(a) Single provider appeals.

(1) In order to satisfy the amount in controversy requirement under §405.1811(a)(2) or §405.1811(c)(3) for a contractor hearing or the amount in controversy requirement under §405.1835(a)(2) or §405.1835(c)(3) for a Board hearing for a single provider, the provider must demonstrate that if its appeal were successful, the provider's total program reimbursement for each cost reporting period under appeal would increase by at least $1,000 but by less than $10,000 for a contractor hearing, or by at least $10,000 for a Board hearing, as applicable.

(2) Aggregation of claims. For purposes of satisfying the applicable amount in controversy requirement for a single provider appeal to the contractor or the Board, the provider may aggregate claims for additional program payment for more than one specific matter at issue, provided each specific claim and issue is for the same cost reporting period. Aggregation of claims from more than one cost reporting period to meet the applicable amount in controversy requirement is prohibited, even if a specific claim or issue in the appeal recurs for multiple cost years.

(b) Group appeals.

(1) In order to satisfy the amount in controversy requirement under §405.1837(a)(3) of this subpart for a Board hearing as a group appeal, the group must demonstrate that if its appeal were successful, the total program reimbursement for the cost reporting periods under appeal would increase, in the aggregate, by at least $50,000.

(2) Aggregation of claims.

(i) For purposes of satisfying the amount in controversy requirement, group members are not allowed to aggregate claims involving different issues.

(A) A group appeal must involve a single question of fact or interpretation of law, regulations, or CMS Ruling that is common to each provider (as described in §405.1837(a)(2) of this subpart).

(B) The single issue that is common to each provider may exist over different cost reporting periods.

(ii) For purposes of satisfying the amount in controversy requirement, a provider may appeal multiple cost reporting periods and different providers in the group may appeal different cost reporting periods.

(c) Limitations on change in Medicare reimbursement.

(1) In order to satisfy the applicable amount in controversy requirement for a single provider appeal or a group appeal, an appeal favorable to the provider(s) on all specific matters at issue in the appeal increases program reimbursement for the provider(s) in the cost reporting period(s) at issue by an amount that equals or exceeds the applicable amount in controversy threshold.

(2) The applicable amount in controversy requirement is not satisfied if the result of a favorable appeal decreases program reimbursement for the provider(s) in the cost reporting year(s) at issue in the appeal.

(3) Any effects that a favorable appeal might have on program reimbursement for the provider(s) in cost reporting period(s) not at issue in the appeal have no bearing on whether the amount in controversy requirement is satisfied for the cost year(s) at issue in the appeal.

(4) When a provider (or group of providers) has requested a hearing before a contractor under §405.1811 of this subpart, and the amount in controversy is subsequently determined to be at least $10,000 (for example, due to a reassessment of the amount in controversy by the contractor hearing office or due to adding an issue), the appeal is transferred to the Board. The Board is not bound by any jurisdictional finding of the contractor hearing officer(s).

(5) When a provider or group of providers has requested a hearing before the Board under §405.1835 or §405.1837 of this subpart, and the amount in controversy changes to an amount less than the minimum for a Board appeal due to—

(A) The settlement or partial settlement of an issue, transfer of an issue to a group appeal, or the abandonment of an issue in an individual appeal, the change in the amount in controversy does not deprive the Board of jurisdiction.

(B) A more accurate assessment of the amount in controversy, the Board does not retain jurisdiction.

[73 FR 30252, May 23, 2008; 73 FR 49356, Aug. 21, 2008, as amended at 80 FR 70600, Nov. 13, 2015]