the requirement that an attending provider complete a certificate of medical necessity to obtain authorization for the period between 72 hours and 96 hours following a delivery by cesarean section is prohibited by this paragraph (a)(4). (5) Exceptions—(i) Discharge of mother. If a decision to discharge a mother earlier than the period specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section is made by an attending provider, in consultation with the mother, the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section do not apply for any period after the discharge. (ii) Discharge of newborn. If a decision to discharge a newborn child earlier than the period specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section is made by an attending provider, in consultation with the mother (or the newborn's authorized representative), the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section do not apply for any period after the discharge. (iii) Attending provider defined. For purposes of this section, attending provider means an individual who is licensed under applicable state law to provide maternity or pediatric care and who is directly responsible for providing maternity or pediatric care to a mother or newborn child. Therefore, a plan, hospital, managed care organization, or other issuer is not an attending provider. (iv) Example. The rules of this paragraph (a)(5) are illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, the requirements of this paragraph (a) have been satisfied with respect to the mother and the newborn. If either is readmitted, the hospital stay for the readmission is not subject to this section. (b) Prohibitions—(1) With respect to mothers—(i) In general. A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, may not— (A) Deny a mother or her newborn child eligibility or continued eligibility to enroll or renew coverage under the terms of the plan solely to avoid the requirements of this section; or (B) Provide payments (including payments-in-kind) or rebates to a mother to encourage her to accept less than the minimum protections available under this section. (ii) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (b)(1) are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, the group health plan is subject to the requirements of this section, as follows: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, because waiver of the copayment and deductible is in the nature of a rebate that the mother would not receive if she and her newborn remained in the hospital, it is prohibited by this paragraph (b)(1). (In addition, the plan violates paragraph (b)(2) of this section because, in effect, no copayment or deductible is required for the first portion of the stay and a double copayment and a deductible are required for the second portion of the stay.) (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, because the follow-up visit does not provide any services beyond what the mother and her newborn would receive in the hospital, coverage for the follow-up visit is not prohibited by this paragraph (b)(1). (2) With respect to benefit restrictions—(i) In general. Subject to paragraph (c)(3) of this section, a group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, may not restrict the benefits for any portion of a hospital length of stay specified in paragraph (a) of this section in a manner that is less favorable than the benefits provided for any preceding portion of the stay. (ii) Example. The rules of this paragraph (b)(2) are illustrated by the following example: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example, the requirement to obtain precertification for the two 24-hour periods immediately following the initial 48-hour stay is prohibited by this paragraph (b)(2) because benefits for the latter part of the stay are restricted in a manner that is less favorable than benefits for a preceding portion of the stay. (However, this section does not prohibit a plan from requiring precertification for any period after the first 96 hours.) In addition, the requirement to obtain precertification from the plan based on medical necessity for a hospital length of stay within the 96-hour period would also violate paragraph (a) of this section. (3) With respect to attending providers. A group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, may not directly or indirectly— (i) Penalize (for example, take disciplinary action against or retaliate against), or otherwise reduce or limit the compensation of, an attending provider because the provider furnished care to a participant or beneficiary in accordance with this section; or (ii) Provide monetary or other incentives to an attending provider to induce the provider to furnish care to a participant or beneficiary in a manner inconsistent with this section, including providing any incentive that could induce an attending provider to discharge a mother or newborn earlier than 48 hours (or 96 hours) after delivery. (c) Construction. With respect to this section, the following rules of construction apply: (1) Hospital stays not mandatory. This section does not require a mother to— (i) Give birth in a hospital; or (ii) Stay in the hospital for a fixed period of time following the birth of her child. (2) Hospital stay benefits not mandated. This section does not apply to any group health plan, or any group health insurance coverage, that does not provide benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth for a mother or her newborn child. (3) Cost-sharing rules—(i) In general. This section does not prevent a group health plan or a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage from imposing deductibles, coinsurance, or other cost-sharing in relation to benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth for a mother or a newborn under the plan or coverage, except that the coinsurance or other cost-sharing for any portion of the hospital length of stay specified in paragraph (a) of this section may not be greater than that for any preceding portion of the stay. (ii) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (c)(3) are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, the group health plan is subject to the requirements of this section, as follows: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the plan violates the rules of this paragraph (c)(3) because coinsurance for the second 24-hour period of the 48-hour stay is greater than that for the preceding portion of the stay. (In addition, the plan also violates the similar rule in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.) (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the plan does not violate the rules of this paragraph (c)(3) because the level of benefits provided (70 percent or 80 percent) is consistent throughout the 48-hour (or 96-hour) hospital length of stay required under paragraph (a) of this section. (In addition, the plan does not violate the rules in paragraph (a)(4) or (b)(2) of this section.) (4) Compensation of attending provider. This section does not prevent a group health plan or a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage from negotiating with an attending provider the level and type of compensation for care furnished in accordance with this section (including paragraph (b) of this section). (d) Notice requirement. See 29 CFR 2520.102-3(u) (relating to the disclosure requirement under section 711(d) of the Act). (e) Applicability in certain states—(1) Health insurance coverage. The requirements of section 711 of the Act and this section do not apply with respect to health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan if there is a state law regulating the coverage that meets any of the following criteria: (i) The state law requires the coverage to provide for at least a 48-hour hospital length of stay following a vaginal delivery and at least a 96-hour hospital length of stay following a delivery by cesarean section. (ii) The state law requires the coverage to provide for maternity and pediatric care in accordance with guidelines that relate to care following childbirth established by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, or any other established professional medical association. (iii) The state law requires, in connection with the coverage for maternity care, that the hospital length of stay for such care is left to the decision of (or is required to be made by) the attending provider in consultation with the mother. State laws that require the decision to be made by the attending provider with the consent of the mother satisfy the criterion of this paragraph (e)(1)(iii). (2) Group health plans—(i) Fully-insured plans. For a group health plan that provides benefits solely through health insurance coverage, if the state law regulating the health insurance coverage meets any of the criteria in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, then the requirements of section 711 of the Act and this section do not apply. (ii) Self-insured plans. For a group health plan that provides all benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth other than through health insurance coverage, the requirements of section 711 of the Act and this section apply. (iii) Partially-insured plans. For a group health plan that provides some benefits through health insurance coverage, if the state law regulating the health insurance coverage meets any of the criteria in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, then the requirements of section 711 of the Act and this section apply only to the extent the plan provides benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth other than through health insurance coverage. (3) Relation to section 731(a) of the Act. The preemption provisions contained in section 731(a)(1) of the Act and Sec. 2590.731(a) do not supersede a state law described in paragraph (e)(1) of this section. (4) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (e) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the coverage is subject to state law, and the requirements of section 711 of the Act and this section do not apply. (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, even though the state law satisfies the criterion of paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of this section, because the plan provides benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth other than through health insurance coverage, the plan is subject to the requirements of section 711 of the Act and this section. (f) Applicability date. This section applies to group health plans, and health insurance issuers offering group health insurance coverage, for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2009.

§ 2590.712 Parity in mental health and substance use disorder benefits. (a) Purpose and meaning of terms—(1) Purpose. This section and § 2590.712-1 set forth rules to ensure parity in aggregate lifetime and annual dollar limits, financial requirements, and quantitative and nonquantitative treatment limitations between mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits, as required under ERISA section 712. A fundamental purpose of ERISA section 712, this section, and § 2590.712-1 is to ensure that participants and beneficiaries in a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with a group health plan) that offers mental health or substance use disorder benefits are not subject to more restrictive aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits, financial requirements, or treatment limitations with respect to those benefits than the predominant dollar limits, financial requirements, or treatment limitations that are applied to substantially all medical/surgical benefits covered by the plan or coverage in the same classification, as further provided in this section and § 2590.712-1. Accordingly, in complying with the provisions of ERISA section 712, this section, and § 2590.712-1, plans and issuers must not design or apply financial requirements and treatment limitations that impose a greater burden on access (that is, are more restrictive) to mental health or substance use disorder benefits under the plan or coverage than they impose on access to medical/surgical benefits in the same classification of benefits. The provisions of ERISA section 712, this section, and § 2590.712-1 should be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with the purpose described in this paragraph (a)(1). (2) Meaning of terms. For purposes of this section and § 2590.712-1, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise, the following terms have the meanings indicated: Aggregate lifetime dollar limit means a dollar limitation on the total amount of specified benefits that may be paid under a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with such a plan) for any coverage unit. Annual dollar limit means a dollar limitation on the total amount of specified benefits that may be paid in a 12-month period under a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with such a plan) for any coverage unit. Coverage unit means coverage unit as described in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section. Cumulative financial requirements are financial requirements that determine whether or to what extent benefits are provided based on accumulated amounts and include deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. (However, cumulative financial requirements do not include aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits because these two terms are excluded from the meaning of financial requirements.) Cumulative quantitative treatment limitations are treatment limitations that determine whether or to what extent benefits are provided based on accumulated amounts, such as annual or lifetime day or visit limits. DSM means the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. For the purpose of this definition, the most current version of the DSM as of November 22, 2024, is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision published in March 2022. A subsequent version of the DSM published after November 22, 2024, will be considered the most current version beginning on the first day of the plan year that is one year after the date the subsequent version is published. Evidentiary standards are any evidence, sources, or standards that a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with such a plan) considered or relied upon in designing or applying a factor with respect to a nonquantitative treatment limitation, including specific benchmarks or thresholds. Evidentiary standards may be empirical, statistical, or clinical in nature, and include: sources acquired or originating from an objective third party, such as recognized medical literature, professional standards and protocols (which may include comparative effectiveness studies and clinical trials), published research studies, payment rates for items and services (such as publicly available databases of the “usual, customary and reasonable” rates paid for items and services), and clinical treatment guidelines; internal plan or issuer data, such as claims or utilization data or criteria for assuring a sufficient mix and number of network providers; and benchmarks or thresholds, such as measures of excessive utilization, cost levels, time or distance standards, or network participation percentage thresholds. Factors are all information, including processes and strategies (but not evidentiary standards), that a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with such a plan) considered or relied upon to design a nonquantitative treatment limitation, or to determine whether or how the nonquantitative treatment limitation applies to benefits under the plan or coverage. Examples of factors include, but are not limited to: provider discretion in determining a diagnosis or type or length of treatment; clinical efficacy of any proposed treatment or service; licensing and accreditation of providers; claim types with a high percentage of fraud; quality measures; treatment outcomes; severity or chronicity of condition; variability in the cost of an episode of treatment; high cost growth; variability in cost and quality; elasticity of demand; and geographic location. Financial requirements include deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, or out-of-pocket maximums. Financial requirements do not include aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits. ICD means the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases adopted by the Department of Health and Human Services through 45 CFR 162.1002. For the purpose of this definition, the most current version of the ICD as of November 22, 2024, is the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification adopted for the period beginning on October 1, 2015. Any subsequent version of the ICD adopted through 45 CFR 162.1002 after November 22, 2024, will be considered the most current version beginning on the first day of the plan year that is one year after the date the subsequent version is adopted. Medical/surgical benefits means benefits with respect to items or services for medical conditions or surgical procedures, as defined under the terms of the group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with such a plan) and in accordance with applicable Federal and State law, but does not include mental health benefits or substance use disorder benefits. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, any condition or procedure defined by the plan or coverage as being or as not being a medical condition or surgical procedure must be defined consistent with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice (for example, the most current version of the ICD). To the extent generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice do not address whether a condition or procedure is a medical condition or surgical procedure, plans and issuers may define the condition or procedure in accordance with applicable Federal and State law. Mental health benefits means benefits with respect to items or services for mental health conditions, as defined under the terms of the group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with such a plan) and in accordance with applicable Federal and State law, but does not include medical/surgical benefits or substance use disorder benefits. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, any condition defined by the plan or coverage as being or as not being a mental health condition must be defined consistent with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice. For the purpose of this definition, to be consistent with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice, the definition must include all conditions covered under the plan or coverage, except for substance use disorders, that fall under any of the diagnostic categories listed in the mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders chapter (or equivalent chapter) of the most current version of the ICD or that are listed in the most current version of the DSM. To the extent generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice do not address whether a condition is a mental health condition, plans and issuers may define the condition in accordance with applicable Federal and State law. Processes are actions, steps, or procedures that a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with such a plan) uses to apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation, including actions, steps, or procedures established by the plan or issuer as requirements in order for a participant or beneficiary to access benefits, including through actions by a participant's or beneficiary's authorized representative or a provider or facility. Examples of processes include, but are not limited to: procedures to submit information to authorize coverage for an item or service prior to receiving the benefit or while treatment is ongoing (including requirements for peer or expert clinical review of that information); provider referral requirements that are used to determine when and how a participant or beneficiary may access certain services; and the development and approval of a treatment plan used in a concurrent review process to determine whether a specific request should be granted or denied. Processes also include the specific procedures used by staff or other representatives of a plan or issuer (or the service provider of a plan or issuer) to administer the application of nonquantitative treatment limitations, such as how a panel of staff members applies the nonquantitative treatment limitation (including the qualifications of staff involved, number of staff members allocated, and time allocated), consultations with panels of experts in applying the nonquantitative treatment limitation, and the degree of reviewer discretion in adhering to criteria hierarchy when applying a nonquantitative treatment limitation. Strategies are practices, methods, or internal metrics that a plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with such a plan) considers, reviews, or uses to design a nonquantitative treatment limitation. Examples of strategies include, but are not limited to: the development of the clinical rationale used in approving or denying benefits; the method of determining whether and how to deviate from generally accepted standards of care in concurrent reviews; the selection of information deemed reasonably necessary to make medical necessity determinations; reliance on treatment guidelines or guidelines provided by third-party organizations in the design of a nonquantitative treatment limitation; and rationales used in selecting and adopting certain threshold amounts to apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation, professional standards and protocols to determine utilization management standards, and fee schedules used to determine provider reimbursement rates, used as part of a nonquantitative treatment limitation. Strategies also include the method of creating and determining the composition of the staff or other representatives of a plan or issuer (or the service provider of a plan or issuer) that deliberates, or otherwise makes decisions, on the design of nonquantitative treatment limitations, including the plan's or issuer's methods for making decisions related to the qualifications of staff involved, number of staff members allocated, and time allocated; breadth of sources and evidence considered; consultations with panels of experts in designing the nonquantitative treatment limitation; and the composition of the panels used to design a nonquantitative treatment limitation. Substance use disorder benefits means benefits with respect to items or services for substance use disorders, as defined under the terms of the group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with such a plan) and in accordance with applicable Federal and State law, but does not include medical/surgical benefits or mental health benefits. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, any disorder defined by the plan or coverage as being or as not being a substance use disorder must be defined consistent with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice. For the purpose of this definition, to be consistent with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice, the definition must include all disorders covered under the plan or coverage that fall under any of the diagnostic categories listed as a mental or behavioral disorder due to psychoactive substance use (or equivalent category) in the mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders chapter (or equivalent chapter) of the most current version of the ICD or that are listed as a Substance-Related and Addictive Disorder (or equivalent category) in the most current version of the DSM. To the extent generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice do not address whether a disorder is a substance use disorder, plans and issuers may define the disorder in accordance with applicable Federal and State law. Treatment limitations include limits on benefits based on the frequency of treatment, number of visits, days of coverage, days in a waiting period, or other similar limits on the scope or duration of treatment. Treatment limitations include both quantitative treatment limitations, which are expressed numerically (such as 50 outpatient visits per year), and nonquantitative treatment limitations (such as standards related to network composition), which otherwise limit the scope or duration of benefits for treatment under a plan or coverage. (See paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section for an illustrative, non-exhaustive list of nonquantitative treatment limitations.) A complete exclusion of all benefits for a particular condition or disorder, however, is not a treatment limitation for purposes of this definition. (b) Parity requirements with respect to aggregate lifetime and annual dollar limits. This paragraph (b) details the application of the parity requirements with respect to aggregate lifetime and annual dollar limits. This paragraph (b) does not address the provisions of PHS Act section 2711, as incorporated in ERISA section 715 and Code section 9815, which prohibit imposing lifetime and annual limits on the dollar value of essential health benefits. For more information, see 29 CFR 2590.715-2711. (1) General—(i) General parity requirement. A group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with a group health plan) that provides both medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits must comply with paragraph (b)(2), (b)(3), or (b)(5) of this section. (ii) Exception. The rule in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section does not apply if a plan (or health insurance coverage) satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f) or (g) of this section (relating to exemptions for small employers and for increased cost). (2) Plan with no limit or limits on less than one-third of all medical/surgical benefits. If a plan (or health insurance coverage) does not include an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit on any medical/surgical benefits or includes an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit that applies to less than one-third of all medical/surgical benefits, it may not impose an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit, respectively, on mental health or substance use disorder benefits. (3) Plan with a limit on at least two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits. If a plan (or health insurance coverage) includes an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit on at least two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits, it must either— (i) Apply the aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit both to the medical/surgical benefits to which the limit would otherwise apply and to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in a manner that does not distinguish between the medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits; or (ii) Not include an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit on mental health or substance use disorder benefits that is less than the aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit, respectively, on medical/surgical benefits. (For cumulative limits other than aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits, see paragraph (c)(3)(v) of this section prohibiting separately accumulating cumulative financial requirements or cumulative quantitative treatment limitations.) (4) Determining one-third and two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits. For purposes of this paragraph (b), the determination of whether the portion of medical/surgical benefits subject to an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit represents one-third or two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits is based on the dollar amount of all plan payments for medical/surgical benefits expected to be paid under the plan for the plan year (or for the portion of the plan year after a change in plan benefits that affects the applicability of the aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits). Any reasonable method may be used to determine whether the dollar amount expected to be paid under the plan will constitute one-third or two-thirds of the dollar amount of all plan payments for medical/surgical benefits. (5) Plan not described in paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(3) of this section—(i) In general. A group health plan (or health insurance coverage) that is not described in paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(3) of this section with respect to aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits on medical/surgical benefits, must either— (A) Impose no aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit, as appropriate, on mental health or substance use disorder benefits; or (B) Impose an aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limit on mental health or substance use disorder benefits that is no less than an average limit calculated for medical/surgical benefits in the following manner. The average limit is calculated by taking into account the weighted average of the aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits, as appropriate, that are applicable to the categories of medical/surgical benefits. Limits based on delivery systems, such as inpatient/outpatient treatment or normal treatment of common, low-cost conditions (such as treatment of normal births), do not constitute categories for purposes of this paragraph (b)(5)(i)(B). In addition, for purposes of determining weighted averages, any benefits that are not within a category that is subject to a separately-designated dollar limit under the plan are taken into account as a single separate category by using an estimate of the upper limit on the dollar amount that a plan may reasonably be expected to incur with respect to such benefits, taking into account any other applicable restrictions under the plan. (ii) Weighting. For purposes of this paragraph (b)(5), the weighting applicable to any category of medical/surgical benefits is determined in the manner set forth in paragraph (b)(4) of this section for determining one-third or two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits. (c) Parity requirements with respect to financial requirements and treatment limitations—(1) Clarification of terms—(i) Classification of benefits. When reference is made in this paragraph (c) to a classification of benefits, the term “classification” means a classification as described in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section. (ii) Type of financial requirement or treatment limitation. When reference is made in this paragraph (c) to a type of financial requirement or treatment limitation, the reference to type means its nature. Different types of financial requirements include deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, and out-of-pocket maximums. Different types of quantitative treatment limitations include annual, episode, and lifetime day and visit limits. See paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of this section for an illustrative, non-exhaustive list of nonquantitative treatment limitations. (iii) Level of a type of financial requirement or treatment limitation. When reference is made in this paragraph (c) to a level of a type of financial requirement or treatment limitation, level refers to the magnitude of the type of financial requirement or treatment limitation. For example, different levels of coinsurance include 20 percent and 30 percent; different levels of a copayment include $15 and $20; different levels of a deductible include $250 and $500; and different levels of an episode limit include 21 inpatient days per episode and 30 inpatient days per episode. (iv) Coverage unit. When reference is made in this paragraph (c) to a coverage unit, coverage unit refers to the way in which a plan (or health insurance coverage) groups individuals for purposes of determining benefits, or premiums or contributions. For example, different coverage units include self-only, family, and employee-plus-spouse. (2) General parity requirement—(i) General rule. A group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with a group health plan) that provides both medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits may not apply any financial requirement or treatment limitation to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any classification that is more restrictive than the predominant financial requirement or treatment limitation of that type applied to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. Whether a financial requirement or treatment limitation is a predominant financial requirement or treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in a classification is determined separately for each type of financial requirement or treatment limitation. A plan or issuer may not impose any financial requirement or treatment limitation that is applicable only with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits and not to any medical/surgical benefits in the same benefit classification. The application of the rules of this paragraph (c)(2) to financial requirements and quantitative treatment limitations is addressed in paragraph (c)(3) of this section; the application of the rules of this paragraph (c)(2) to nonquantitative treatment limitations is addressed in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. (ii) Classifications of benefits used for applying rules—(A) In general. If a plan (or health insurance coverage) provides any benefits for a mental health condition or substance use disorder in any classification of benefits described in this paragraph (c)(2)(ii), it must provide meaningful benefits for that mental health condition or substance use disorder in every classification in which medical/surgical benefits are provided. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A), whether the benefits provided are meaningful benefits is determined in comparison to the benefits provided for medical conditions and surgical procedures in the classification and requires, at a minimum, coverage of benefits for that condition or disorder in each classification in which the plan (or coverage) provides benefits for one or more medical conditions or surgical procedures. A plan (or coverage) does not provide meaningful benefits under this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) unless it provides benefits for a core treatment for that condition or disorder in each classification in which the plan (or coverage) provides benefits for a core treatment for one or more medical conditions or surgical procedures. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A), a core treatment for a condition or disorder is a standard treatment or course of treatment, therapy, service, or intervention indicated by generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice. If there is no core treatment for a covered mental health condition or substance use disorder with respect to a classification, the plan (or coverage) is not required to provide benefits for a core treatment for such condition or disorder in that classification (but must provide benefits for such condition or disorder in every classification in which medical/surgical benefits are provided). In determining the classification in which a particular benefit belongs, a plan (or health insurance issuer) must apply the same standards to medical/surgical benefits and to mental health or substance use disorder benefits. To the extent that a plan (or health insurance coverage) provides benefits in a classification and imposes any separate financial requirement or treatment limitation (or separate level of a financial requirement or treatment limitation) for benefits in the classification, the rules of this paragraph (c) apply separately with respect to that classification for all financial requirements or treatment limitations (illustrated in examples in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C) of this section). The following classifications of benefits are the only classifications used in applying the rules of this paragraph (c), in addition to the permissible sub-classifications described in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section: (1) Inpatient, in-network. Benefits furnished on an inpatient basis and within a network of providers established or recognized under a plan or health insurance coverage. See special rules for plans with multiple network tiers in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section. (2) Inpatient, out-of-network. Benefits furnished on an inpatient basis and outside any network of providers established or recognized under a plan or health insurance coverage. This classification includes inpatient benefits under a plan (or health insurance coverage) that has no network of providers. (3) Outpatient, in-network. Benefits furnished on an outpatient basis and within a network of providers established or recognized under a plan or health insurance coverage. See special rules for office visits and plans with multiple network tiers in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section. (4) Outpatient, out-of-network. Benefits furnished on an outpatient basis and outside any network of providers established or recognized under a plan or health insurance coverage. This classification includes outpatient benefits under a plan (or health insurance coverage) that has no network of providers. See special rules for office visits in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section. (5) Emergency care. Benefits for emergency care. (6) Prescription drugs. Benefits for prescription drugs. See special rules for multi-tiered prescription drug benefits in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section. (B) Application to out-of-network providers. See paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of this section, under which a plan (or health insurance coverage) that provides mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any classification of benefits must provide mental health or substance use disorder benefits in every classification in which medical/surgical benefits are provided, including out-of-network classifications. (C) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii) are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, the group health plan is subject to the requirements of this section and provides both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits. With regard to the examples in this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C), references to any particular core treatment are included for illustrative purposes only. Plans and issuers must consult generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice to determine the applicable core treatment, therapy, service, or intervention for any covered condition or disorder. (1) Example 1—(i) Facts. A group health plan offers inpatient and outpatient benefits and does not contract with a network of providers. The plan imposes a $500 deductible on all benefits. For inpatient medical/surgical benefits, the plan imposes a coinsurance requirement. For outpatient medical/surgical benefits, the plan imposes copayments. The plan imposes no other financial requirements or treatment limitations. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(1) (Example 1), because the plan has no network of providers, all benefits provided are out-of-network. Because inpatient, out-of-network medical/surgical benefits are subject to separate financial requirements from outpatient, out-of-network medical/surgical benefits, the rules of this paragraph (c) apply separately with respect to any financial requirements and treatment limitations, including the deductible, in each classification. (2) Example 2—(i) Facts. A plan imposes a $500 deductible on all benefits. The plan has no network of providers. The plan generally imposes a 20 percent coinsurance requirement with respect to all benefits, without distinguishing among inpatient, outpatient, emergency care, or prescription drug benefits. The plan imposes no other financial requirements or treatment limitations. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(2) (Example 2), because the plan does not impose separate financial requirements (or treatment limitations) based on classification, the rules of this paragraph (c) apply with respect to the deductible and the coinsurance across all benefits. (3) Example 3—(i) Facts. Same facts as in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(2)(i) of this section (Example 2), except the plan exempts emergency care benefits from the 20 percent coinsurance requirement. The plan imposes no other financial requirements or treatment limitations. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(3) (Example 3), because the plan imposes separate financial requirements based on classifications, the rules of this paragraph (c) apply with respect to the deductible and the coinsurance separately for benefits in the emergency care classification and all other benefits. (4) Example 4—(i) Facts. Same facts as in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(2)(i) of this section (Example 2), except the plan also imposes a preauthorization requirement for all inpatient treatment in order for benefits to be paid. No such requirement applies to outpatient treatment. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(4) (Example 4), because the plan has no network of providers, all benefits provided are out-of-network. Because the plan imposes a separate treatment limitation based on classifications, the rules of this paragraph (c) apply with respect to the deductible and coinsurance separately for inpatient, out-of-network benefits and all other benefits. (5) Example 5—(i) Facts. A plan covers treatment for autism spectrum disorder (ASD), a mental health condition, and covers outpatient, out-of-network developmental screenings for ASD but excludes all other benefits for outpatient treatment for ASD, including applied behavior analysis (ABA) therapy, when provided on an out-of-network basis. The plan generally covers the full range of outpatient treatments (including core treatments) and treatment settings for medical conditions and surgical procedures when provided on an out-of-network basis. Under the generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice consulted by the plan, developmental screenings alone do not constitute a core treatment for ASD. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(5) (Example 5), the plan violates the rules of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii). Although the plan covers benefits for ASD in the outpatient, out-of-network classification, it only covers developmental screenings, so it does not cover a core treatment for ASD in the classification. Because the plan generally covers the full range of medical/surgical benefits, including a core treatment for one or more medical conditions or surgical procedures in the classification, it fails to provide meaningful benefits for treatment of ASD in the classification. (6) Example 6—(i) Facts. Same facts as in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(5) of this section (Example 5), except that the plan is an HMO that does not cover the full range of medical/surgical benefits, including a core treatment for any medical conditions or surgical procedures in the outpatient, out-of-network classification (except as required under ERISA sections 716 and 717), but covers benefits for medical conditions and surgical procedures in the inpatient, in-network; outpatient, in-network; emergency care; and prescription drug classifications. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(6) (Example 6), the plan does not violate the rules of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii). Because the plan does not provide meaningful benefits, including for a core treatment for any medical condition or surgical procedure in the outpatient, out-of-network classification (except as required under ERISA sections 716 and 717), the plan is not required to provide meaningful benefits for any mental health conditions or substance use disorders in that classification. Nevertheless, the plan must provide meaningful benefits for each mental health condition and substance use disorder for which the plan provides benefits in every classification in which meaningful medical/surgical benefits are provided as required under paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of this section. This example does not address whether the plan has complied with other applicable requirements of this section in excluding coverage of ABA therapy in the outpatient, out-of-network classification. (7) Example 7—(i) Facts. A plan provides extensive benefits, including for core treatments for many medical conditions and surgical procedures in the outpatient, in-network classification, including nutrition counseling for diabetes and obesity. The plan also generally covers diagnosis and treatment for eating disorders, which are mental health conditions, including coverage for nutrition counseling to treat eating disorders in the outpatient, in-network classification. Nutrition counseling is a core treatment for eating disorders, in accordance with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice consulted by the plan. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(7) (Example 7), the plan does not violate the rules of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii). The coverage of diagnosis and treatment for eating disorders, including nutrition counseling, in the outpatient, in-network classification results in the plan providing meaningful benefits for the treatment of eating disorders in the classification, as determined in comparison to the benefits provided for medical conditions or surgical procedures in the classification. (8) Example 8—(i) Facts. A plan provides extensive benefits for the core treatments for many medical conditions and surgical procedures in the outpatient, in-network and prescription drug classifications. The plan provides coverage for diagnosis and treatment for opioid use disorder, a substance use disorder, in the outpatient, in-network classification, by covering counseling and behavioral therapies and, in the prescription drug classification, by covering medications to treat opioid use disorder (MOUD). Counseling and behavioral therapies and MOUD, in combination, are one of the core treatments for opioid use disorder, in accordance with generally recognized independent standards of current medical practice consulted by the plan. (ii) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(C)(8) (Example 8), the plan does not violate the rules of this paragraph (c)(2)(ii). The coverage of counseling and behavioral therapies and MOUD, in combination, in the outpatient, in-network classification and prescription drug classification, respectively, results in the plan providing meaningful benefits for the treatment of opioid use disorder in the outpatient, in-network and prescription drug classifications. (3) Financial requirements and quantitative treatment limitations—(i) Determining “substantially all” and “predominant”—(A) Substantially all. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(3), a type of financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation is considered to apply to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in a classification of benefits if it applies to at least two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits in that classification. (For purposes of this paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A), benefits expressed as subject to a zero level of a type of financial requirement are treated as benefits not subject to that type of financial requirement, and benefits expressed as subject to a quantitative treatment limitation that is unlimited are treated as benefits not subject to that type of quantitative treatment limitation.) If a type of financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation does not apply to at least two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits in a classification, then that type cannot be applied to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in that classification. (B) Predominant. (1) If a type of financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation applies to at least two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits in a classification as determined under paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this section, the level of the financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation that is considered the predominant level of that type in a classification of benefits is the level that applies to more than one-half of medical/surgical benefits in that classification subject to the financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation. (2) If, with respect to a type of financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation that applies to at least two-thirds of all medical/surgical benefits in a classification, there is no single level that applies to more than one-half of medical/surgical benefits in the classification subject to the financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation, the plan (or health insurance issuer) may combine levels until the combination of levels applies to more than one-half of medical/surgical benefits subject to the financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation in the classification. The least restrictive level within the combination is considered the predominant level of that type in the classification. (For this purpose, a plan may combine the most restrictive levels first, with each less restrictive level added to the combination until the combination applies to more than one-half of the benefits subject to the financial requirement or treatment limitation.) (C) Portion based on plan payments. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(3), the determination of the portion of medical/surgical benefits in a classification of benefits subject to a financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation (or subject to any level of a financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation) is based on the dollar amount of all plan payments for medical/surgical benefits in the classification expected to be paid under the plan for the plan year (or for the portion of the plan year after a change in plan benefits that affects the applicability of the financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation). (D) Clarifications for certain threshold requirements. For any deductible, the dollar amount of plan payments includes all plan payments with respect to claims that would be subject to the deductible if it had not been satisfied. For any out-of-pocket maximum, the dollar amount of plan payments includes all plan payments associated with out-of-pocket payments that are taken into account towards the out-of-pocket maximum as well as all plan payments associated with out-of-pocket payments that would have been made towards the out-of-pocket maximum if it had not been satisfied. The rules of this paragraph (c)(3)(i)(D) apply for any other thresholds at which the rate of plan payment changes. (See also PHS Act section 2707 and Affordable Care Act section 1302(c), which establish annual limitations on out-of-pocket maximums for all non-grandfathered health plans.) (E) Determining the dollar amount of plan payments. Subject to paragraph (c)(3)(i)(D) of this section, any reasonable method may be used to determine the dollar amount expected to be paid under a plan for medical/surgical benefits subject to a financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation (or subject to any level of a financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation). (ii) Application to different coverage units. If a plan (or health insurance coverage) applies different levels of a financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation to different coverage units in a classification of medical/surgical benefits, the predominant level that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the classification is determined separately for each coverage unit. (iii) Special rules. Unless specifically permitted under this paragraph (c)(3)(iii), sub-classifications are not permitted when applying the rules of paragraph (c)(3) of this section. (A) Multi-tiered prescription drug benefits. If a plan (or health insurance coverage) applies different levels of financial requirements to different tiers of prescription drug benefits based on reasonable factors determined in accordance with the rules in paragraph (c)(4) of this section (relating to requirements for nonquantitative treatment limitations) and without regard to whether a drug is generally prescribed with respect to medical/surgical benefits or with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits, the plan (or health insurance coverage) satisfies the parity requirements of this paragraph (c) with respect to prescription drug benefits. Reasonable factors include cost, efficacy, generic versus brand name, and mail order versus pharmacy pick-up. (B) Multiple network tiers. If a plan (or health insurance coverage) provides benefits through multiple tiers of in-network providers (such as an in-network tier of preferred providers with more generous cost-sharing to participants than a separate in-network tier of participating providers), the plan may divide its benefits furnished on an in-network basis into sub-classifications that reflect network tiers, if the tiering is based on reasonable factors determined in accordance with the rules in paragraph (c)(4) of this section (such as quality, performance, and market standards) and without regard to whether a provider provides services with respect to medical/surgical benefits or mental health or substance use disorder benefits. After the sub-classifications are established, the plan or issuer may not impose any financial requirement or treatment limitation on mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any sub-classification that is more restrictive than the predominant financial requirement or treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the sub-classification using the methodology set forth in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. (C) Sub-classifications permitted for office visits, separate from other outpatient services. For purposes of applying the financial requirement and treatment limitation rules of this paragraph (c), a plan or issuer may divide its benefits furnished on an outpatient basis into the two sub-classifications described in this paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C). After the sub-classifications are established, the plan or issuer may not impose any financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation on mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any sub-classification that is more restrictive than the predominant financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the sub-classification using the methodology set forth in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. Sub-classifications other than these special rules, such as separate sub-classifications for generalists and specialists, are not permitted. The two sub-classifications permitted under this paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C) are: (1) Office visits (such as physician visits), and (2) All other outpatient items and services (such as outpatient surgery, facility charges for day treatment centers, laboratory charges, or other medical items). (iv) Examples. The rules of paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, the group health plan is subject to the requirements of this section and provides both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits. (A) Example 1—(1) Facts. (i) For inpatient, out-of-network medical/surgical benefits, a group health plan imposes five levels of coinsurance. Using a reasonable method, the plan projects its payments for the upcoming year as follows: Table 1 to Paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(A)(1)(i) (ii) The plan projects plan costs of $800x to be subject to coinsurance ($100x + $450x + $100x + $150x = $800x). Thus, 80 percent ($800x/$1,000x) of the benefits are projected to be subject to coinsurance, and 56.25 percent of the benefits subject to coinsurance are projected to be subject to the 15 percent coinsurance level. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(A) (Example 1), the two-thirds threshold of the substantially all standard is met for coinsurance because 80 percent of all inpatient, out-of-network medical/surgical benefits are subject to coinsurance. Moreover, the 15 percent coinsurance is the predominant level because it is applicable to more than one-half of inpatient, out-of-network medical/surgical benefits subject to the coinsurance requirement. The plan may not impose any level of coinsurance with respect to inpatient, out-of-network mental health or substance use disorder benefits that is more restrictive than the 15 percent level of coinsurance. (B) Example 2—(1) Facts. (i) For outpatient, in-network medical/surgical benefits, a plan imposes five different copayment levels. Using a reasonable method, the plan projects payments for the upcoming year as follows: Table 2 to Paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(B)(1)(i) (ii) The plan projects plan costs of $800x to be subject to copayments ($200x + $200x + $300x + $100x = $800x). Thus, 80 percent ($800x/$1,000x) of the benefits are projected to be subject to a copayment. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(B) (Example 2), the two-thirds threshold of the substantially all standard is met for copayments because 80 percent of all outpatient, in-network medical/surgical benefits are subject to a copayment. Moreover, there is no single level that applies to more than one-half of medical/surgical benefits in the classification subject to a copayment (for the $10 copayment, 25%; for the $15 copayment, 25%; for the $20 copayment, 37.5%; and for the $50 copayment, 12.5%). The plan can combine any levels of copayment, including the highest levels, to determine the predominant level that can be applied to mental health or substance use disorder benefits. If the plan combines the highest levels of copayment, the combined projected payments for the two highest copayment levels, the $50 copayment and the $20 copayment, are not more than one-half of the outpatient, in-network medical/surgical benefits subject to a copayment because they are exactly one-half ($300x + $100x = $400x; $400x/$800x = 50%). The combined projected payments for the three highest copayment levels—the $50 copayment, the $20 copayment, and the $15 copayment—are more than one-half of the outpatient, in-network medical/surgical benefits subject to the copayments ($100x + $300x + $200x = $600x; $600x/$800x = 75%). Thus, the plan may not impose any copayment on outpatient, in-network mental health or substance use disorder benefits that is more restrictive than the least restrictive copayment in the combination, the $15 copayment. (C) Example 3—(1) Facts. A plan imposes a $250 deductible on all medical/surgical benefits for self-only coverage and a $500 deductible on all medical/surgical benefits for family coverage. The plan has no network of providers. For all medical/surgical benefits, the plan imposes a coinsurance requirement. The plan imposes no other financial requirements or treatment limitations. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(C) (Example 3), because the plan has no network of providers, all benefits are provided out-of-network. Because self-only and family coverage are subject to different deductibles, whether the deductible applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits is determined separately for self-only medical/surgical benefits and family medical/surgical benefits. Because the coinsurance is applied without regard to coverage units, the predominant coinsurance that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits is determined without regard to coverage units. (D) Example 4—(1) Facts. A plan applies the following financial requirements for prescription drug benefits. The requirements are applied without regard to whether a drug is generally prescribed with respect to medical/surgical benefits or with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits. Moreover, the process for certifying a particular drug as “generic”, “preferred brand name”, “non-preferred brand name”, or “specialty” complies with the rules of paragraph (c)(4) of this section (relating to requirements for nonquantitative treatment limitations). Table 3 to Paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(D)(1) (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(D) (Example 4), the financial requirements that apply to prescription drug benefits are applied without regard to whether a drug is generally prescribed with respect to medical/surgical benefits or with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits; the process for certifying drugs in different tiers complies with paragraph (c)(4) of this section; and the bases for establishing different levels or types of financial requirements are reasonable. The financial requirements applied to prescription drug benefits do not violate the parity requirements of this paragraph (c)(3). (E) Example 5—(1) Facts. A plan has two -tiers of network of providers: a preferred provider tier and a participating provider tier. Providers are placed in either the preferred tier or participating tier based on reasonable factors determined in accordance with the rules in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, such as accreditation, quality and performance measures (including customer feedback), and relative reimbursement rates. Furthermore, provider tier placement is determined without regard to whether a provider specializes in the treatment of mental health conditions or substance use disorders, or medical/surgical conditions. The plan divides the in-network classifications into two sub-classifications (in-network/preferred and in-network/participating). The plan does not impose any financial requirement or treatment limitation on mental health or substance use disorder benefits in either of these sub-classifications that is more restrictive than the predominant financial requirement or treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in each sub-classification. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(E) (Example 5), the division of in-network benefits into sub-classifications that reflect the preferred and participating provider tiers does not violate the parity requirements of this paragraph (c)(3). (F) Example 6—(1) Facts. With respect to outpatient, in-network benefits, a plan imposes a $25 copayment for office visits and a 20 percent coinsurance requirement for outpatient surgery. The plan divides the outpatient, in-network classification into two sub-classifications (in-network office visits and all other outpatient, in-network items and services).The plan or issuer does not impose any financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation on mental health or substance use disorder benefits in either of these sub-classifications that is more restrictive than the predominant financial requirement or quantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in each sub-classification. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(F) (Example 6), the division of outpatient, in-network benefits into sub-classifications for office visits and all other outpatient, in-network items and services does not violate the parity requirements of this paragraph (c)(3). (G) Example 7—(1) Facts. Same facts as in paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(F)(1) of this section (Example 6), but for purposes of determining parity, the plan divides the outpatient, in-network classification into outpatient, in-network generalists and outpatient, in-network specialists. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(3)(iv)(G) (Example 7), the division of outpatient, in-network benefits into any sub-classifications other than office visits and all other outpatient items and services violates the requirements of paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C) of this section. (v) No separate cumulative financial requirements or cumulative quantitative treatment limitations. (A) A group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan) may not apply any cumulative financial requirement or cumulative quantitative treatment limitation for mental health or substance use disorder benefits in a classification that accumulates separately from any established for medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. (B) The rules of this paragraph (c)(3)(v) are illustrated by the following examples: (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 1, the combined annual deductible complies with the requirements of this paragraph (c)(3)(v). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 2, the separate annual deductible on mental health and substance use disorder benefits violates the requirements of this paragraph (c)(3)(v). (ii) Conclusion. In this Example 3, the separate annual deductible on mental health and substance use disorder benefits violates the requirements of this paragraph (c)(3)(v). (4) Nonquantitative treatment limitations. Consistent with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with a group health plan) may not impose any nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any classification that is more restrictive, as written or in operation, than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4), a nonquantitative treatment limitation is more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification if the plan or issuer fails to meet the requirements of paragraph (c)(4)(i) or (iii) of this section. In such a case, the plan (or health insurance coverage) will be considered to violate ERISA section 712(a)(3)(A)(ii), and the nonquantitative treatment limitation may not be imposed by the plan (or health insurance coverage) with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the classification. (i) Requirements related to design and application of a nonquantitative treatment limitation—(A) In general. A plan (or health insurance coverage) may not impose a nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any classification unless, under the terms of the plan (or health insurance coverage), as written and in operation, any processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, or other factors used in designing and applying the nonquantitative treatment limitation to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the classification are comparable to, and are applied no more stringently than, the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, or other factors used in designing and applying the limitation with respect to medical/surgical benefits in the classification. (B) Prohibition on discriminatory factors and evidentiary standards. For purposes of determining comparability and stringency under paragraph (c)(4)(i)(A) of this section, a plan (or health insurance coverage) may not rely upon discriminatory factors or evidentiary standards to design a nonquantitative treatment limitation to be imposed on mental health or substance use disorder benefits. A factor or evidentiary standard is discriminatory if the information, evidence, sources, or standards on which the factor or evidentiary standard are based are biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. (1) Information, evidence, sources, or standards are considered to be biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits if, based on all the relevant facts and circumstances, the information, evidence, sources, or standards systematically disfavor access or are specifically designed to disfavor access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B)(1), relevant facts and circumstances may include, but are not limited to, the reliability of the source of the information, evidence, sources, or standards, including any underlying data; the independence of the information, evidence, sources, and standards relied upon; the analyses and methodologies employed to select the information and the consistency of their application; and any known safeguards deployed to prevent reliance on skewed data or metrics. Information, evidence, sources, or standards are not considered biased or not objective for this purpose if the plan or issuer has taken the steps necessary to correct, cure, or supplement any information, evidence, sources, or standards that would have been biased or not objective in the absence of such steps. (2) For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B), historical plan data or other historical information from a time when the plan or coverage was not subject to ERISA section 712 or was not in compliance with ERISA section 712 are considered to be biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits, if the historical plan data or other historical information systematically disfavor access or are specifically designed to disfavor access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits, and the plan or issuer has not taken the steps necessary to correct, cure, or supplement the data or information. (3) For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B), generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards and carefully circumscribed measures reasonably and appropriately designed to detect or prevent and prove fraud and abuse that minimize the negative impact on access to appropriate mental health and substance use disorder benefits are not information, evidence, sources, or standards that are biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. However, plans and issuers must comply with the other requirements in this paragraph (c)(4), as applicable, with respect to such standards or measures that are used as the basis for a factor or evidentiary standard used to design or apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation. (ii) Illustrative, non-exhaustive list of nonquantitative treatment limitations. Nonquantitative treatment limitations include— (A) Medical management standards (such as prior authorization) limiting or excluding benefits based on medical necessity or medical appropriateness, or based on whether the treatment is experimental or investigative; (B) Formulary design for prescription drugs; (C) For plans with multiple network tiers (such as preferred providers and participating providers), network tier design; (D) Standards related to network composition, including but not limited to, standards for provider and facility admission to participate in a network or for continued network participation, including methods for determining reimbursement rates, credentialing standards, and procedures for ensuring the network includes an adequate number of each category of provider and facility to provide services under the plan or coverage; (E) Plan or issuer methods for determining out-of-network rates, such as allowed amounts; usual, customary, and reasonable charges; or application of other external benchmarks for out-of-network rates; (F) Refusal to pay for higher-cost therapies until it can be shown that a lower-cost therapy is not effective (also known as fail-first policies or step therapy protocols); (G) Exclusions based on failure to complete a course of treatment; and (H) Restrictions based on geographic location, facility type, provider specialty, and other criteria that limit the scope or duration of benefits for services provided under the plan or coverage. (iii) Required use of outcomes data—(A) In general. To ensure that a nonquantitative treatment limitation applicable to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in a classification, in operation, is no more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation applied to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the classification, a plan or issuer must collect and evaluate relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the impact of the nonquantitative treatment limitation on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits and carefully consider the impact as part of the plan's or issuer's evaluation. As part of its evaluation, the plan or issuer may not disregard relevant outcomes data that it knows or reasonably should know suggest that a nonquantitative treatment limitation is associated with material differences in access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. The Secretary, jointly with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, may specify in guidance the type, form, and manner of collection and evaluation for the data required under this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A). (1) Relevant data generally. For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A), relevant data could include, as appropriate, but are not limited to, the number and percentage of claims denials and any other data relevant to the nonquantitative treatment limitation required by State law or private accreditation standards. (2) Relevant data for nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition. In addition to the relevant data set forth in paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A)(1) of this section, relevant data for nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition could include, as appropriate, but are not limited to, in-network and out-of-network utilization rates (including data related to provider claim submissions), network adequacy metrics (including time and distance data, and data on providers accepting new patients), and provider reimbursement rates (for comparable services and as benchmarked to a reference standard). (3) Unavailability of data. (i) If a plan or issuer newly imposes a nonquantitative treatment limitation for which relevant data is initially temporarily unavailable and the plan or issuer therefore cannot comply with this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A), the plan or issuer must include in its comparative analysis, as required under § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(i)(C), a detailed explanation of the lack of relevant data, the basis for the plan's or issuer's conclusion that there is a lack of relevant data, and when and how the data will become available and be collected and analyzed. Such a plan or issuer also must comply with this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A) as soon as practicable once relevant data becomes available. (ii) If a plan or issuer imposes a nonquantitative treatment limitation for which no data exist that can reasonably assess any relevant impact of the nonquantitative treatment limitation on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits, the plan or issuer must include in its comparative analysis, as required under § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(i)(D), a reasoned justification as to the basis for the conclusion that there are no data that can reasonably assess the nonquantitative treatment limitation's impact, why the nature of the nonquantitative treatment limitation prevents the plan or issuer from reasonably measuring its impact, an explanation of what data was considered and rejected, and documentation of any additional safeguards or protocols used to ensure the nonquantitative treatment limitation complies with this section. If a plan or issuer becomes aware of data that can reasonably assess any relevant impact of the nonquantitative treatment limitation, the plan or issuer must comply with this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A) as soon as practicable. (iii) Consistent with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, paragraphs (c)(4)(iii)(A)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section shall only apply in very limited circumstances and, where applicable, shall be construed narrowly. (B) Material differences. To the extent the relevant data evaluated under paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A) of this section suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits in a classification, such differences will be considered a strong indicator that the plan or issuer violates this paragraph (c)(4). (1) Where the relevant data suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits in a classification, the plan or issuer must take reasonable action, as necessary, to address the material differences to ensure compliance, in operation, with this paragraph (c)(4) and must document the actions that have been or are being taken by the plan or issuer to address material differences in access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits, as compared to medical/surgical benefits, as required by § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(iv). (2) For purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B), relevant data are considered to suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits if, based on all relevant facts and circumstances, and taking into account the considerations outlined in this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(2), the difference in the data suggests that the nonquantitative treatment limitation is likely to have a negative impact on access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. (i) Relevant facts and circumstances, for purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(2), may include, but are not limited to, the terms of the nonquantitative treatment limitation at issue, the quality or limitations of the data, causal explanations and analyses, evidence as to the recurring or non-recurring nature of the results, and the magnitude of any disparities. (ii) Differences in access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits attributable to generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards or carefully circumscribed measures reasonably and appropriately designed to detect or prevent and prove fraud and abuse that minimize the negative impact on access to appropriate mental health and substance use disorder benefits, which are used as the basis for a factor or evidentiary standard used to design or apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation, are not considered to be material for purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B). To the extent a plan or issuer attributes any differences in access to the application of such standards or measures, the plan or issuer must explain the bases for that conclusion in the documentation prepared under § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(iv)(A). (C) Nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition. For purposes of applying paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A) of this section with respect to nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition, a plan or issuer must collect and evaluate relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the aggregate impact of all such nonquantitative treatment limitations on access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits. Examples of possible actions that a plan or issuer could take to comply with the requirement under paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(1) of this section to take reasonable action, as necessary, to address any material differences in access with respect to nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition, to ensure compliance with this paragraph (c)(4), include, but are not limited to: (1) Strengthening efforts to recruit and encourage a broad range of available mental health and substance use disorder providers and facilities to join the plan's or issuer's network of providers, including taking actions to increase compensation or other inducements, streamline credentialing processes, or contact providers reimbursed for items and services provided on an out-of-network basis to offer participation in the network; (2) Expanding the availability of telehealth arrangements to mitigate any overall mental health and substance use disorder provider shortages in a geographic area; (3) Providing additional outreach and assistance to participants and beneficiaries enrolled in the plan or coverage to assist them in finding available in-network mental health and substance use disorder providers and facilities; and (4) Ensuring that provider directories are accurate and reliable. (iv) Prohibition on separate nonquantitative treatment limitations applicable only to mental health or substance use disorder benefits. Consistent with paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered by an issuer in connection with such a plan) may not apply any nonquantitative treatment limitation that is applicable only with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits and does not apply with respect to any medical/surgical benefits in the same benefit classification. (v) Effect of final determination of noncompliance under § 2590.712-1. (A) If a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with a group health plan) receives a final determination from the Secretary that the plan or issuer is not in compliance with the requirements of ERISA section 712(a)(8) or § 2590.712-1 with respect to a nonquantitative treatment limitation, the nonquantitative treatment limitation violates this paragraph (c)(4) and the Secretary may direct the plan or issuer not to impose the nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the relevant classification, unless and until the plan or issuer demonstrates to the Secretary compliance with the requirements of this section or takes appropriate action to remedy the violation. (B) A determination by the Secretary of whether to require cessation of a nonquantitative treatment limitation under this paragraph (c)(4)(v) will be based on an evaluation of the relevant facts and circumstances involved in the specific final determination and the nature of the underlying nonquantitative treatment limitation and will take into account the interest of plan participants and beneficiaries and feedback from the plan or issuer. (vi) Examples. The rules of this paragraph (c)(4) are illustrated by the following examples. In each example, the group health plan is subject to the requirements of this section and provides both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits. (A) Example 1 (not comparable and more stringent factors for reimbursement rate methodology, in operation)—(1) Facts. A plan's reimbursement rate methodology for outpatient, in-network providers is based on a variety of factors. As written, for mental health, substance use disorder, and medical/surgical benefits, all reimbursement rates for physicians and non-physician practitioners for the same Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code are based on a combination of factors, such as the nature of the service, duration of the service, intensity and specialization of training, provider licensure and type, number of providers qualified to provide the service in a given geographic area, and market need (demand). In operation, the plan utilizes an additional strategy to further reduce reimbursement rates for mental health and substance use disorder non-physician providers from those paid to mental health and substance use disorder physicians by the same percentage for every CPT code, but does not apply the same reductions for non-physician medical/surgical providers. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(A) (Example 1), the plan violates the rules of this paragraph (c)(4). Because the plan reimburses non-physician providers of mental health and substance use disorder services by reducing their reimbursement rate from the rate for physician providers of mental health and substance use disorder services by the same percentage for every CPT code but does not apply the same reductions to non-physician providers of medical/surgical services from the rate for physician providers of medical/surgical services, in operation, the factors used in designing and applying the nonquantitative treatment limitation to mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the outpatient, in-network classification are not comparable to, and are applied more stringently than, the factors used in designing and applying the limitation with respect to medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. As a result, the nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the outpatient, in-network classification is more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. (B) Example 2 (strategy for exclusion for experimental or investigative treatment more stringently applied to ABA therapy in operation)—(1) Facts. A plan, as written, generally excludes coverage for all treatments that are experimental or investigative for both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the outpatient, in-network classification. As a result, the plan generally excludes, as experimental, a treatment or procedure when no professionally recognized treatment guidelines include the treatment or procedure as a clinically appropriate standard of care for the condition or disorder and fewer than two randomized controlled trials are available to support the treatment's use with respect to the given condition or disorder. The plan provides benefits for the treatment of ASD, which is a mental health condition, but, in operation, the plan excludes coverage for ABA therapy to treat children with ASD, deeming it experimental. More than one professionally recognized treatment guideline defines clinically appropriate standards of care for ASD and more than two randomized controlled trials are available to support the use of ABA therapy as one intervention to treat certain children with ASD. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(B) (Example 2), the plan violates the rules of this paragraph (c)(4). As written, the plan excludes coverage of experimental treatment of medical conditions and surgical procedures, mental health conditions, and substance use disorders when no professionally recognized treatment guidelines define clinically appropriate standards of care for the condition or disorder as including the treatment or procedure at issue, and fewer than two randomized controlled trials are available to support the treatment's use with respect to the given condition or procedure. However, in operation, the plan deviates from this strategy with respect to ABA therapy because more than one professionally recognized treatment guideline defines clinically appropriate standards of care for ASD as including ABA therapy to treat certain children with ASD and more than two randomized controlled trials are available to support the use of ABA therapy to treat certain children with ASD. Therefore, in operation, the strategy used to design the nonquantitative treatment limitation for benefits for the treatment of ASD, which is a mental health condition, in the outpatient, in-network classification is not comparable to, and is applied more stringently than, the strategy used to design the nonquantitative treatment limitation for medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. As a result, the nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the outpatient, in-network classification is more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. (C) Example 3 (step therapy protocol with exception for severe or irreversible consequences, discriminatory factor)—(1) Facts. A plan's written terms include a step therapy protocol that requires participants and beneficiaries who are prescribed certain drugs to try and fail a generic or preferred brand name drug before the plan will cover the drug originally prescribed by a participant's or beneficiary's attending provider. The plan provides an exception to this protocol that was developed solely based on a methodology developed by an external third-party organization. The third-party organization's methodology, which is not based on a generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standard, identifies instances in which a delay in treatment with a drug prescribed for a medical condition or surgical procedure could result in either severe or irreversible consequences. However, with respect to a drug prescribed for a mental health condition or a substance use disorder, the third-party organization's methodology only identifies instances in which a delay in treatment could result in both severe and irreversible consequences, and the plan does not take any steps to correct, cure, or supplement the methodology. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(C) (Example 3), the plan violates the rules of paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B) of this section. The source upon which the factor used to apply the step therapy protocol is based is biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits because it addresses instances in which a delay in treatment with a drug prescribed for a medical condition or surgical procedure could result in either severe or irreversible consequences, but only addresses instances in which a delay in treatment with a drug prescribed for a mental health condition or substance use disorder could result in both severe and irreversible consequences, and the plan fails to take the steps necessary to correct, cure, or supplement the methodology so that it is not biased and is objective. Based on the relevant facts and circumstances, this source systematically disfavors access or is specifically designed to disfavor access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. Therefore, the factor used to apply the step therapy protocol is discriminatory for purposes of determining comparability and stringency under paragraph (c)(4)(i)(A) of this section, and may not be relied upon by the plan. (D) Example 4 (use of historical plan data and plan steps to correct, cure, or supplement)—(1) Facts. A plan's methodology for calculating provider reimbursement rates relies only on historical plan data on total plan spending for each specialty, divided between mental health and substance use disorder providers and medical/surgical providers, from a time when the plan was not subject to ERISA section 712. The plan has used these historical plan data for many years to establish base reimbursement rates in all provider specialties for which it provides medical/surgical, mental health, and substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, in-network classification. In evaluating the use of these historical plan data in the design of the methodology for calculating provider reimbursement rates, the plan determined, based on all the relevant facts and circumstances, that the historical plan data systematically disfavor access or are specifically designed to disfavor access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. To ensure this information about historical reimbursement rates is not biased and is objective, the plan supplements its methodology to develop the base reimbursement rates for mental health and substance use disorder providers in accordance with additional information, evidence, sources, and standards that reflect the increased demand for mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, in-network classification and to attract sufficient mental health and substance use disorder providers to the network, so that the relevant facts and circumstances indicate the supplemented information, evidence, sources, or standards do not systematically disfavor access and are not specifically designed to disfavor access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(D) (Example 4), the plan does not violate the rules of paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B) of this section with respect to the plan's methodology for calculating provider reimbursement rates in the inpatient, in-network classification. The relevant facts and circumstances indicate that the plan's use of only historical plan data to design its methodology for calculating provider reimbursement rates in the inpatient, in-network classification would otherwise be considered to be biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits under paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B)(2) of this section, since the historical data systematically disfavor access or are specifically designed to disfavor access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. However, the plan took the steps necessary to supplement the information, evidence, sources, and standards to reasonably reflect the increased demand for mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, in-network classification, and adjust the methodology to increase reimbursement rates for those benefits, thereby ensuring that the information, evidence, sources, and standards relied upon by the plan for this purpose are not biased and are objective. Therefore, the factors and evidentiary standards used to design the plan's methodology for calculating provider reimbursement rates in the inpatient, in-network classification are not discriminatory. (E) Example 5 (generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards and more stringent prior authorization requirement in operation)—(1) Facts. The provisions of a plan state that it relies on, and does not deviate from, generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards to inform the factor used to design prior authorization requirements for both medical/surgical and mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the prescription drug classification. The generally recognized independent professional medical standard for treatment of opioid use disorder that the plan utilizes—in this case, the American Society of Addiction Medicine national practice guidelines—does not support prior authorization every 30 days for buprenorphine/naloxone. However, in operation, the plan requires prior authorization for buprenorphine/naloxone combination for treatment of opioid use disorder, every 30 days, which is inconsistent with the generally recognized independent professional medical standard on which the factor used to design the limitation is based. The plan's factor used to design prior authorization requirements for medical/surgical benefits in the prescription drug classification relies on, and does not deviate from, generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(E) (Example 5), the plan violates the rules of this paragraph (c)(4). The American Society of Addiction Medicine national practice guidelines on which the factor used to design prior authorization requirements for substance use disorder benefits is based are generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards that are not considered to be biased or not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health and substance use disorder benefits under paragraph (c)(4)(i)(B)(3) of this section. However, the plan must comply with other requirements in this paragraph (c)(4), as applicable, with respect to such standards or measures that are used as the basis for a factor or evidentiary standard used to design or apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation. In operation, the plan's factor used to design and apply prior authorization requirements with respect to substance use disorder benefits is not comparable to, and is applied more stringently than, the same factor used to design and apply prior authorization requirements for medical/surgical benefits, because the factor relies on, and does not deviate from, generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards for medical/surgical benefits, but deviates from the relevant guidelines for substance use disorder benefits. As a result, the nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to substance use disorder benefits in the prescription drug classification is more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. (F) Example 6 (plan claims no data exist to reasonably assess impact of nonquantitative treatment limitation on access; medical necessity criteria)—(1) Facts. A plan approves or denies claims for mental health and substance use disorder benefits and for medical/surgical benefits in the inpatient, in-network and outpatient, in-network classifications based on medical necessity criteria. The plan states in its comparative analysis that no data exist that can reasonably assess any relevant impact of the medical necessity criteria nonquantitative treatment limitation on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to the plan's medical necessity criteria nonquantitative treatment limitation's impact on relevant outcomes related to access to medical/surgical benefits in the relevant classifications, without further explanation. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(F) (Example 6), the plan violates this paragraph (c)(4). The plan does not comply with paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A)(3)(ii) of this section because the plan did not include in its comparative analysis, as required under § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(i)(D), a reasoned justification as to the basis for its conclusion that there are no data that can reasonably assess the nonquantitative treatment limitation's impact, an explanation of why the nature of the nonquantitative treatment limitation prevents the plan from reasonably measuring its impact, an explanation of what data was considered and rejected, and documentation of any additional safeguards or protocols used to ensure the nonquantitative treatment limitation complies with this paragraph (c)(4). Data that could reasonably assess the medical necessity criteria nonquantitative treatment limitation's impact might include, for example, the number and percentage of claims denials, or the number and percentage of claims that were approved for a lower level of care than the level requested on the initial claim. Therefore, because the plan has not collected and evaluated relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the impact of the nonquantitative treatment limitation on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits in the relevant classifications, the plan violates the requirements of paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section, and violates the requirements under § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(i)(D) because it did not include sufficient information in its comparative analysis with respect to the lack of relevant data. (G) Example 7 (concurrent review data collection; no material difference in access)—(1) Facts. A plan follows a written process to apply a concurrent review nonquantitative treatment limitation to all medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits within the inpatient, in-network classification. Under this process, a first-level review is conducted in every instance in which concurrent review applies and an authorization request is approved by the first-level reviewer only if the clinical information submitted by the facility meets the plan's criteria for a continued stay. If the first-level reviewer is unable to approve the authorization request because the clinical information submitted by the facility does not meet the plan's criteria for a continued stay, it is sent to a second-level reviewer who will either approve or deny the request. The plan collects relevant data, including the number of referrals to second-level review, and the number of denials of claims for medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits subject to concurrent review as compared to the total number of claims subject to concurrent review, in the inpatient, in-network classification. The plan also collects and evaluates the number of denied claims for medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits that are overturned on appeal in the inpatient, in-network classification. The plan evaluates the relevant data and determines that, based on the relevant facts and circumstances, the data do not suggest that the concurrent review nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits in the classification Upon requesting the plan's comparative analysis for the concurrent review nonquantitative treatment limitation and reviewing the relevant data, the Secretary does not request additional data and agrees that the data do not suggest material differences in access. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(G) (Example 7), the plan does not violate the rules of paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section. The plan collected and evaluated relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the impact of the nonquantitative treatment limitation on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits and considered the impact as part of its evaluation. Because the relevant data evaluated do not suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits in the inpatient, in-network classification, under paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B) of this section, there is no strong indicator that the plan violates this paragraph (c)(4). (H) Example 8 (material difference in access for prior authorization requirement with reasonable action)—(1) Facts. A plan requires prior authorization that a treatment is medically necessary for all inpatient, in-network medical/surgical benefits and for all inpatient, in-network mental health and substance use disorder benefits. The plan collects and evaluates relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the impact of the prior authorization requirement on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits in the inpatient, in-network classification. The plan's written process for prior authorization states that the plan approves inpatient, in-network benefits for medical conditions and surgical procedures and mental health and substance use disorder benefits for periods of 1, 3, and 7 days, after which a treatment plan must be submitted by the patient's attending provider and approved by the plan. Approvals for mental health and substance use disorder benefits are most commonly given only for 1 day, after which a treatment plan must be submitted by the patient's attending provider and approved by the plan. The relevant data show that approvals for 7 days are most common for medical conditions and surgical procedures under this plan. Based on all the relevant facts and circumstances, the difference in the relevant data suggests that the nonquantitative treatment limitation is likely to have a negative impact on access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. Therefore, the data suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access. To address these material differences in access, the plan consults more recent medical guidelines to update the factors that inform its medical necessity nonquantitative treatment limitations. Based on this review, the plan modifies the limitation so that inpatient, in-network prior authorization requests for mental health or substance use disorder benefits are approved for similar periods to what is approved for medical/surgical benefits. The plan includes documentation of this action as part of its comparative analysis. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(H) (Example 8), the plan does not violate the rules of paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section. While relevant data for the plan's prior authorization requirements suggested that the nonquantitative treatment limitation contributes to material differences in access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to inpatient, in-network medical/surgical benefits under paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B) of this section, the plan has taken reasonable action, as necessary, to ensure compliance, in operation, with this paragraph (c)(4) by updating the factors that inform its prior authorization nonquantitative treatment limitation for inpatient, in-network mental health and substance use disorder benefits so that these benefits are approved for similar periods to what is approved for medical/surgical benefits. The plan also documents its action taken to address material differences in access to inpatient, in-network benefits as required by paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(B)(1) of this section. (I) Example 9 (differences attributable to generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards)—(1) Facts. A group health plan develops a medical management requirement for all inpatient, out-of-network benefits for both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits to ensure treatment is medically necessary. The factors and evidentiary standards used to design and apply the medical management requirement rely on independent professional medical or clinical standards that are generally recognized by health care providers and facilities in relevant clinical specialties. The processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used in designing and applying the medical management requirement to mental health and substance use disorder benefits are comparable to, and are applied no more stringently than, the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used in designing and applying the requirement with respect to medical/surgical benefits. The plan collects and evaluates relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the impact of the medical management nonquantitative treatment limitation on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits, and considers the impact as part of the plan's evaluation, as required by paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A) of this section. Within the inpatient, out-of-network classification, the application of the medical management requirement results in a higher percentage of denials for mental health and substance use disorder claims than medical/surgical claims, because the benefits were found to be medically necessary for a lower percentage of mental health and substance use disorder claims. The plan correctly determines that these differences in access are attributable to the generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards used as the basis for the factors and evidentiary standards used to design or apply the limitation and adequately explains the bases for that conclusion as part of its comparative analysis. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(I) (Example 9), the plan does not violate the rules of this paragraph (c)(4). Generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards of care are not considered to be information, evidence, sources, or standards that are biased and not objective in a manner that discriminates against mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits, and the plan otherwise complies with the requirements in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Additionally, the plan does not violate paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section because it has collected and evaluated relevant data, the differences in access are attributable to the generally recognized independent professional medical or clinical standards that are used as the basis for the factors and evidentiary standards used to design or apply the medical management nonquantitative treatment limitation, and the plan explains the bases for this conclusion in its comparative analysis. As a result, the nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, out-of-network classification is no more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitation that applies to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classification. (J) Example 10 (material differences in access for standards for provider admission to a network with reasonable action)—(1) Facts. A plan applies nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition in the inpatient, in-network and outpatient, in-network classifications. The plan's networks are constructed by separate service providers for medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits. The processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used in designing and applying the nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition for mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the outpatient, in-network and inpatient, in-network classifications are comparable to, and are applied no more stringently than, the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used in designing and applying the nonquantitative treatment limitations with respect to medical/surgical benefits in the classifications, as required under paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. In order to ensure, in operation, that the nonquantitative treatment limitations are no more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitations applied to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the classification, the plan collects and evaluates relevant data in a manner reasonably designed to assess the aggregate impact of all the nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared with access to medical/surgical benefits and considers the impact as part of the plan's evaluation. The plan considers relevant data that is known, or reasonably should be known, including metrics relating to the time and distance from plan participants and beneficiaries to network providers in rural and urban regions; the number of network providers accepting new patients; the proportions of mental health and substance use disorder and medical/surgical providers and facilities that provide services in rural and urban regions who are in the plan's network; provider reimbursement rates (for comparable services and benchmarked to a reference standard, as appropriate); and in-network and out-of-network utilization rates (including data related to the dollar value and number of provider claims submissions). The plan determines that the relevant data suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitations in the aggregate contribute to material differences in access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits compared to medical/surgical benefits in the classifications because, based on all the relevant facts and circumstances, the differences in the data suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition are likely to have a negative impact on access to mental health or substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits. The plan takes reasonable actions, as necessary, to address the material differences in access, to ensure compliance, in operation, with this paragraph (c)(4), by strengthening its efforts to recruit and encourage a broad range of available providers and facilities to join the plan's network of providers, including by taking actions to increase compensation and other inducements, streamline credentialing processes, contact providers reimbursed for items and services provided on an out-of-network basis to offer participation in the network, and develop a process to monitor the effects of such efforts; expanding the availability of telehealth arrangements to mitigate overall provider shortages in certain geographic areas; providing additional outreach and assistance to participants and beneficiaries enrolled in the plan to assist them in finding available in-network providers and facilities; and ensuring that the plan's provider directories are accurate and reliable. The plan documents the efforts that it has taken to address the material differences in access that the data revealed, and the plan includes the documentation as part of its comparative analysis submission. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(J) (Example 10), the plan does not violate the rules of this paragraph (c)(4). The plan's nonquantitative treatment limitations related to network composition comply with the rules of paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section. Additionally, the plan collects and evaluates relevant data, as required under paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A) of this section, in a manner reasonably designed to assess the aggregate impact of all such nonquantitative treatment limitations on relevant outcomes related to access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and medical/surgical benefits, as required under paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(C) of this section. While the data suggest that the nonquantitative treatment limitations contribute to material differences in access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits, the plan has taken reasonable action, as necessary, to ensure compliance with this paragraph (c)(4). The plan also documents the actions that have been and are being taken by the plan to address material differences as required by § 2590.712-1(c)(5)(iv). As a result, the network composition nonquantitative treatment limitations with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, in-network and outpatient, in-network classifications are no more restrictive than the predominant nonquantitative treatment limitations that apply to substantially all medical/surgical benefits in the same classifications. (K) Example 11 (separate EAP exhaustion treatment limitation applicable only to mental health or substance use disorder benefits)—(1) Facts. An employer maintains both a major medical plan and an employee assistance program (EAP). The EAP provides, among other benefits, a limited number of mental health or substance use disorder counseling sessions, which, together with other benefits provided by the EAP, are not significant benefits in the nature of medical care. Participants are eligible for mental health or substance use disorder benefits under the major medical plan only after exhausting the counseling sessions provided by the EAP. No similar exhaustion requirement applies with respect to medical/surgical benefits provided under the major medical plan. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(K) (Example 11), the requirement that limits eligibility for mental health and substance use disorder benefits under the major medical plan until EAP benefits are exhausted is a nonquantitative treatment limitation subject to the parity requirements of this paragraph (c)(4). Because the limitation does not apply to medical/surgical benefits, it is a separate nonquantitative treatment limitation applicable only to mental health and substance use disorder benefits that violates paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section. Additionally, this EAP would not qualify as excepted benefits under § 2590.732(c)(3)(vi)(B)(1) because participants in the major medical plan are required to use and exhaust benefits under the EAP (making the EAP a gatekeeper) before an individual is eligible for benefits under the plan. (L) Example 12 (separate exclusion for treatment in a residential facility applicable only to mental health and substance use disorder benefits)—(1) Facts. A plan generally covers inpatient, in-network and inpatient, out-of-network treatment without any limitations on setting, including skilled nursing facilities and rehabilitation hospitals, provided other medical necessity standards are satisfied. The plan has an exclusion for treatment at residential facilities, which the plan defines as an inpatient benefit for mental health and substance use disorder benefits. This exclusion was not generated through any broader nonquantitative treatment limitation (such as medical necessity or other clinical guideline). (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(L) (Example 12), the plan violates the rules of paragraph (c)(4)(iv) of this section. The exclusion of treatment at residential facilities is a separate nonquantitative treatment limitation applicable only to mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, in-network and inpatient, out-of-network classifications because the plan does not apply a comparable exclusion with respect to any medical/surgical benefits in the same benefit classification. (M) Example 13 (impermissible nonquantitative treatment limitation imposed following a final determination of noncompliance and direction by the Secretary)—(1) Facts. Following an initial request by the Secretary for a plan's comparative analysis of the plan's exclusion of mental health and substance use disorder benefits for failure to complete a course of treatment in the inpatient, in-network classification under § 2590.712-1(d), the plan submits a comparative analysis for the nonquantitative treatment limitation. After review of the comparative analysis, as well as additional information submitted by the plan after the Secretary determines that the plan has not submitted sufficient information to be responsive to the request, the Secretary makes an initial determination that the comparative analysis fails to demonstrate that the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used in designing and applying the nonquantitative treatment limitation to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the inpatient, in-network classification are comparable to, and applied no more stringently than, those used in designing and applying the limitation to medical/surgical benefits in the classification. Under § 2590.712-1(d)(3), the plan submits a corrective action plan and additional comparative analyses within 45 calendar days after the initial determination. However, the corrective action plan does not alter or eliminate the exclusion or alter the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used in designing and applying the exclusion. Moreover, the additional comparative analysis still does not include sufficient information. The Secretary then determines that the additional comparative analyses do not demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this paragraph (c)(4). Accordingly, the plan receives a final determination of noncompliance with ERISA section 712(a)(8) and § 2590.712-1 from the Secretary, which concludes that the plan did not demonstrate compliance through the comparative analysis process. After considering the relevant facts and circumstances, and considering the interests of plan participants and beneficiaries, as well as feedback from the plan, the Secretary directs the plan not to impose the nonquantitative treatment limitation by a certain date, unless and until the plan demonstrates compliance to the Secretary or takes appropriate action to remedy the violation. The plan makes no changes to its plan terms by that date and continues to impose the exclusion of benefits for failure to complete a course of treatment in the inpatient, in-network classification. (2) Conclusion. In this paragraph (c)(4)(vi)(M) (Example 13), by continuing to impose the exclusion of mental health and substance use disorder benefits for failure to complete a course of treatment in the inpatient, in-network classification after the Secretary directs the plan not to impose this nonquantitative treatment limitation, the plan violates the requirements of paragraph (c)(4)(v) of this section. (5) Exemptions. The rules of this paragraph (c) do not apply if a group health plan (or health insurance coverage) satisfies the requirements of paragraph (f) or (g) of this section (relating to exemptions for small employers and for increased cost). (d) Availability of plan information—(1) Criteria for medical necessity determinations. The criteria for medical necessity determinations made under a group health plan with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with the plan with respect to such benefits) must be made available by the plan administrator (or the health insurance issuer offering such coverage) to any current or potential participant, beneficiary, or contracting provider upon request. (2) Reason for any denial. The reason for any denial under a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with such plan) of reimbursement or payment for services with respect to mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the case of any participant or beneficiary must be made available by the plan administrator (or the health insurance issuer offering such coverage) to the participant or beneficiary in a form and manner consistent with the requirements of § 2560.503-1 of this chapter for group health plans. (3) Provisions of other law. Compliance with the disclosure requirements in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section is not determinative of compliance with any other provision of applicable Federal or State law. In particular, in addition to those disclosure requirements, provisions of other applicable law require disclosure of information relevant to medical/surgical, mental health, and substance use disorder benefits. For example, ERISA section 104 and § 2520.104b-1 of this chapter provide that, for plans subject to ERISA, instruments under which the plan is established or operated must generally be furnished to plan participants within 30 days of request. Instruments under which the plan is established or operated include documents with information on medical necessity criteria for both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits; the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used to apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits under the plan; and the comparative analyses and other applicable information required by § 2590.712-1. In addition, § 2560.503-1 of this chapter and § 2590.715-2719 set forth rules regarding claims and appeals, including the right of claimants (or their authorized representative) who have received an adverse benefit determination (or a final internal adverse benefit determination) to be provided, upon request and free of charge, reasonable access to and copies of all documents, records, and other information relevant to the claimant's claim for benefits. This includes documents with information on medical necessity criteria for both medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits, as well as the processes, strategies, evidentiary standards, and other factors used to apply a nonquantitative treatment limitation with respect to medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits under the plan and the comparative analyses and other applicable information required by § 2590.712-1. (e) Applicability—(1) Group health plans. The requirements of this section apply to a group health plan offering medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits. If, under an arrangement or arrangements to provide medical care benefits by an employer or employee organization (including for this purpose a joint board of trustees of a multiemployer trust affiliated with one or more multiemployer plans), any participant (or beneficiary) can simultaneously receive coverage for medical/surgical benefits and coverage for mental health or substance use disorder benefits, then the requirements of this section (including the exemption provisions in paragraph (g) of this section) apply separately with respect to each combination of medical/surgical benefits and of mental health or substance use disorder benefits that any participant (or beneficiary) can simultaneously receive from that employer's or employee organization's arrangement or arrangements to provide medical care benefits, and all such combinations are considered for purposes of this section to be a single group health plan. (2) Health insurance issuers. The requirements of this section apply to a health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage for mental health or substance use disorder benefits in connection with a group health plan subject to paragraph (e)(1) of this section. (3) Scope. This section does not— (i) Require a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with a group health plan) to provide any mental health benefits or substance use disorder benefits, and the provision of benefits by a plan (or health insurance coverage) for one or more mental health conditions or substance use disorders does not require the plan or health insurance coverage under this section to provide benefits for any other mental health condition or substance use disorder; (ii) Require a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with a group health plan) that provides coverage for mental health or substance use disorder benefits only to the extent required under PHS Act section 2713 to provide additional mental health or substance use disorder benefits in any classification in accordance with this section; or (iii) Affect the terms and conditions relating to the amount, duration, or scope of mental health or substance use disorder benefits under the plan (or health insurance coverage) except as specifically provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. (4) Coordination with EHB requirements. Nothing in paragraph (f) or (g) of this section or § 2590.712-1(g) changes the requirements of 45 CFR 147.150 and 156.115 providing that a health insurance issuer offering non-grandfathered health insurance coverage in the individual or small group market that is required to provide mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment services, as part of essential health benefits required under 45 CFR 156.110(a)(5) and 156.115(a), must comply with the requirements under section 2726 of the Public Health Service Act and its implementing regulations at 45 CFR 146.136 and 146.137 to satisfy the requirement to provide coverage for mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment, as part of essential health benefits. (f) Small employer exemption—(1) In general. The requirements of this section do not apply to a group health plan (or health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with a group health plan) for a plan year of a small employer. For purposes of this paragraph (f), the term small employer means, in connection with a group health plan with respect to a calendar year and a plan year, an employer who employed an average of at least two (or one in the case of an employer residing in a State that permits small groups to include a single individual) but not more than 50 employees on business days during the preceding calendar year. See section 732(a) of ERISA and § 2590.732(b), which provide that this section (and certain other sections) does not apply to any group health plan (and health insurance issuer offering coverage in connection with a group health plan) for any plan year if, on the first day of the plan year, the plan has fewer than two participants who are current employees. (2) Rules in determining employer size. For purposes of paragraph (f)(1) of this section— (i) All persons treated as a single employer under subsections (b), (c), (m), and (o) of section 414 of the Code are treated as one employer; (ii) If an employer was not in existence throughout the preceding calendar year, whether it is a small employer is determined based on the average number of employees the employer reasonably expects to employ on business days during the current calendar year; and (iii) Any reference to an employer for purposes of the small employer exemption includes a reference to a predecessor of the employer. (g) Increased cost exemption—(1) In general. If the application of this section to a group health plan (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with such plans) results in an increase for the plan year involved of the actual total cost of coverage with respect to medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits as determined and certified under paragraph (g)(3) of this section by an amount that exceeds the applicable percentage described in paragraph (g)(2) of this section of the actual total plan costs, the provisions of this section shall not apply to such plan (or coverage) during the following plan year, and such exemption shall apply to the plan (or coverage) for one plan year. An employer or issuer may elect to continue to provide mental health and substance use disorder benefits in compliance with this section with respect to the plan or coverage involved regardless of any increase in total costs. (2) Applicable percentage. With respect to a plan or coverage, the applicable percentage described in this paragraph (g) is— (i) 2 percent in the case of the first plan year in which this section is applied to the plan or coverage; and (ii) 1 percent in the case of each subsequent plan year. (3) Determinations by actuaries—(i) Determinations as to increases in actual costs under a plan or coverage that are attributable to implementation of the requirements of this section shall be made and certified by a qualified and licensed actuary who is a member in good standing of the American Academy of Actuaries. All such determinations must be based on the formula specified in paragraph (g)(4) of this section and shall be in a written report prepared by the actuary. (ii) The written report described in paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section shall be maintained by the group health plan or health insurance issuer, along with all supporting documentation relied upon by the actuary, for a period of six years following the notification made under paragraph (g)(6) of this section. (4) Formula. The formula to be used to make the determination under paragraph (g)(3)(i) of this section is expressed mathematically as follows: (i) E1 is the actual total cost of coverage with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits for the base period, including claims paid by the plan or issuer with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and administrative costs (amortized over time) attributable to providing these benefits consistent with the requirements of this section. (ii) E0 is the actual total cost of coverage with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits for the length of time immediately before the base period (and that is equal in length to the base period), including claims paid by the plan or issuer with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits and administrative costs (amortized over time) attributable to providing these benefits. (iii) T0 is the actual total cost of coverage with respect to all benefits during the base period. (iv) k is the applicable percentage of increased cost specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this section that will be expressed as a fraction for purposes of this formula. (v) D is the average change in spending that is calculated by applying the formula (E1 − E0)/T0 to mental health and substance use disorder spending in each of the five prior years and then calculating the average change in spending. (5) Six month determination. If a group health plan or health insurance issuer seeks an exemption under this paragraph (g), determinations under paragraph (g)(3) of this section shall be made after such plan or coverage has complied with this section for at least the first 6 months of the plan year involved. (6) Notification. A group health plan or health insurance issuer that, based on the certification described under paragraph (g)(3) of this section, qualifies for an exemption under this paragraph (g), and elects to implement the exemption, must notify participants and beneficiaries covered under the plan, the Secretary, and the appropriate State agencies of such election. (i) Participants and beneficiaries—(A) Content of notice. The notice to participants and beneficiaries must include the following information: (1) A statement that the plan or issuer is exempt from the requirements of this section and a description of the basis for the exemption. (2) The name and telephone number of the individual to contact for further information. (3) The plan or issuer name and plan number (PN). (4) The plan administrator's name, address, and telephone number. (5) For single-employer plans, the plan sponsor's name, address, and telephone number (if different from paragraph (g)(6)(i)(A)(3) of this section) and the plan sponsor's employer identification number (EIN). (6) The effective date of such exemption. (7) A statement regarding the ability of participants and beneficiaries to contact the plan administrator or health insurance issuer to see how benefits may be affected as a result of the plan's or issuer's election of the exemption. (8) A statement regarding the availability, upon request and free of charge, of a summary of the information on which the exemption is based (as required under paragraph (g)(6)(i)(D) of this section). (B) Use of summary of material reductions in covered services or benefits. A plan or issuer may satisfy the requirements of paragraph (g)(6)(i)(A) of this section by providing participants and beneficiaries (in accordance with paragraph (g)(6)(i)(C) of this section) with a summary of material reductions in covered services or benefits consistent with § 2520.104b-3(d) of this chapter that also includes the information specified in paragraph (g)(6)(i)(A) of this section. However, in all cases, the exemption is not effective until 30 days after notice has been sent. (C) Delivery. The notice described in this paragraph (g)(6)(i) is required to be provided to all participants and beneficiaries. The notice may be furnished by any method of delivery that satisfies the requirements of section 104(b)(1) of ERISA (29 U.S.C. 1024(b)(1)) and its implementing regulations (for example, first-class mail). If the notice is provided to the participant and any beneficiaries at the participant's last known address, then the requirements of this paragraph (g)(6)(i) are satisfied with respect to the participant and all beneficiaries residing at that address. If a beneficiary's last known address is different from the participant's last known address, a separate notice is required to be provided to the beneficiary at the beneficiary's last known address. (D) Availability of documentation. The plan or issuer must make available to participants and beneficiaries (or their representatives), on request and at no charge, a summary of the information on which the exemption was based. (For purposes of this paragraph (g), an individual who is not a participant or beneficiary and who presents a notice described in paragraph (g)(6)(i) of this section is considered to be a representative. A representative may request the summary of information by providing the plan a copy of the notice provided to the participant under paragraph (g)(6)(i) of this section with any personally identifiable information redacted.) The summary of information must include the incurred expenditures, the base period, the dollar amount of claims incurred during the base period that would have been denied under the terms of the plan or coverage absent amendments required to comply with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the administrative costs related to those claims, and other administrative costs attributable to complying with the requirements of this section. In no event should the summary of information include any personally identifiable information. (ii) Federal agencies—(A) Content of notice. The notice to the Secretary must include the following information: (1) A description of the number of covered lives under the plan (or coverage) involved at the time of the notification, and as applicable, at the time of any prior election of the cost exemption under this paragraph (g) by such plan (or coverage); (2) For both the plan year upon which a cost exemption is sought and the year prior, a description of the actual total costs of coverage with respect to medical/surgical benefits and mental health and substance use disorder benefits; and (3) For both the plan year upon which a cost exemption is sought and the year prior, the actual total costs of coverage with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits under the plan. (B) Reporting. A group health plan, and any health insurance coverage offered in connection with a group health plan, must provide notice to the Department of Labor. This requirement is satisfied if the plan sends a copy, to the address designated by the Secretary in generally applicable guidance, of the notice described in paragraph (g)(6)(ii)(A) of this section identifying the benefit package to which the exemption applies. (iii) Confidentiality. A notification to the Secretary under this paragraph (g)(6) shall be confidential. The Secretary shall make available, upon request and not more than on an annual basis, an anonymous itemization of each notification that includes— (A) A breakdown of States by the size and type of employers submitting such notification; and (B) A summary of the data received under paragraph (g)(6)(ii) of this section. (iv) Audits. The Secretary may audit the books and records of a group health plan or a health insurance issuer relating to an exemption, including any actuarial reports, during the 6 year period following notification of such exemption under paragraph (g)(6) of this section. A State agency receiving a notification under paragraph (g)(6) of this section may also conduct such an audit with respect to an exemption covered by such notification. (h) Sale of nonparity health insurance coverage. A health insurance issuer may not sell a policy, certificate, or contract of insurance that fails to comply with paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, except to a plan for a year for which the plan is exempt from the requirements of this section because the plan meets the requirements of paragraph (f) or (g) of this section. (i) Applicability dates—(1) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section— (i) This section applies to group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group health insurance coverage on the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after January 1, 2025, except that the requirements of paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(A), (c)(4)(i)(B), and (c)(4)(iii) of this section apply on the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after January 1, 2026. (ii) Until the applicability date in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this section, plans and issuers are required to continue to comply with 29 CFR 2590.712, revised as of July 1, 2022. (2) Special effective date for certain collectively-bargained plans. For a group health plan maintained pursuant to one or more collective bargaining agreements ratified before October 3, 2008, the requirements of this section do not apply to the plan (or health insurance coverage offered in connection with the plan) for plan years beginning before the date on which the last of the collective bargaining agreements terminates (determined without regard to any extension agreed to after October 3, 2008). (j) Severability. If any provision of this section is held to be invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any person or circumstance, or stayed pending further agency action, the provision shall be construed so as to continue to give the maximum effect to the provision permitted by law, unless such holding shall be one of invalidity or unenforceability, in which event the provision shall be severable from this section and shall not affect the remainder thereof or the application of the provision to persons not similarly situated or to dissimilar circumstances.

The text continues — open the document to read the rest.