Don Morrison and NDPeople.org

Dear Senator Seymour,

As you prepare to share holiday visits and meals with family and friends, here are some some quick facts for you in your likely conversations about health care reform - a long overdue and probably hardest fought change in America in decades. As you know, opponents are doing everything they can to stall, lie and spread wild exaggerations to protect the privildged. During the holidays, please help people know about the good that reform will bring. Remember it’s not done yet and this is a critical time for us to do our part to tell people accurate information. Your voice makes the greatest difference with people know you.
For the first time in American history, we are close to achieving guaranteed health insurance protection.
With reform we won’t have to sell the house to pay for health care costs.
Cradle to grave health care will mean Americans like you and I won’t go bankrupt because of skyrocketing health care costs.
No more denying people coverage because of pre-existing conditions and no more lifetime caps on coverage.
Children will be covered on their parents’ insurance policy up to age 26.
As soon as the bill is passed, insurance companies will be banned from refusing coverage to children due to pre-existing conditions.
No cuts in Medicare benefits. It is stated that clearly in the bill.
Reform will protect seniors’ access to their doctors and it will lower prescription drug costs for people in the Part D “doughnut hole”.
Don’t believe the lies about it hurting business. Only the largest 14% of businesses will be required to provide health care and most them already do.
31 million more people will be covered by health insurance, saving us all money from paying for uninsured.
It is the audacity of hope vs. the mendacity of nope!
It is time to bring good cheer. Please forward this to as many people as you can. During the holidays, take the initiative; start the conversations.

Thank you!! We wish you the very best holiday time.

Don Morrison

--
Don Morrison
NDPeople.org
410 E Thayer Ave, Suite 2
Bismarck ND 58501
(w) 701-224-8090
(c) 701-527-0060
don@ndpeople.org
Remove my name from all future email correspondence

Address postal inquiries to:
NDPeople.Org
410 E. Thayer Ave
Bismarck, ND 58501-4049
Powered By

Election Tips for You

Hi :

'Tis the season to get ready for the next election with great organizing tools from Political Net Press.

The Candidate's Handbook

35 years of successful campaign experience boiled down to a complete campaign in one compact volume.

Softcover - $24.95 plus shipping.
Downloadable as a non-printable PDF file - $12.95

32 Campaign Checklists

Track all your campaign details from filing deadlines to ordering campaign materials to coffee and event planning, and print them out to keep your staff on the same page.

Sent in email as a printable Word file. $9.95


How To Organize a Precinct Walk

How do you know which precincts to walk and which doors to knock? You need a plan. This step-by-step guide gets the most votes out of your volunteers and your walking time. This guide tells you how to:

Locate the voters you must meet.

Calculate how many homes you can reach with the time and volunteers available.

Decide where to walk first.

Prepare Walking Kits for your volunteers containing:

precinct maps

walk lists

tracking codes

talking scripts

Determine what time of day to walk which neighborhoods.

Downloadable as a printable PDF file. $9.95

Preview and order The Candidate's Handbook only at www.politicalnetpress.com

Sent by Political Net Press
info@politicalnetpress.com
3145 Alma St.
Palo Alto, CA 94306
650-494-3962

If you no longer wish to receive this information please respond to sender and put "remove" in the subject line.

North Dakota -- Oil News - Ron Ness

New Members – Thanks to the new Petroleum Council members Nexen Marketing, Looper, Reed & McGraw, International Western Company, and Oasis Petroleum, LLC.

North Dakota Oil Production Continues to Grow – Oil production for October 2009 broke another record with production reaching nearly 240,000 barrels of oil per day. There were 4,606 wells producing and the rig count has risen to 79 in December. The Department of Mineral Resources predicts the rig count may grow to110 by May 2010.

Gas Flaring Drops by 14% – With estimates of investment in gas infrastructure of nearly $400 million over the past 18 months to capture natural gas, North Dakota is seeing significant reductions in gas flaring and another gas pipeline in Mountrail County will reduce the flaring even more when it comes online in early 2010. Mountrail County has reduced flaring by 16 million cubic feet per day and has increased natural gas sales by 33 million cubic feet per day in recent months. Producers, pipelines and gas processors should be commended for their efforts to capture this valuable resource.

Get Involved – Sign-up for a Committee – The Petroleum Council has formed standing committees and is looking for members to participate. This is your chance to have a voice on key issues and make a difference in the oil industry. Get involved by becoming a member of one or more Petroleum Council standing committees and task forces today!

Voting members of the Petroleum Council can sign up to be committee members with a few simple clicks by visiting our website, www.ndoil.org, and completing the form on the bottom of the Standing Committee Sign-Up page. If you are interested in following a committee, but do not wish to be a member of the committee, check the “correspondence only” boxes and you’ll receive up-to-date information on committee action. Once your information has been submitted, you will receive notification and committee information shortly thereafter. Committee and task force descriptions are listed below.

• Transportation Committee
o Road Infrastructure Task Force
o Water Task Force
• Regulatory/Legal Committee
o Royalty Owners Task Force
o Bakken VOC Task Force
o Legal Issues Task Force
o Split Estate/Surface Owners Task Force
• Communication Committee
• Oil Can! Committee
• Membership Committee
• Workforce Committee
• Tribal Lands Committee

Refinery Task Force Selects Consultant – The Refinery Task Force, that was funded by Senator Dorgan and is being managed by the Association of Rural Cooperatives, has selected the Corval Group, in partnership with Purvin & Gertz and Mustang Engineering, to conduct the feasibility study of a new refinery in North Dakota. The Petroleum Council, along with Tesoro, Murex Petroleum, Cenex, and the Petroleum Marketers, is involved in the steering and advisory committee. The results of phase one will be presented at the Williston Basin Petroleum Conference in May.
Water Development Meeting Information Available Online – On December 10, the Governor’s Office, with support from the Petroleum Council, held an informational meeting about water resource opportunities in western North Dakota. PowerPoint presentations and PDF versions of information shared at the meeting are available on the Presentations page of the Petroleum Council website. The Petroleum Council has established a Water Resources Task Force. (See story above.)
2010 WBPC Information Online – Information regarding the 2010 Williston Basin Petroleum Conference is now available on the Petroleum Council website. Additional information will continually be posted as the event draws near. Registration for exhibit booths and sponsorships will be open January 13, 2010. Registration for conference attendees will be open February 17.
Enbridge’s Pipeline Capacity to Increase by 60,000 barrels per day on January 1 – See the full story on this great news and more pipeline news in the North Dakota Pipeline Authority’s Pipeline Publication. We applaud Enbridge for doubling their pipeline over the past four years. Keep the increases coming, we need more export capacity.
North Dakotans Receive Tax Relief – North Dakotans will save an average of $650 on their taxes as a result of the property tax relief bill passed by the 2009 legislature and signed by Governor Hoeven. Taxpayers will save an average of 15-19% on their property taxes, depending upon valuation and local taxes, and approximately 12% on state income taxes. The corporate income tax reduction is minimal. Revenues from the Oi1 Tax Trust Fund were used to fund a majority of this tax relief package. Revenues are also set aside for property tax relief through 2012.
The comprehensive 2009 tax relief package includes:
Property tax relief and reform: $295 million
Homestead tax credit: $5 million
Individual income tax relief: $90 million
Business income tax relief $10 million
Total $400 million


For more information on any of these issues or to be removed from the mailing list, contact the North Dakota Petroleum Council at
(701) 223-6380, ndpc@ndoil.org, or see www.ndoil.org.

Rankings of US Highways

Tom,

Since 1984, per-mile total disbursements on state highways have increased by 262 percent. In 2007, U.S. states spent over $109 billion on state-owned highways, a 10 percent increase over 2006. But some states are doing a much better job with that money than others. Taxpayers in New York, Hawaii, New Jersey, California, Rhode Island and Alaska have the worst-performing highway systems in the nation.

Reason's new 18th Annual Highway Report looks at the performance of state highway systems from 1984-2007 (the latest year for which data is available). THe study examines state highway systems in 11 categories, including congestion, pavement condition, fatalities, deficient bridges and total spending.

You can see each states performance on this interactive map, and you can get the report and other information here.

Top-ranked North Dakota, which has had the best performing system each year since 2001, scored well by having the least interstate and rural mileage in poor condition and ranking first in maintenance spending. New Mexico continues its impressive improvement. The state was 27th in 2000, but now ranks 2nd in overall performance and cost-effectiveness. Kansas is 3rd overall, South Carolina, with one of the largest state-owned highway systems in the country, is 4th and Montana rounds out the top five.

Delaware posted the biggest improvement in the overall rankings, moving from 28th to 11th by cutting spending without sacrificing road condition. Michigan improved from 42nd to 30th thanks to an improvement in rural pavement condition. Mississippi also posted double-digit gains.

Four states fell in the overall rankings by double-digits - Missouri, Oregon, Vermont and Indiana, which fell 16 spots, from 15th to 31st, because of a sharp decline in urban interstate condition and an increase in spending per mile.

The bottom line is that these comparisons highlight where some states have substantially improved the condition of their highway system, and where some have allowed major decline. Taxpayers and leaders in poor performing states should be demanding change.

Adrian
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Adrian Moore
Vice President
Reason Foundation
(661)477-3107




This email was sent to tseymour@state.nd.us,


from Adrian Moore at Reason Foundation
3415 Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA, 90034, USA





If you would like to change your preferences for email communications from Reason, you may reply to this email, or visit our Profile Center. To unsubscribe from all future email communications from Reason, click here.

North Dakota Legislative Energy Committee Minutes

NORTH DAKOTA LEGISLATIVE MANAGEMENT
Minutes of the
ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSMISSION COMMITTEE
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Roughrider Room, State Capitol
Bismarck, North Dakota
Senator Rich Wardner, Chairman, called the
meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
Members present: Senators Rich Wardner,
John M. Andrist, Robert M. Horne, Joe Miller, George
Nodland; Representatives Tracy Boe, Mike
Brandenburg, Lee Kaldor, Todd Porter, Dave Weiler
Members absent: Senator Jim Dotzenrod;
Representative Matthew M. Klein
Others present: Tim Mathern, State Senator,
Fargo
Representatives Shirley Meyer and Lisa Wolf,
members of the Legislative Management, were also in
attendance.
See Appendix A for additional persons present.
It was moved by Senator Andrist, seconded by
Senator Nodland, and carried on a voice vote that
the minutes of the previous meeting be approved
as distributed.
COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY
POLICY STUDY - TRANSMISSION
Mr. Bill Malcolm, Manager, State Regulatory
Affairs, Midwest ISO, made a presentation
(Appendix B) on what the Midwest ISO provides for
services and for whom. He said the Midwest ISO has
recently completed a winter reliability assessment,
and demand is approximately half of capacity. He
said electricity sales are expected to be down
9 percent due to the recession. He said the Midwest
ISO received a United States Department of Energy
grant for a smart grid project. He said the Midwest
ISO has a midwest transportation expansion plan of
576 projects with $4.3 billion of investment. He
reviewed the new generator interconnection cost
allocation approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission in October 2009. He said the old cost
allocation formula placed 50 percent of the cost with
the interconnection customer and 50 percent with the
transmission owner. He said the new cost allocation
formula places 90 percent with the interconnection
customer and 10 percent under the Midwest ISO
postage stamp for lines 345 kilovolts and above; for
lines under 345 kilovolts, the total cost is with the
interconnection customer. He said the Midwest ISO is
conducting a regional generator outlets study to
develop transmission for mandates in Iowa, Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and
Wisconsin.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Mr. Malcolm said the reserve market for electricity will
be transferred to the Midwest ISO on January 6, 2010.
In response to a question from Senator Miller,
Mr. Malcolm said the new cost allocation formula is a
benefit to this state because of the export of wind
energy.
In response to a question from Senator Horne,
Mr. Malcolm said the best solution for wind integration
would be for the storage of electricity. He said wind
energy and electric cars work well together because
the car can be charged in the middle of the night. He
said if there is too much wind to integrate into the
system, the system would need a price signal, a
mandatory curtailment, or plants to be taken off line.
In response to a question from Representative
Kaldor, Mr. Malcolm said the license plate rate design
is based on where the power sinks. He said the
postage stamp rate design is based on the average
over the system.
Mr. Scott Scovill, Director of Wind Development,
NextEra Energy Resources, provided testimony to the
committee. He said it is unfair for the generator to pay
for all of the transmission. He said there will have to
be further action on cost allocation.
In response to a question from Representative
Kaldor, Mr. Malcolm said interconnection customers
are generators like wind farms and coal plants.
COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY
POLICY STUDY - PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION UPDATE
Mr. Tony Clark, Commissioner, Public Service
Commission, presented written testimony
(Appendix C) on recent energy developments and
transmission issues. He said the recent decision by
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to
approve the Midwest ISO tariff revision decreased the
risk that North Dakotans will pay an unfair share of the
cost of generation development in our state. He said
under the former pricing rules, North Dakota utilities
were on the hook to pay for 50 percent of the
transmission upgrades when new generation was
brought on line. He said North Dakotans were
expected to pay 50 percent of those costs even when
the power was for the benefit of consumers
elsewhere. He said under the new tariff, the
generator will pay 100 percent of the costs, unless a
project is above 345 kilovolts, in which case the
Energy Development and Transmission 2 November 24, 2009
generator pays 90 percent and 10 percent of the costs
is shared across the entire Midwest ISO footprint. He
said siting fees totaled $1,197,250 during the 2007-09
biennium. He said in the current biennium,
developers have paid a total of $230,000. He said the
Public Service Commission returns the unspent
portion of the fees to the developer. He said since the
beginning of the 2007-09 biennium, the Public Service
Commission has refunded $718,414.13.
In response to a question from Senator Horne,
Mr. Clark said the fees are used for anything to
process the permit, including consultants, travel, and
direct out-of-pocket expenses. He said staff time is
not included. He said most of the fees are refunded.
He said the fees are placed in a special fund and
some of the fees are held back for future inspections.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Mr. Clark said under the new formula, the developer
pays 100 percent and that cost is rolled into rates,
most likely through a power purchase agreement. He
said the developer paying 100 percent can create an
unfair situation. He said under open access, others
can use the same transmission for free. He said this
is like building a highway for one additional car and
having that car pay for the highway, even though
others can use the highway. He said the new cost
allocation is better than the old cost allocation.
COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY
POLICY STUDY - FEDERAL ACTION
Ms. Sandi Tabor, Vice President, Administration
and Policy Development, Lignite Energy Council,
made a presentation (Appendix D) on federal
legislation and issues and lignite study initiatives. She
reviewed the Waxman-Markey bill, the Kerry-Boxer
bill, and the energy bill. She provided the economic
impact of the Waxman-Markey bill. She reviewed
Environmental Protection Agency regulatory initiatives
to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, mercury, air
quality, and coal combustion byproducts. She
reviewed the Clean Water Restoration Act, which
would change the definition of navigable waters to
give the federal government jurisdiction over all
waters in the United States. She reviewed the lignite
study initiatives, including the beneficiated lignite
marketing study, the lignite-based advanced
generation technology systems study, and the carbon
dioxide capture technologies and costs associated
with lignite-based power plants study.
In response to a question from Senator Andrist,
Ms. Tabor said there are congressional members who
think coal can be removed as an energy source.
COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY
POLICY STUDY - TAX INCENTIVES
Mr. Ryan Rauschenberger, Deputy Tax
Commissioner, made a presentation (Appendix E) on
the three primary incentives for wind--sales tax
exemption, property tax reduction, and income tax
credit.
In response to a question from Senator Nodland,
Mr. Rauschenberger said income tax information for
developers is confidential because there are fewer
than five users of the credit. He said the sales tax
exemption is for anything used on a wind farm before
the expiration in 2015. He said some wind farms are
assessed at 3 percent because they were built during
the time at which property tax was 3 percent.
Senator Andrist said the wind incentives were to
launch the industry. He said developers are standing
in line to create wind energy in this state. He said
there do not need to be incentives for wind energy.
He said North Dakota exports 70 percent of its energy
and exports the incentive with the energy.
Representative Brandenburg said in 2001, a wind
tower would pay approximately $7,000 in property tax
in Minnesota and $20,000 in North Dakota. He said
the Legislative Assembly balanced the states with the
reduction to 3 percent. He said this placed a tax of
approximately $6,000 per tower on the wind company.
He said we were competitive with Minnesota and
South Dakota until those states changed their tax to
be based on the cost of generation. As a result, he
said, this state was at twice the cost per tower. He
said the Legislative Assembly reduced the tax from
3 percent to 1.5 percent to make the tax competitive.
He said if the tax had remained at 10 percent, there
would be no tax collected because wind farms would
not have been built in this state.
Ms. Sara Hewson, Tax Department, answered
questions for the committee. In response to a
question from Senator Horne, Ms. Hewson said
Minnesota has a generation tax of .012 per kilowatthour.
She said South Dakota is based on depreciated
costs at the local level. She said North Dakota is
comparable to South Dakota.
In response to a question from Representative
Kaldor, Ms. Hewson said this state uses a
combination of the income approach and the
cost/depreciation approach. She said the
cost/depreciation approach is weighed heavier
because some companies do not provide income
information. She said the depreciation is 2.5 percent
per year, which is book depreciation.
Representative Brandenburg said North Dakota
appears to have a better tax policy than Minnesota
and South Dakota.
WIND EASEMENT AND WIND ENERGY
LEASE PROVISIONS STUDY
At the request of Chairman Wardner, committee
counsel presented a handout (Appendix F) entitled
Wind Turbine Lease Considerations for Landowners
published by the North Dakota State University
Extension Service. In addition, he provided wind
energy leases from NextEra Energy Resources
(Appendix G), Crownbutte Wind Power, Inc.
(Appendix H), Basin Electric Power Cooperative
(Appendix I), and Minnesota Power (Appendix J). He
said he sent a letter requesting a copy of the wind
Energy Development and Transmission 3 November 24, 2009
easement or lease from each developer in this state
and had received four documents to date. The
following table summarizes key provisions in the
leases or easements:
Years
Confidentiality
Clause
Underground
Facilities
Requirements
Stricter Than
Public Service
Commission Rules Noise Other
Basin Electric
Power Cooperative
45 + 10 For wind monitoring
and operating data
Foundation removal
to 48"
71 dBA or less at 650'
from facilities
None
NextEra Energy
Resources
99 General clause Collection facilities
buried to 48"
Not to exceed
50 dBA within 200'
of residence
Waive right to jury
trial
Crownbutte Wind
Power, Inc.
40 None None None Owner waiver of
setbacks
Minnesota Power 50 None None Less than 50 dBA
within 100' of dwelling
Most-favored nation
payment
Mr. Scovill presented testimony on wind energy
leases and easements. He said NextEra Energy
Resources supports confidentiality agreements. He
said NextEra Energy Resources encourages
landowners to hire an attorney of the landowner's
choice. He said NextEra Energy Resources
compensates the landowner for attorney's fees. He
said NextEra Energy Resources pays everyone the
same in the same project. He said the marketplace
determines the rates offered to landowners. He said
landowners do not have to sign the lease. He said the
wind energy business is highly competitive and
NextEra Energy Resources wants confidentiality so
that competitors do not learn from NextEra Energy
Resources. He said NextEra Energy Resources does
not want bidding wars. He said the confidentiality
clauses are contained in private agreements between
parties, and if the marketplace demands the removal
of confidentiality clauses, then the confidentiality
clauses will be removed.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Mr. Scovill said the financial terms in the agreement
are at arm's length and should be private and not
bantered around the community.
In response to a question from Representative
Meyer, Mr. Scovill said although some people may
wish to discuss the agreement and cannot due to the
confidentiality clause, those people had to sign the
agreement for the confidentiality clause to apply to
them.
In response to a question from Representative
Boe, Mr. Scovill said NextEra Energy Resources has
never sued any landowner in North Dakota for
violation of a confidentiality clause. The decision to
sue would be based upon the damages caused by the
violation of the clause.
In response to a question from Representative
Weiler, Mr. Scovill did not have an example of when
damages from violation of a confidentiality clause
might result in a lawsuit.
In response to a question from Senator Nodland,
Mr. Scovill said NextEra Energy Resources has an
escalation clause and payment clauses vary from
state to state.
Senator Andrist said he does not like confidentiality
clauses because they take away a person's free
speech. He said NextEra Energy Resources has
never sued, probably never will sue, and probably
would lose if it did sue. He said it does not make any
sense to have a confidentiality clause.
In response to a question from Senator Andrist,
Mr. Scovill said a confidentiality clause allows NextEra
Energy Resources to protect the economics in the
project.
Representative Brandenburg said if a landowner is
paid on a percentage, and the landowner violated the
confidentiality clause by providing information to a
competitor, the competitor could figure what was paid
in the final power purchase agreement.
ALLOCATION OF WIND RIGHTS STUDY
Mr. Tom Factor, NextEra Energy Resources,
provided information based on handouts (Appendix K)
on the allocation of wind rights, including information
on wind turbine sound and health. In addition, he
read from Romero v. Bernell, 603 F.Supp.2d 1333
(D.N.M. 2009) (Appendix L). In particular, the case
states:
Strictly speaking, the ownership of wind is a
misnomer. Wind, in and of itself, does not
appear to be susceptible of any ownership. It is
not like oil and gas in place where there is a
deposit of hydrocarbons which can be reduced
to possession by one or more mineral owners
of the tracts under which the hydrocarbon
deposit resides. Wind itself is more akin to a
wild animal or percolating waters which must
first be reduced to possession before they have
value. To reduce wind to "possession" appears
to require that it be focused on driving the fins
of a windmill which turn a generator and
ultimately generates electricity. Then and only
then can wind a) be reduced to possession and
b) have value.
Energy Development and Transmission 4 November 24, 2009
Mr. Factor said wind, oil, and water are significantly
different. Comparing water and oil legislatively to
wind is inappropriate. He said under present
setbacks, there is a 3.2 rotor diameter dead zone
surrounding a property line. He said most
manufacturers require at least a 3 rotor diameter
separation for maintaining a warranty. He said if there
were greater setbacks, a small landowner could stop
larger landowners around the small landowner from
developing wind resources, and that would not be fair
to the other landowners. He said the payment to
landowners at present is the floor for which
landowners are willing to have a wind tower. He said
unitization would require additional money.
In response to a question from Senator Miller,
Mr. Factor said 1.1 times the total height is
approximately equal to 1.6 times the rotor diameter.
In response to a question from Senator Horne,
Mr. Factor said if there is unitization then there will
have to be another income source, besides the
developer, to provide payments for impacts from wind
farms. He said once impacts other than those related
to real property are considered, there is an opening of
Pandora's box.
In response to a question from Representative
Kaldor, Mr. Factor said the Stillings' house is unique in
that it is surrounded by wind turbines. He said there
have been studies done on values of homes inside
and outside the view shed of a wind farm. He said
over time there is no diminution of property values as
a result of a wind farm. He said some people like
wind farms because they are progressive and people
like the way they look.
Mr. Warren Enyart, Secretary, M-Power, LLC,
presented testimony to the committee. He provided
written testimony (Appendix M) in response to
testimony at the previous meeting. He said he is the
general manager and a founder of M-Power. He said
M-Power consists of landowners in the Luverne Wind
Farm. He said M-Power gathered property owners for
a construction-ready transfer to Florida Power and
Light for the development of a wind farm. He said
when M-Power signed landowners there were no
promises as to who got turbines. He said M-Power
purchased a footprint. He said shareholders in
M-Power are remunerated. He said some
shareholders have turbines and some have no
turbines. He said the most controversial issue is who
gets a turbine and who does not get a turbine. He
said being a shareholder of M-Power to some extent
mitigates not getting a tower. He said the income is
distributed to shareholders in an equitable manner
from the power purchase agreement. He said
landowners on the edge of a footprint may need to be
compensated.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Mr. Enyart said everyone in M-Power voluntarily
entered and received stock in the company. He said
the stock was doubled when the project was on the
ground.
In response to a question from Representative
Brandenburg, Mr. Enyart said in future contracts
M-Power would consider a margin for the peripheral of
a footprint for a person who does not want to enter
M-Power. He said there is a gentleman in the
footprint who did not enter because he does not sign
leases on principle; however, he supports the wind
farm.
In response to a question from Senator Horne,
Mr. Enyart said in the Luverne Wind Farm those
located outside the wind farm were adequately
addressed by current siting guidelines.
Senator Mathern presented testimony based upon
handouts (Appendix N) that relate to his petition for a
reevaluation of setbacks, the notification of members
of the Legislative Assembly of his petition, and the
response to the petition. He said there must be
support for business and families affected by wind.
He said people have had concerns about wind but are
afraid of being sued. He said he filed a petition in
support of their position. He said there should be a
means by which to protect unique individuals and deal
with people who are damaged by wind development.
He said there must be promotion of North Dakota
ownership of wind farms so that this state does not
become an energy colony. He said wind farms do not
have enough local ownership. He said the more
people are involved in the process, the more people
are willing and able to deal with the downside of wind
development. He said there should be a focus on the
Public Service Commission. He said the Public
Service Commission is confusing to people. He said
each commissioner should have expertise in particular
areas. He said the design of the Public Service
Commission should be reviewed.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Senator Mathern said M-Power began as a local wind
developer but sold the project to a large out-of-state
wind developer. He said the profit made by large
out-of-state corporations should be made by North
Dakotans.
Mr. Ron Rebenitsch, Manager of Alternative
Technologies, Basin Electric Power Cooperative,
made a presentation (Appendix O) regarding wind
rights and project development. In addition, he
provided a white paper (Appendix P) on setbacks,
siting, and allocation of wind rights. He said siting
involved choosing the best wind sites for economic
reasons and balancing tower placement with
landowner concerns relating to cropland, access,
proximity, and lack of interest. He said after
exclusions areas are mapped, the areas that may
have a wind tower are greatly limited. He said siting is
critical because a 15 percent increase in wind speed
yields a 50 percent increase in production. He said
the effects of adjacent turbines is less than 2 percent
if within three rotor diameters for crosswind. He said
for predominant wind, the separation would have to be
approximately five rotor diameters to have less than a
2 percent effect. He said the cost to the project
developer for a wind turbine is $3 million to $5 million
Energy Development and Transmission 5 November 24, 2009
and includes the transmission risk, two to three years
of wind studies, engineering, permitting risks,
operating risk, market risk, and tax risk. He said the
landowner risks one-quarter acre to one-half acre of
land per turbine for $4,000 to $7,000 per turbine per
year. He said the key points to consider are whether
a nearby landowner should have virtual veto rights
over a neighbor's land. He said wind is not
"produced" on the wind site and could be considered
an interstate resource. He said existing projects
should be considered when establishing new rights.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Mr. Rebenitsch said Basin Electric Power Cooperative
blades and waters roads continuously and pays for
this upkeep. He said Basin Electric Power
Cooperative avoids an area for a wind turbine if there
is an environmental reason not to place the turbine at
that location.
In response to a question from Representative
Meyer, Mr. Rebenitsch said there are spots where
there may be too much wind. He said high gusts shut
down the wind tower at 56 miles per hour. He said
North Dakota has fairly steady wind which makes it
ideal for the location of wind towers. He said the goal
of Basin Electric Power Cooperative is to place wind
towers at least five rotor diameters away from each
other.
In response to a question from Senator Nodland,
Mr. Rebenitsch said Basin Electric Power Cooperative
improves section lines with gravel, geotextile fabric,
and a ditch. He said roads on private property are left
as flat as possible.
Mr. Dennis Stillings, Valley City, provided a DVD
presentation for the committee, a copy of which is on
file in the Legislative Council office. The DVD
includes three papers on the siting of wind turbines.
Mr. Jim and Ms. Mary Ann Miller, Luverne,
provided testimony on the impact of wind facilities.
Mr. Miller said he had to spend a night in the
basement when there were high winds because of the
loud noise. He said when there is not any wind, the
turbine still turns and there still is noise. He said when
it is quiet the noise sticks out more. He said the
generator makes noise as well as the blades. He said
he is now experiencing shadow flicker and it is
disturbing.
Ms. Miller said her aluminum venetian blinds do
not block the shadow flicker in her office. She said
the only place there is no flicker is in the bathroom
with the door shut. She said she raises dogs and the
dogs are affected by the shadow flicker.
Mr. Miller said the tower making the flicker is 1,800
feet away from his home. He said the flicker lasts
20 minutes to one and one-half hours per day.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Mr. Miller said one turbine causes the bulk of the
problem. He said as the sun moves, another may
cause flicker as well.
In response to a question from Senator Nodland,
Mr. Miller said the flicker began after the last meeting
of the Energy Development and Transmission
Committee. He said the flicker begins at about
8:00 a.m. and continues until around 9:30 a.m. He
said the standard of no more than 23 hours in a year
for flicker will be met by December.
Ms. Miller said the flicker takes away her most
productive time of the day in her office. She said she
invested everything in the farm where she lives and
has her business, and it is not fair that a wind farm
can impact her life this severely. She said North
Dakota citizens are unable to protect themselves from
large out-of-state companies. She said these
companies are not willing to work with individuals
because it would set unwanted precedents. She said
people are afraid to speak out against wind farms
because the neighbors may be offended and because
of confidentiality clauses. She said people did not
know that the wind farm would have the effects it has
on people.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Ms. Miller said wind developers should provide more
information up front. She said there should be larger
setbacks from residences. She said there should be a
one mile setback from residences. She said NextEra
Energy Resources offered a contract (Appendix Q) of
$6,000 a year in exchange for the release of claims by
her and her husband. She said she did not accept the
contract because it gives claims to her property to
NextEra Energy Resources.
In response to a question from Representative
Brandenburg, Ms. Miller said the contract from
NextEra Energy Resources was objectionable
because it locked in her property for 99 years, but
allowed NextEra Energy Resources to back out of the
agreement with 30 days' notice.
In response to a question from Representative
Brandenburg, Ms. Miller said the only thing that
NextEra Energy Resources could do to make her
whole is to relocate her home and business. She said
because of state policy, the same thing could happen
to her in her new location.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Ms. Miller said there are many people in her situation
and cited the example of a bed and breakfast owner's
business that was destroyed by the wind farms. She
said people used to visit the bed and breakfast from
around the world. She said now the guests talk about
how they hate the wind farm when they visit the bed
and breakfast.
In response to a question from Senator Wardner,
Ms. Miller said farmers cannot complain because they
have signed the agreement. She said Florida Power
and Light is not taking care of wind farms in other
states and cited an example in California
(Appendix R). In addition, she provided some sample
letters (Appendix S) from individuals impacted by a
wind farm.
In response to a question from Representative
Boe, Mr. Miller said M-Power is the group that sold the
site to NextEra Energy Resources. He said NextEra
Energy Resources had alternative sites when the
Energy Development and Transmission 6 November 24, 2009
Public Service Commission required NextEra Energy
Resources to move a tower.
In response to a question from Representative
Brandenburg, Ms. Miller said she is willing to work
with neighbors so the moving of a wind tower is not
unduly burdensome on her farmer neighbors.
Mr. Joseph Richardson, Richardson Farms, Fargo,
made a presentation (Appendix T) on wind power
development.
In response to a question from Senator Horne,
Mr. Richardson said the system he proposes is not
used in any state.
In response to a question from Representative
Brandenburg, Mr. Richardson said the five rotor
diameter standard does not address anomalous
situations in which there is a 500 foot dropoff and any
policy should allow the Public Service Commission to
grant a variance for anomalous conditions.
In response to a question from Representative
Porter, Mr. Richardson said competitive pressures
make it a disincentive for landowners to voluntarily
adopt the system he proposes.
In response to a question from Representative
Porter, Mr. Richardson said his system addresses
turbulence and fairness.
In response to a question from Representative
Porter, Mr. Richardson said those paid under his
system who do not have a wind tower, have wind. He
said wind is reduced by a neighbor having a wind
tower. He said the areas that would share are areas
that the resource is not developable because it is
inside a wind farm. Otherwise, he said, the wind
resource would be able to be developed.
Mr. Doug Schonert, Burleigh County
Commissioner, presented information on the study.
He said wind developers should be bonded. He said
some counties would not be able to handle the
cleanup of an abandoned wind farm. He said he was
for unitization. He said he has concerns with real
estate values, and it would be difficult to sell a
farmstead surrounded by wind towers. He said he is
a real estate agent. He said there should be state
direction in the area of wind development.
Mr. Tim Simons, Crownbutte Wind Power Inc.,
provided testimony on the study. He said he is
against the new Midwest ISO cost allocation. He said
wind towers need to be sited in the best places, which
is an exact science. He said a wind farm needs a
financeable wind report. He said in western North
Dakota neighbors are not downwind, but downhill. He
said bonding is not necessary because a wind tower
has approximately 350,000 pounds of high-grade
steel valued at $300 to $500 per ton. He said each
turbine has three tons to four tons of copper. He said
the copper is worth $120,000 to $150,000.
Mr. Enyart said M-Power, is made up of
150 investors. He said there are 75 landowners in
M-Power, and 74 are in favor of the wind farm. He
said the Millers were at the first two meetings when
M-Power began.
Mr. Factor said wind towers do not turn in low
wind. He said the power from the local utility is for the
oil pumps and lights. He said this power does not
spin the rotor. He said NextEra Energy Resources
considered the tower moves suggested by Mr. Miller;
however, the placement of wind towers is very
complex and NextEra Energy Resources was unable
to honor his suggestions. He said the second turbine
that Mr. Miller fears may cause flicker will not cause
flicker because the sun will change trajectory on
December 21. He said differences in terrain are the
norm and not anomalous in North Dakota. He said a
metal tower is a $3 million asset. He said it is fully
depreciated in 10 years and that is why there is a wait
of 10 years before the Public Service Commission
may require a bond.
Mr. Scovill said NextEra Energy Resources works
with county road departments. He said sometimes
roads are unable to be fixed immediately because of
rain. He said NextEra Energy Resources has a
$2.5 million bond on roads. He said NextEra Energy
Resources receives a call for every problem with
roads and addresses these concerns as part of an
ongoing relationship with the community.
No further business appearing, Chairman Wardner
adjourned the meeting at 3:20 p.m.
___________________________________________
Timothy J. Dawson
Committee Counsel
ATTACH:20

Attend the Higher Learning Commission Meeting in April

Make Every Dollar Count
Get Greater Value from Attending the Higher Learning Commission's Annual Meeting




Visit ncahlc.org/annualmeeting/ for information on registration, hotels and travel, and program details. Check back often for additional information on the general program, pre-conference and special programs.

Go to the Meeting Overview to see the complete schedule.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Share this information with anyone who might be interested, including your institution's:

Commission Liaison
Self-Study Coordinator
Assessment Coordinator
Quality Improvement Administrator
General Education Administrator
Technology Administrator

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Prospective Business Partners:
The Commission's Business Partner Program offers promotional opportunities that connect companies with attendees.














The Higher Learning Commission is aware that in these economic times, colleges and universities strive to make every dollar count. That is why the Higher Learning Commission has set the early bird registration fees the same as they were in 2009.
By maintaining the cost of attending the 2010 Annual Meeting, the Commission provides a greater value for:

Workshops and educational programs on current issues in higher education including accountability, assessment of student learning, institutional effectiveness, organizational change, and quality improvement


Targeted programs for presidents, peer reviewers, self-study teams, and those engaged in quality improvement initiatives


Showcases and an Exhibit Hall that share information on successful products, services, and partnerships
In addition, the Commission has contracted with the Hyatt Regency Chicago, the Palmer House Hilton, and the Swissotel for sleeping rooms at great rates with some savings on extras.

Join your colleagues for the latest information on Commission Policies and Procedures, as well as State, Regional, and National Initiatives.

Register Now and Save!

The Higher Learning Commission's 2010 Annual Meeting
Conference on Quality in Higher Education
April 9-13, 2010
Hyatt Regency Chicago, Illinois
ncahlc.org/annualmeeting/


Higher Learning Commission | 30 N LaSalle Street | Suite 2400 | Chicago, IL | 60602









This email is being sent to tom.seymour@minotstateu.edu
Use this link to be deleted or to update your email address

A Medicare Update

Hello Everyone,

Please enjoy the information contained in this edition of Frontier Focus. Please be sure to share it with your members, colleagues, providers and office billing staff. Thank you for your continued efforts to broadcast Medicare information to the providers in Region VIII.





Table of Contents



1. Delay in Implementing Phase 2 of CRs 6417 and 6421



2. Only 3 Days Left to Bid for the Round 1 Rebid of the DMEPOS Competitive Bidding Program



3. Bidder Alert for DMEPOS Competitive Bidding



4. Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) Program Announcement



5. 2010 Electronic Prescribing Incentive (eRx) Program Announcement



6. MLN Matters Article #MM6740 - Revisions to Consultation Services Payment Policy



7. Nursing Home Five-Star Quality Rating System – December News



8. Your December Flu Message



9. Extra Help for Medicare Beneficiaries Paying for Prescription Drugs













~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



1. Delay in Implementing Phase 2 of CRs 6417 and 6421



The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will delay, until April 5, 2010, the implementation of Phase 2 of Change Request (CR) 6417 (Expansion of the Current Scope of Editing for Ordering/Referring Providers for Claims Processed by Medicare Carriers and Part B Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs)) and CR 6421 (Expansion of the Current Scope of Editing for Ordering/Referring Providers for Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Supplier Claims Processed by Durable Medical Equipment Medicare Administrative Contractors (DME MACs)). CRs 6417 and 6421 are applicable to Part B claims only.



The delay in implementing Phase 2 of these CRs will give physicians and non-physician practitioners who order items or services for Medicare beneficiaries or who refer Medicare beneficiaries to other Medicare providers or suppliers sufficient time to enroll in Medicare or take the action necessary to establish a current enrollment record in Medicare prior to Phase 2 implementation.



Although enrolled in Medicare, many physicians and non-physician practitioners who are eligible to order items or services or refer Medicare beneficiaries to other Medicare providers or suppliers for services do not have current enrollment records in Medicare. A current enrollment record is one that is in the Medicare Provider Enrollment, Chain and Ownership System (PECOS) and also contains the physician/non-physician practitioner’s National Provider Identifier (NPI). Under Phase 2 of the above referenced CRs, a physician or non-physician practitioner who orders or refers and who does not have a current enrollment record that contains the NPI will cause the claim submitted by the Part B provider/supplier who furnished the ordered or referred item or service to be rejected.



CMS continues to urge physicians and non-physician practitioners who are enrolled in Medicare but who have not updated their Medicare enrollment record since November 2003 to update their enrollment record now. If these physicians and non-physician practitioners have no changes to their enrollment data, they need to submit an initial enrollment application which will establish a current enrollment record in PECOS.



For physicians and non-physician practitioners who order or refer—



· If you are not enrolled in the Medicare program, or if you enrolled more than 6 years ago and have not submitted any updates or changes to your enrollment information in more than 6 years, you do not have an enrollment record in PECOS. In order to continue to order or refer items or services for Medicare beneficiaries, you will have to submit an initial enrollment application. You may do so either by (1) using Internet-based PECOS (which transmits your enrollment application to the Medicare carrier or A/B MAC via the Internet—be sure to mail the signed and dated Certification Statement to the carrier or A/B MAC immediately after submitting the application), or (2) filling out the appropriate paper Medicare provider enrollment application(s) (CMS-855I and CMS-855R, if appropriate) and mailing the application, along with any required additional supplemental documentation, to the local Medicare carrier or A/B MAC, who will enter your information into PECOS and process your enrollment application. Information on how to enroll in Medicare is found on the Medicare provider/supplier enrollment web site at www.cms.hhs.gov/MedicareProviderSupEnroll.

· If you are already enrolled in Medicare, make sure you have a current enrollment record. You can find out if you have an enrollment record in PECOS by calling your designated carrier or A/B MAC or by going on-line, using Internet-based PECOS, to view your enrollment record. We will be posting information to the Medicare provider/supplier enrollment web site that will guide you through this process. Information about Internet-based PECOS and a link to Internet-based PECOS can be found on the Medicare provider/supplier enrollment web site. Before using Internet-based PECOS, we recommend that you read the information that is posted there and that is available in the downloadable documents section.

· If you are a dentist or a physician with a specialty such as a pediatrics who is eligible to order or refer items or services for Medicare beneficiaries but have not enrolled in Medicare because the services you provide are not covered by Medicare or you treat few Medicare beneficiaries, you need to enroll in Medicare in order to continue to order or refer items or services for Medicare beneficiaries.

· If you are a physician who is employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Public Health Service, or the Department of Defense Tricare program but have not enrolled in Medicare because you would not be paid by Medicare for your services, you need to enroll in Medicare in order to continue to order or refer items or services for Medicare beneficiaries.



If you are a resident who has a medical license but have not enrolled in Medicare because you would not be paid by Medicare for your services, you do not need to enroll in Medicare in order to continue to order or refer items or services for Medicare beneficiaries. The teaching physician—not the resident—should be identified in claims as the ordering/referring provider when a resident orders or refers items or services for Medicare beneficiaries.



CMS actions to mitigate the number of informational messages:



Since many Part B providers and suppliers are receiving a high volume of informational messages in their Remittances, CMS is taking the following actions to reduce the number of informational messages being generated:



1. Prior to the implementation of Phase 2, CMS will systematically add the NPIs to the PECOS enrollment records of all physicians and non-physician practitioners whose enrollment records are in PECOS but do not contain their NPIs. Because the NPI is one of the matching criteria used in implementing the two new edits on the Ordering/Referring Provider, it is essential that the NPI be in the PECOS enrollment record. Because the data file used to implement the two edits contains only the eligible physicians and non-physician practitioners who are in PECOS with NPIs in their enrollment records, this action will add many more physicians and non-physician practitioners to that data file.

2. Prior to the implementation of Phase 2, CMS will make publicly available on the Internet the names and NPIs of the Medicare physicians and non-physician practitioners who are eligible to order or refer in the Medicare program. The name displayed will be that of the physician or non-physician practitioner as it appears in his or her PECOS enrollment record. This will allow Part B providers and suppliers who furnish and bill for items or services based on orders or referrals to determine if the Ordering/Referring Provider being identified in their claims will pass the two new edits prior to submitting the claims to Medicare.

3. Prior to the implementation of Phase 2, CMS will issue instructions to carriers and A/B MACs that will assist them in processing enrollment applications from physicians who are employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Public Health Service, and the Department of Defense Tricare program. The instructions will also state that the teaching physician should be reported as the Ordering/Referring Physician in situations where a resident orders or refers items or services for Medicare beneficiaries. The instructions will also note that dentists and pediatricians, who sometimes order or refer items or services for Medicare beneficiaries, may be enrolling in Medicare in order to continue to order and refer.

4. CMS will be preparing a Special Edition Medicare Learning Network (MLN) Matters Article on the implementation of these two new edits. This MLN Matters Article will expand upon the information currently available in MLN Matters Articles MM 6417 and MM 6421.



Note: If you have problems accessing any hyperlink in this message, please copy and paste the URL into your Internet browser.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



2. Only 3 Days Left to Bid for the Round 1 Rebid of the DMEPOS Competitive Bidding Program



The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is currently accepting bids for the Round 1 Rebid of the Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies (DMEPOS) Competitive Bidding Program. All bids must be submitted in DBidS, the on-line bidding system, by 9 p.m. prevailing Eastern Time on December 21, 2009; all required hardcopy documents that must be included as part of the bid package must be postmarked by 11:59 p.m. on December 21, 2009. You will not be permitted to alter or amend your bid after the close of bidding.



Here are some important things to remember when submitting your bid:

· You must submit your bid in DBidS using the user ID you received during registration. By now you should have already logged into DBidS and have started completing your bid application online. Please note that you must answer at least 2 and up to 10 authentication questions the first time you log in.

· All bidders must submit certain required hardcopy documents as specified in the Request for Bids (RFB) instructions. It is very important that you review Appendix B of the RFB instructions and the sample financial statements to ensure your documents include the required information. If you have already submitted your financial documents, you may still amend those documents until bidding closes on December 21, 2009. You are required to indicate your bidder number on each page of your hardcopy documents.

· If you submitted financial documents by the Covered Document Review Date (CDRD), November 21, 2009, you will receive an e-mail about your financial documents from the Competitive Bidding Implementation Contractor (CBIC) by December 29, 2009. If you submitted all financial documents, the e-mail will confirm that the CBIC received all financial documents and that no further action from you is required. If you did not submit all financial documents, the e-mail will alert you to expect a letter notifying you of the missing financial documents. The letter notifying you of missing financial documents will be mailed to your authorized official by January 4, 2010. The letter will identify the missing document(s) as of the CDRD. You will be required to submit only the indicated missing financial document(s) within 10 business days of the notification. If you did not submit any financial documents by the CDRD, you will not receive an e-mail or a letter about your financial documents. Remember, the covered document review process does not indicate whether the financial documents are accurate, acceptable, or in accordance with the RFB instructions. You cannot submit revised versions of previously submitted financial documents after December 21, 2009.

· If you did not submit any hardcopy financial documents by the CDRD, you are still required to submit all required hardcopy documents specified in the Request for Bids (RFB) instructions by 11:59 p.m. on December 21, 2009.

· The Round 1 Rebid competitive bidding areas (CBAs), product categories, DBidS information, bidder charts, educational materials, and complete RFB instructions can be found on the CBIC web site, www.dmecompetitivebid.com. You should review this information prior to submitting your bid(s).

If you have any questions about the bidding process, please contact the CBIC Customer Service Center at 1-877-577-5331.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



3. Bidder Alert for DMEPOS Competitive Bidding



Here is some important information for you to consider if you are planning to use a consultant for the preparation of your bid(s):



Question: May bidders use a consultant for the preparation of their bids?



Answer: While bidders may use consultants to assist in the preparation of their bids, each bidder is responsible for validating and submitting its own bid. All bids must comply with all terms and conditions of the Request for Bids (RFB), regardless of whether a consultant is used.



Question: Are certain consultants or certain consultant services not appropriate for assisting in bid preparation?



Answer: If a bidder decides to use a consultant, any consultation service must be consistent with the DMEPOS competitive bidding program authorizing regulations and the RFB and permissible under all applicable Federal laws.



If a supplier uses a consultant, the supplier may not knowingly use a consultant that compares that supplier’s bid with, or knowingly makes bid item prices identical or substantially the same as, the bid of another bidder(s). Consultants must not violate any Federal antitrust law or engage in anticompetitive behavior (e.g., comparing different suppliers’ bids or knowingly advising different suppliers to submit identical or substantially identical bid prices) in preparing bids. CMS reviews the financial capacity of each bidder to supply DMEPOS at the bid price and determines whether a bid is bona fide, and, generally, whether the bid complies with the applicable law, regulations, and RFB. CMS will reject a bid that is not bona fide or does not otherwise comply with the law, regulations, or RFB. If you suspect a consultant may be engaging in practices that violate antitrust laws, please contact the CBIC Customer Service Center at 1-877-577-5331.



If a bidder uses a consultant, the bidder needs to verify that the information prepared by the consultant is accurate and can be certified as true by the bidder. Bidders certify that their bids are true, accurate and complete when they approve Form B in DBidS. Approving Form B also certifies that the bidder understands that any omission, misrepresentation, or falsification of any information contained in the bid and all required attachments and supplemental information or contained in any communication supplying information to CMS or the CBIC may be punishable by criminal, civil, or other administrative actions including revocation of approval, fees, and/or imprisonment under Federal law.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



4. Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) Program Announcement



2010 Physician Quality Reporting Initiative Educational Products are Now Available!

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is pleased to announce the posting of 2010 Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI) educational products to the PQRI webpage at www.cms.hhs.gov/PQRI on the CMS website:

2010 PQRI Quality Measure List- this document identifies the 179 quality measures (this includes 175 individual quality measures and the 4 measures in the Back Pain measures group, which are not reportable as individual PQRI quality measures) selected for the 2010 PQRI

2010 PQRI Quality Data Code (QDC) Categories – a table that outlines, for each measure, each QDC that should be reported for a corresponding quality action performed by the individual EP as noted in the measures specification. This determines how each code will be used when calculating performance rates. This also clarifies those measures that require 2 or more QDCs to report satisfactorily. Insufficiently reporting the QDCs (as specified in the 2010 PQRI measure specifications) will result in invalid reporting.

2010 Single Source Code Master- this file includes a numerical listing of all codes included in 2010 PQRI for incorporation into billing software.

2010 PQRI Measure Specifications Manual for Claims and Registry; Reporting of Individual Measures and Release Notes- this zip file contains two documents which are the authoritative documents that describe 1) the 2010 measure specifications (including codes and reporting instructions) for the 175 individual PQRI quality measures for claims or registry-based reporting and 2) changes from the 2009 PQRI Measure Specifications in the form of release notes delineated by measure number.

2010 PQRI Implementation Guide- provides guidance about how to implement 2010 PQRI claims-based reporting of measures to facilitate satisfactory reporting of quality data codes by EPs.

2010 PQRI Measures Groups Specifications Manual and Release Notes- Measures group specifications that are different from those of the individual measures that form the group. The specifications and instructions for measures group reporting are, therefore, provided in a separate manual. This zip file contains two documents which are the authoritative documents that describe 1) the 2010 measures groups specifications (including codes and reporting instructions) for the 13 PQRI measures groups for claims or registry-based reporting and 2) changes from the 2009 PQRI Measures Groups Specifications Manual in the form of release notes.

Getting Started with 2010 PQRI Reporting of Measures Groups - provides guidance about implementing the 2010 PQRI measures groups.

2010 PQRI Measure Applicability Validation Process for Claims-Based Reporting of Individual Measures- provides guidance for those eligible professionals who satisfactorily submit quality-data codes for fewer than three PQRI measures, and how the measure-applicability validation process will determine whether they should have submitted QDCs for additional measures.

2010 PQRI Measure-Applicability Validation Process Release Notes- the release notes for the changes occurring for the 2010 PQRI Measure Applicability Validation Process (MAV).

2010 Measure-Applicability Validation Process Flow Chart- a chart that depicts the Measure Applicability Validation Process (MAV)

Group Practice Reporting Option (GPRO) Requirements for Submission of 2010 PQRI Data- provides guidance on how a group practice can self-nominate to participate in the GPRO for 2010 data submission.

2010 PQRI GPRO Disease Modules and Preventive Care Measures- a document containing a list of the 2010 PQRI GPRO Measures

2010 PQRI GPRO Narrative Measure Specifications- this document contains descriptions of the 2010 PQRI GPRO measures.

Registry Requirements for Submission of 2010 PQRI Data on Behalf of Eligible Professionals- this document describes the high-level requirements for a registry to qualify to submit under the registry-based reporting alternatives for 2010. This document also outlines how a registry can become qualified for 2010 data submission.

To access the 2010 PQRI educational products, visit the following page http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PQRI/02_Spotlight.asp#TopOfPage on the CMS website. Once on the Spotlight page, view the listing of educational products and the corresponding webpages where they can be found.

Further information on the 2010 PQRI Program may be found in the final 2010 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule rule with comment period (74 FR 61788 through 61861) that was published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009. The final rule can be found on the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative webpage at www.cms.hhs.gov/PQRI on the CMS website, click on the Statute/Regulations/Program Instructions section page at left.

Reporting for the 2010 PQRI begins January 1, 2010. Please note there is no need to sign up or pre-register in order to participate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



5. 2010 Electronic Prescribing Incentive (eRx) Program Announcement



2010 Electronic Prescribing Incentive (eRx) Educational Products are Now Available!

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is pleased to announce the posting of 2010 Electronic Prescribing Incentive (eRx) Program educational products to the eRx webpage at www.cms.hhs.gov/ERxIncentive on the CMS website:

· 2010 eRx Measure Specifications and Release Notes- Provides guidance on the 2010 eRx measure specifications for claims or registry-based reporting and release notes describing changes from the 2009 eRx measure specifications.



· Claims-Based Reporting Principles for the 2010 eRx Incentive Program- provides guidance on the principles for reporting the eRx measure on claims for the 2010 eRx Incentive Program.



· 2010 EHR Measure Specifications for eRx and Release Notes- provides guidance on The 2010 EHR measure specifications for eRx and release notes. In addition it details the specifications contain a detailed description of data element names and codes.



· 2010 EHR Downloadable Resource- an Excel spreadsheet listing 2010 EHR information.



· Group Practice Reporting Option (GPRO) Requirements for Submission of 2010 eRx Data- provides guidance on the Group Practice Reporting Option (GPRO) requirements for submission of 2010 eRx data.



· GPRO eRx Measure Specifications- provides guidance on the specifications for the eRx measure for use in the 2010 eRx GPRO.

To access the 2010 eRx educational products, visit the following page http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PQRI/02_Spotlight.asp#TopOfPage on the CMS website. Once on the Spotlight page, view the listing of educational products and the corresponding webpages they can be found on.

Further information on the 2010 eRx Incentive Program may be found in the final 2010 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule rule with comment period (74 FR 61788 through 61861) that was published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009. The final rule can be found on the Electronic Prescribing Incentive Program webpage at www.cms.hhs.gov/ERxIncentive on the CMS website, click on the Statute/Regulations/Program Instructions section page at left.

Reporting for the 2010 eRx begins January 1, 2010. Please note there is no need to sign up or pre-register in order to participate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



6. MLN Matters Article #MM6740 - Revisions to Consultation Services Payment Policy



MM6740 - Revisions to Consultation Services Payment Policy



This article pertains to Change Request (CR) 6740, which alerts physicians and non-physician practitioners that effective January 1, 2010, the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) consultation codes (ranges 99241-99245 and 99251-99255) are no longer recognized for Medicare Part B payment. Effective for services furnished on or after January 1, 2010, physicians and non-physician practitioners should code a patient evaluation and management visit with E/M codes that represents where the visit occurs and that identify the complexity of the visit performed. For more information, please view the article located at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MLNMattersArticles/downloads/MM6740.pdf on the CMS website.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



7. Nursing Home Five-Star Quality Rating System – December News



1. The Five-Star provider preview reports will be available beginning Tuesday, December 15, 2009. Providers can access the report from the Minimum Data Set (MDS) State Welcome pages available at the State servers for submission of Minimum Data Set data.

Provider Preview access information:

· Visit the MDS State Welcome page available on the State servers where you submit MDS data to review your results.

· To access these reports, select the Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reports (CASPER) Reporting link located at the bottom of the login page.

· Once in the CASPER Reporting system,

i. Click on the 'Folders' button and access the Five-Star Report in your 'st LTC facid' folder,

ii. Where st is the 2-digit postal code of the state in which your facility is located, and

iii. Facid is the state assigned facid of your facility.

2. BetterCare@cms.hhs.gov is available to address any questions and concerns about the December’s data. The helpline will reopen in January 2010.

3. Nursing Home Compare will update with December’s Five-Star data on Thursday, December 24, 2009.

4. Please visit http://www.cms.hhs.gov/CertificationandComplianc/13_FSQRS.asp for the latest Five-Star Quality Rating system information.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



8. Your December Flu Message



Flu Season is Here!



Annual outbreaks of the seasonal flu usually occur from late fall to early spring. Typically, 5 to 20 percent of Americans get the seasonal flu, resulting in approximately 36,000 flu-related deaths.[1]



If you have Medicare patients who haven’t yet received their flu shot, you can help them reduce their risk of contracting the seasonal flu by recommending an annual seasonal influenza vaccination. Medicare provides coverage of the seasonal flu vaccine and its administration. And don’t forget to immunize yourself and your staff. Protect yourself, your staff, your patients, and your family and friends.



Remember - Influenza vaccine plus its administration are covered Part B benefits. Note that influenza vaccine is NOT a Part D covered drug.



For information about Medicare’s coverage of the seasonal influenza virus vaccine and its administration as well as related educational resources for health care professionals and their staff, please go to http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MLNProducts/Downloads/flu_products.pdf on the CMS website. You will find a variety of resources that explain Medicare coverage and claims submission policies related to the seasonal influenza vaccine.



For information on Medicare policies related to H1N1 influenza, please go to http://www.cms.hhs.gov/H1N1 on the CMS website.

--------------------------------------

[1] Flu.gov. 2009. About the Flu [online]. Washington DC: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 [cited 30 November 2009]. Available from the World Wide Web:
(http://www.flu.gov/individualfamily/about/index.htm )

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



9. Extra Help for Medicare Beneficiaries Paying for Prescription Drugs



Do You Know Someone Who Is Having Trouble Paying For Prescription Drugs? Medicare Can Help!



· If an individual has limited income and resources, they may qualify for extra help from Medicare. This can mean big savings on prescription drug costs.

· Encourage people with Medicare to file for Extra Help online: https://secure.ssa.gov/apps6z/i1020/main.html or by calling Social Security at 1-800-772-1213 to apply over the phone.

· State Health Insurance Information Program (SHIP) offices can assist with the application. Find contact information for a local SHIP Counselor at http://www.medicare.gov/Contacts/staticpages/ships.aspx or by calling 1-800-MEDICARE.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~











Lucretia James

Division for Medicare Health Plans Operations
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Region VIII
1600 Broadway, Suite 700
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 844-1568
lucretia.james@cms.hhs.gov







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Flu.gov. 2009. About the Flu [online]. Washington DC: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 [cited 30 November 2009]. Available from the World Wide Web:
(http://www.flu.gov/individualfamily/about/index.htm )