Database Search Results

The statute specifically instructs designated officers, medical facilities, and public health officers on actions to take in response to potential infectious disease exposures of emergency responders. While “guidelines” are mentioned, the statute lays out a highly specific regulatory task.

The statute and regulation are related because they both pertain to health insurance and health information, but the statute does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize the regulation in question. The statute concerns infectious disease exposure notification for emergency responders, while the regulation addresses broader requirements for group health insurance markets.

While the statute uses terms like “as appropriate,” it specifically instructs the Secretary to establish an administrative process for gathering information and to seek injunctive relief for violations related to “this part.” This directs the agency to a specific regulatory task of creating an information-gathering process and seeking injunctions, which qualifies as specific authority despite the open-ended phrasing.

The statute concerns injunctions regarding violations of a particular part of the U.S. Code related to public health. The regulation pertains to requirements for the group health insurance market. While both relate to health, the statute does not directly mandate the regulation, nor is it explicitly authorized within the regulation’s listed authorities. The relationship is generally related through the broader topic of health and healthcare, but not directly connected through explicit mandates or authorizations.

The statute explicitly directs the Administrator to establish and carry out a specific program (“Midsize and Large Drinking Water System Infrastructure Resilience and Sustainability Program”). It provides details on eligible entities, use of funds, application requirements, reporting requirements, and authorized appropriations. This level of detail indicates a specific regulatory task, even if the Administrator has some discretion in how to implement the program.

The statute concerns drinking water system infrastructure resilience and sustainability, while the regulation concerns requirements for the group health insurance market. These topics are unrelated.

The statute explicitly instructs the Secretary to establish and maintain a Medical Reserve Corps, outlining specific tasks such as certification, deployment, and identification card development, using open-ended terms like “appropriate” and “necessary” in determining professional training and expertise.

The statute relates to public health emergencies and volunteer medical personnel, while the regulation concerns requirements for the group health insurance market. While both relate to healthcare in a broad sense, they are neither directly mandated nor explicitly authorized by each other.

While the statute itself focuses on prohibiting preexisting condition exclusions and defining related terms, it also provides specific instructions, such as in subsection (c)(3)(B), where it allows for an alternative method of crediting coverage “based on coverage of benefits within each of several classes or categories of benefits specified in regulations.” This constitutes a specific task delegated to the agency. Also, in subsection (f)(3)(B)(ii), the statute requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to determine “sufficient specificity” of benefits disclosure “under regulations.”

The statute directly mandates the regulations related to “public health plan (as defined in regulations)” in subsection (c)(1)(I) and the method of crediting coverage based on classes of benefits in subsection (c)(3)(B) and establishment of period through presentation of certifications in subsection (c)(4).

The statute provides detailed instructions regarding the types and amounts of compensation to be awarded under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. While it uses terms like “reasonable” and gives the Secretary some discretion (e.g., in determining the average cost of a health insurance policy for calculating lost earnings), the statute clearly instructs the agency (HHS, acting through the Secretary) on the specific regulatory task of determining and awarding compensation.

42 U.S. Code § 300aa-15 outlines compensation guidelines for vaccine-related injuries or deaths under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. While 45 CFR Part 146 concerns group health insurance market regulations and doesn’t directly address vaccine compensation, there’s a related context since health insurance might cover some of the costs also covered by the vaccine compensation program (e.g., medical expenses). However, the statute doesn’t mandate or authorize the regulation. The cross-reference in the statute to the Social Security Act indicates that vaccine compensation should not be secondary to certain health benefits programs. This intersection links the statute to broad health considerations, but it is tangential and does not reflect explicit authorization or mandate.

While the statute refers to another section of the U.S. Code (Section 105(h) of Title 26), it still directs the agency to implement the requirements of that section. Moreover, the statute specifies how certain rules and definitions within that section should apply (e.g., rules similar to paragraphs (3), (4), and (8)). This provides a specific framework for regulation rather than a broad mandate. Even though the terminology is indirect, it still instructs the agency on a specific task which falls into the realm of “specific authority.”

The statute, 42 U.S.C. § 300gg-16, relates to non-discrimination in group health plans. While it doesn’t explicitly mandate the creation of new regulations, it directs plans to satisfy requirements similar to existing regulations under 26 U.S.C. § 105(h). This implies authority for agencies (HHS primarily) to interpret and enforce these requirements through regulation, but it doesn’t directly order the creation of specific new regulations. Furthermore, 45 CFR Part 146, which includes regulations related to group health insurance market requirements, cites 42 U.S.C. 300gg-11 through 300gg-23 as authority, which encompasses 300gg-16. This suggests that the regulations under Part 146 are authorized, but the statute doesn’t require new regulations specifically addressing 300gg-16 beyond ensuring compliance with the referenced section of the tax code.

The statute explicitly instructs the WTC Program Administrator on how to use the funds. The statute uses “as needed at the discretion of such Administrator, for carrying out any provision in this subchapter (including sections 300mm-2 and 300mm-51(c) of this title).” This guides the agency on a specific regulatory task of expending the funds for the specific purpose, even with the phrase, “at the discretion of such Administrator,” it still falls under Specific Authority because it is clear to where it is being directed, not broad.

While both the statute and the regulation pertain to health-related matters and fall under Title 42 of the U.S. Code, the specific sections cited in the regulation’s authority (300gg-1 through 300gg-5, 300gg-11 through 300gg-23, 300gg-91, and 300gg-92) are distinct from the statute in question (300mm-63), as well as 300mm-2 and 300mm-51(c). The provided statutes and regulations relate to health issues, but they are not directly mandated nor explicitly authorized.

The statute requires the Secretary to determine allotment amounts based on specific formulas and considerations outlined in the statute itself and references other specific sections of the U.S. Code. The statute gives the Secretary a clearly defined task using specified criteria.

42 U.S.C. § 300x-33 concerns the determination of allotment amounts for states, territories, and Indian tribes under specific federal programs. While the regulation 45 CFR Part 146 also relates to health insurance, its scope is broader, setting forth requirements for the group health insurance market generally. The statute does not mandate or explicitly authorize the specific regulations laid out in 45 CFR Part 146. However, the CFR does mention 42 U.S.C. 300gg-1 through 300gg-5, 300gg-11 through 300gg-23, 300gg-91, and 300gg-92 as an authority.

This statute explicitly instructs the Secretary to make grants under specific conditions (AIDS cases in metropolitan areas), linking the grant-making activity to detailed eligibility criteria and defined services. While the term “shall” indicates a mandatory aspect, the statute provides a structured framework within which the agency operates, clarifying a specific regulatory task, which constitutes specific authority.

42 U.S.C. § 300ff-11 establishes a grant program for assisting in the provision of services in metropolitan areas with a high incidence of AIDS. While 45 CFR Part 146 addresses requirements for group health insurance market, there’s no direct mandate or explicit authorization from 42 U.S.C. § 300ff-11 for these specific health insurance regulations. The connection lies in the broader context of healthcare and health insurance, but not in a directly mandated or authorized way.

The statute (42 U.S.C. § 300d-42) specifically instructs the Secretary to establish award bases and give preferences for certain types of trauma centers in awarding grants. The statute even defines the percentages applicable to different categories of trauma centers. This specificity makes it a specific authority delegation.

While both the statute and regulation pertain to healthcare, 42 U.S.C. § 300d-42 concerns preferences in making grants to trauma centers, whereas 45 CFR Part 146 focuses on requirements for the group health insurance market. The statute does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize the regulation, but they are related through the broader topic of healthcare.

The statute provides the Secretary with the authority to enter cooperative agreements with specific entities (health departments, tribes, etc.) to address a defined problem (vector-borne diseases). It outlines the specific purpose of the cooperative agreements, eligibility requirements, and the types of programs to be developed or expanded. While the Secretary has discretion within these guidelines, the statute directs them toward a particular regulatory task with clear goals.

The statute addresses vector-borne diseases and allows the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements, while the regulation pertains to requirements for the group health insurance market. There is no direct or explicit connection between the two.

While 42 U.S.C. § 300ff-88 itself is a definition section and thus doesn’t directly delegate authority, its placement within a larger statutory scheme suggests a broad delegation. This is because it provides clarity for implementing the larger framework. The presence of the “Secretary” in definition 9 suggests the law anticipates agency action.

42 U.S. Code § 300ff-88 defines terms used within its subchapter related to HIV/AIDS. While 45 CFR Part 146 concerns health insurance market regulations, the statute’s definitions could indirectly influence how agencies interpret and apply those regulations in the context of HIV/AIDS related care and coverage. However, the statute does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize specific regulations.

While the statute permits the WTC Program Administrator to utilize the supplemental fund to carry out provisions in the relevant title, it does not provide specific instructions or tasks related to rulemaking for health insurance markets. The statute’s language (“as needed at the discretion of such Administrator, for carrying out any provision in this title”) confers broad authority to the Administrator.

42 U.S.C. § 300mm-62 establishes a supplemental fund for the World Trade Center Health Program and grants the WTC Program Administrator discretion in using the funds to carry out provisions within that title. 45 CFR Part 146 concerns requirements for the group health insurance market under a different section of the U.S. Code. The statute provides funding that could potentially impact the activities and scope of health programs, which may indirectly relate to health insurance markets. The statute does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize the regulation.

The statute provides a broad authorization to the Secretary to make grants and contracts for family planning information. It does not provide specific details or tasks for the agency to regulate related to group health insurance; therefore, it falls under the category of a general authority delegation.

The statute authorizes the Secretary to make grants and contracts for family planning information. The regulation concerns requirements for group health insurance markets. While both relate to healthcare, the statute doesn’t directly mandate or explicitly authorize the regulation of group health insurance markets. The regulation is focused on insurance market rules, and the statute is focused on providing information through grants and contracts.

42 U.S.C. § 300b-2 does not instruct the agency on a specific regulatory task or gap. It sets forth a general principle of voluntary participation. While it influences the agency’s approach to program design, it does not delegate specific rulemaking authority.

The statute, 42 U.S.C. § 300b-2, ensures voluntary participation in specific health programs, which indirectly relates to the broader area of health insurance regulations covered by 45 CFR Part 146. The statute doesn’t directly mandate or explicitly authorize the specific regulations in 45 CFR Part 146, but both address aspects of health programs and insurance.

The statute specifically instructs the Secretary to establish a minimum interval (42 U.S.C. § 300gg-13(b)) and develop guidelines for value-based insurance design (42 U.S.C. § 300gg-13(c)). While the language regarding the guidelines is permissive (“may”), it still tasks the Secretary with a specific function.

42 U.S.C. § 300gg-13 directly mandates coverage of specific preventive health services and also directs the Secretary to establish a minimum interval.

The statute provides the Secretary with the authority to recoup funds from states that do not comply with agreements related to the use of those funds. While not using terms “appropriate,” “reasonable,” or “necessary,” the statute specifically addresses a regulatory task, the recoupment of funds.

42 U.S.C. § 300d-19 concerns the repayment of funds by states if they are not used according to agreements. While 45 CFR Part 146 concerns the requirements for group health insurance market, and 42 U.S.C. 300gg-1 through 300gg-5, 300gg-11 through 300gg-23, 300gg-91, and 300gg-92 grants the authority to create regulations regarding health insurance, the statute, 42 U.S.C. § 300d-19, isn’t listed as authority for the regulation. Therefore, they are related because they concern public health and federal funding but neither directly mandated nor explicitly authorized.

The statute provides the Secretary with a specific regulatory task: defining the criteria for states to make a “good faith effort” for spousal notification, which is clearly within the realm of regulating the Ryan White grants and, if good faith effort is not explicitly defined within the Statute, the regulatory agency will need to define it.

The statute authorizes the Secretary of HHS to withhold grants from states that do not take action on spousal notification of HIV exposure. This is an authorization to regulate grant allocation based on state action regarding HIV notification, but does not mandate the specific content of regulations implementing 42 U.S.C. 300ff-27a. HHS has the authority to decide how to implement this section by defining the term “good faith effort.”

The statute specifically directs the Secretary, through the Directors of the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, to establish clinical evaluation units. It also defines the broad purposes of these units: conducting clinical evaluations of experimental treatments for AIDS and related conditions. It then provides specific instructions regarding the capacity of these units, including the number of beds or outpatient clinical capacity they must have. While some terms like “such other support services as may be necessary” are open-ended, the statute overall gives very specific regulatory tasks, fitting within the Specific Authority delegation framework.

The statute authorizes the Secretary to establish and support clinical evaluation units. While the statute uses “shall” regarding the establishment of the units, regulations detailing the specifics of “experimental treatments,” “diagnosing immune deficiency,” “personnel,” and “administrative support” would be authorized but not directly mandated by the statute. The level of specificity requires agency discretion, thus the relationship is authorized but not mandated.

The statute specifically instructs the Secretary to modify the Vaccine Injury Table, detailing the process, criteria for modification (adding/deleting injuries, changing time periods), and considerations for recommendations from the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines. This level of instruction indicates a specific regulatory task.

The statute authorizes the Secretary to revise the Vaccine Injury Table through regulations, and the regulation generally concerns group health insurance market requirements. While related to healthcare, the statute doesn’t directly mandate the specifics in 45 CFR Part 146, nor is this regulation explicitly authorized in name.

The statute provides specific direction on regulatory tasks, such as setting criteria for enrollment, maintaining enrollment, and the form/manner of application submission, using terms like “in accordance with such criteria as the Secretary shall by regulation prescribe.” While the Secretary has discretion, the statute outlines clear subject matter and goals for the regulations.

The statute explicitly states the Secretary “shall prescribe in regulations” certain aspects of the application process and review. This indicates a direct mandate to create regulations.

The statute instructs the Secretary on specific conditions that must be met before grants are issued, including allocation of funds and specific services that must be covered. The section also provides for waivers under specific circumstances, providing criteria that the Secretary must use to determine if a waiver is warranted.

While 42 U.S.C. § 300ff-14 addresses healthcare and grant distribution related to HIV/AIDS, and 45 CFR Part 146 concerns group health insurance market regulations, they are related in the broader context of healthcare access and insurance. However, the statute doesn’t directly mandate the regulation, nor is it explicitly authorized within the statute.

The statute (42 U.S.C. § 300d-54) clearly instructs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a specific program (SOAR) to provide training on human trafficking, outlines specific activities for the program (e.g., engaging stakeholders, providing technical assistance, developing data collection methods), and even describes the types of grants the Secretary may award. This level of detail signifies a Specific Authority Delegation.

The statute establishes a grant program related to human trafficking awareness training for healthcare providers. While 45 CFR Part 146 concerns group health insurance market regulations, which could potentially intersect with healthcare training indirectly, the connection is neither directly mandated nor explicitly authorized.

The statute specifically instructs the Secretaries of Transportation, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security to establish an Interagency Committee and a National Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council. It also outlines the specific purposes, membership, and administrative support for these entities. While the Secretaries have some discretion in appointments and meeting frequency, the overall task is well-defined. This fits the Specific Authority delegation.

While 42 U.S.C. § 300d-4 concerns emergency medical services, and those services are often funded through insurance, the statute focuses on establishing committees and advisory councils to coordinate and improve EMS systems. It does not directly mandate or explicitly authorize regulations related to the group health insurance market as covered by 45 CFR Part 146. It’s related in the broad sense that both concern healthcare, but not directly or explicitly.