Comment on FR Doc # 2013-06454

Document ID: EBSA-2013-0006-0006
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Employee Benefits Security Administration
Received Date: March 25 2013, at 12:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: April 3 2013, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: March 21 2013, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: May 20 2013, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 1jx-84em-fz5x
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

With regards to Paragraph D, write regulations that relfect the law's intent - 90 days, not "first of the month after 60 days". Insurance always takes effect on the first of the month, so a true 90 day waiting period limit means that employers can only comply by setting a "first of month after 60 days" probationary period. The intent of the law was for a 90 day wait to be the max, not a 60 day wait. So let's follow the actual intent of the law and allow the full 90 days by stating that coverage will begin on the first of the month after 90 days, or by counting in months as suggested. Otherwise, we are truly ignoring the main intent of the law and we should honestly state that we are making "first of the month after 60 days" the true waiting period limit.

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 23
Comment on FR Doc # 2013-06454
Public Submission    Posted: 04/03/2013     ID: EBSA-2013-0006-0003

May 20,2013 11:59 PM ET
Comment on FR Doc # 2013-06454
Public Submission    Posted: 04/03/2013     ID: EBSA-2013-0006-0002

May 20,2013 11:59 PM ET
Comment on FR Doc # 2013-06454
Public Submission    Posted: 04/03/2013     ID: EBSA-2013-0006-0005

May 20,2013 11:59 PM ET
Comment on FR Doc # 2013-06454
Public Submission    Posted: 04/03/2013     ID: EBSA-2013-0006-0004

May 20,2013 11:59 PM ET
Comment on FR Doc # 2013-06454
Public Submission    Posted: 04/03/2013     ID: EBSA-2013-0006-0006

May 20,2013 11:59 PM ET