42 C.F.R. § 423.666

Review by the Administrator

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Request for review by Administrator. CMS or a Part D plan sponsor that has received a hearing decision may request a review by the Administrator within 15 calendar days after receipt of the hearing decision as provided under § 423.665(b) of this subpart. Both the Part D plan sponsor and CMS may provide written arguments to the Administrator for review.

(b) Decision to review the hearing decision. After receiving a request for review, the Administrator has the discretion to elect to review the hearing determination in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section or to decline to review the hearing decision.

(c) Notification of Administrator determination. The Administrator notifies both parties of his or her determination regarding review of the hearing decision within 30 calendar days after receipt of request for review. If the Administrator declines to review the hearing decision or the Administrator does not make a determination regarding review within 30 calendar days, the decision of the hearing officer is final.

(d) Review by the Administrator. If the Administrator elects to review the hearing decision regarding a contract determination, the Administrator shall review the hearing officer's decision and determine, based upon this decision, the hearing record, and any written arguments submitted by the Part D sponsor or CMS, whether the determination should be upheld, reversed, or modified.

(e) Decision by the Administrator. The Administrator issues a written decision, and furnishes the decision to the PDP sponsor requesting review.

[70 FR 4525, Jan. 28, 2005, as amended at 72 FR 68734, Dec. 5, 2007; 75 FR 19824, Apr. 15, 2010]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2013–2013 · leading case: Fox Ins. Co., Inc. v. Centers for Medicare & Medic, 715 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2013).
Fox Ins. Co., Inc. v. Centers for Medicare & Medic, 715 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2013). “See 42 C.F.R. § 423.666 . Fox filed its complaint in district court on October 7, 2010 challenging the demand for repayment.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.