Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · Michigan · Chapter 333 — Health

333.22229 Projects and services subject to comparative review; exceptions; establishment of comparative review or alternative procedure; proposed site for project; utiliz

362 words·~2 min read·/mi/chapter-333/333-22229

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

333.22229 Projects and services subject to comparative review; exceptions; establishment of comparative review or alternative procedure; proposed site for project; utilization and financing of covered clinical services.
Sec. 22229.
(1)The following proposed projects are subject to comparative review:
(a)Proposed projects specified as subject to comparative review in a certificate of need review standard.
(b)New beds in a health facility that is a hospital, hospital long-term care unit, or nursing home if there are multiple applications to meet the same need for projects that, when combined, exceed the need of the planning area as determined by the applicable certificate of need review standards.
(2)Replacement beds in a hospital that are proposed for construction on the original site, on a contiguous site, within a 5-mile radius of the original site if the hospital is located in a county with a population of less than 200,000, or within a 2-mile radius of the original site if the hospital is located in a county with a population of 200,000 or more, are not subject to comparative review.
(3)Replacement beds in a nursing home that is located in a nonrural county that are proposed for construction on the original site, on a contiguous site, or within a 2-mile radius of the original site are not subject to comparative review. Replacement beds in a nursing home that is located in a rural county that are proposed for construction on the original site, on a contiguous site, or within the same planning area are not subject to comparative review.
(4)The commission may approve certificate of need review standards that establish comparative review or an alternative procedure for determining whether 1 or more of several qualified applicants may be approved if the level of need is not sufficient to justify approval of all qualified applicants. If an applicant involves more than 1 health facility, the applicant shall indicate on the application the proposed site or sites for the project and arrangements for the utilization and financing of the covered clinical services.
History: Add. 1988, Act 332, Eff. Oct. 1, 1988 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 88, Imd. Eff. July 9, 1993
Popular Name: Act 368
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.