Opinion ID: 2014857
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: gramercy's failure to satisfy con criteria

Text: Gramercy argues that the district court erred in determining that Gramercy failed to satisfy the criteria for a CON set out in the CON Act and the CON regulations. The Department and Ambassador argue that Gramercy failed to meet the criteria set out in the Nebraska statutes and the CON regulations. Section 71-5830(7) requires that a CON be obtained prior to [a]ny capital expenditure or obligation incurred by or on behalf of a health care facility in excess of the capital expenditure minimum made ... [i]n preparation for the offering or developing of a new institutional health service [or] in preparation for initiating a substantial change in an existing health service.... Section 71-5805.01 defines capital expenditure minimum as a base amount of one million two hundred thousand dollars.... Because the cost of Gramercy's new addition for skilled nursing beds exceeds this amount, a CON was required for the addition. In § 71-5802, the Legislature stated that the purpose of the CON Act is to conserve the limited health care resources of personnel and health care facilities in order to provide quality health care to all citizens of the state, to minimize unnecessary duplication of facilities and services, to encourage development of appropriate alternative methods of delivering health care, to promote wherever appropriate a more competitive health care delivery system, to encourage the provision of high-quality health care which is available and accessible to all citizens of the state, and to maximize the effectiveness of expenditures made for health care. The consideration of a CON application is governed by three authorities: (1) the CON Act, (2) Department regulations promulgated under the act, and (3) the state health plan. Beverly Enter.-Nebraska v. Columbus Health Care, 2 Neb.App. 410, 510 N.W.2d 569 (1993), citing Department of Health v. Grand Island Health Care, 223 Neb. 587, 391 N.W.2d 582 (1986). Under the Nebraska Administrative Code, the applicant bears the burden of demonstrating in its application that the proposal satisfies all of the review criteria in [the Department] regulations which are appropriate and significant to the proposal. 82 Neb.Admin.Code, ch. 2, § 003.02C (1983). Additionally, [i]n an appeal of a decision to deny a[CON], the person requesting the appeal shall bear the burden of proving that the project meets the applicable criteria.... § 71-5865. In its order, the district court affirmed the Review Committee's decision and set forth specific findings, stating that Gramercy had not met several of the criteria for a CON set out in the CON regulations. As noted above, an applicant must meet all of the applicable criteria in order to be granted a CON. The failure of Gramercy to meet at least two criteria for a CON disposes of this appeal.