By SA国际传媒 Staff
HARRISBURG, Pa. 鈥� The that would have significantly reduced reimbursement rates for ambulance services, marking a major victory for providers and veterans relying on these critical services.
In a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel, the court ruled that the VA overstepped its statutory authority with the. The regulation aimed to tie reimbursement rates for ambulance services to the lesser of a provider鈥檚 actual charges or the Medicare Fee Schedule rate, even for transports unrelated to VA facilities, according to law firm Page Wolfberg & Wirth, LLC. The ruling ensures that veterans will continue to have reliable access to both emergency and non-emergency ambulance services.
Ambulance associations from Pennsylvania and South Dakota joined forces to support the challenge brought by Texas-based MedStar Mobile Healthcare and three Pennsylvania providers: Valley Ambulance Authority, Quaker Valley Ambulance Authority and AMED Authority, according to the law firm. These groups argued that the rule contradicted clear statutory language and posed a threat to the financial viability of ambulance services, particularly in rural areas.
鈥淭he Court鈥檚 decision marks a significant victory for ambulance providers nationwide, ensuring that they can continue to deliver vital services to our veterans, especially in our rural states, like Pennsylvania and South Dakota, where large numbers of veterans live,鈥� said Brian Hambek, president of the South Dakota Ambulance Association.
Heather Harris, executive director of the Ambulance Association of Pennsylvania, praised the advocacy efforts of the associations and providers, noting the court鈥檚 recognition of the potential harm the rule would have caused.
鈥淭his favorable ruling was achieved due to the effective advocacy of these ambulance services that petitioned the court, and our two state associations,鈥� said Harris.
The VA had requested a delay in the court鈥檚 decision, citing a recently extended implementation timeline to 2029. However, the court rejected the argument and invalidated the regulation, declaring it unlawful.
The legal challenge was supported by attorneys from Page, Wolfberg & Wirth, LLC, who filed a 鈥渇riend of the court鈥� brief on behalf of the ambulance associations, highlighting the rule鈥檚 inconsistencies with existing law and its detrimental impact on veteran care.
SA国际传媒 is using generative AI to create some content that is edited and fact-checked by our editors.