Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

HHS’ Long-Awaited 340B Alternative Dispute Resolution Rule Is Finalized

By Michael Glen, Richard Davis, Michael French, Brenda Maloney Shafer & Madison Hartman on May 2, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

In a move long anticipated by 340B Program participants, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently published its finalized 340B Administrative Dispute Resolution (ADR) rule, establishing formal processes for resolving certain types of disputes between 340B covered entities and drug manufacturers. 340B Program observers are cautiously optimistic that the ADR process will serve as a less time and resource-intensive alternative to formal litigation, while also imbuing the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Office of Pharmacy Affairs (OPA) with at least some authority to enforce its interpretation of the 340B statute. The final rule is substantially similar (although not identical) to the proposed version released back in 2022. At a high level, the ADR process can be used by (1) covered entities alleging that a manufacturer may have overcharged for covered outpatient drugs, or (2) manufacturers of 340B drugs alleging, after a manufacturer-conducted audit of a covered entity, that a covered entity may have violated the prohibitions against duplicate discounts or diversion.

Perhaps most notably, the finalized ADR process will permit covered entities to directly challenge ongoing manufacturer policies restricting 340B pricing availability via contract pharmacy arrangements, a move simultaneously celebrated by covered entities and heavily criticized by manufacturers. In a significant departure from the proposed rule, the final ADR rule now permits the consideration of disputes even if the disputed issue is currently being litigated in a federal court. Additionally, covered entities may use the ADR process to resolve allegations that a manufacturer is overcharging for drugs in the context of limiting 340B pricing availability to that covered entity. Read together, these provisions effectively open the door for covered entities to bring challenges to manufacturer contact pharmacy restrictions via the ADR process.

Other key aspects of the finalized ADR process include:

  • Directing a panel of Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Pharmacy Affairs subject matter experts (referred to as the “ADR Panel”) to review the covered entity or manufacturer dispute and issue a decision;
  • Requiring disputes to be filed within three (3) years of the date of the alleged violation, and requiring the disputing party to support such filings with supporting documentation and proof of prior good faith efforts to resolve the issues with the opposing party;
  • Setting forth additional timeframes for document submission and exchange between the parties;
  • Setting timeframes that the ADR Panel must follow, including providing a decision within one (1) year from the date of receiving a complete claim;
  • Allowing Medicaid duplicate discount disputes tied to Medicaid FFS and Medicaid MCO claims to be considered by the ADR Panel; and
  • Permitting a party to initiate a reconsideration request after the ADR Panel has issued its decision.

The rule takes effect sixty (60) days from the date of publishing, making it effective on June 18, 2024.

Covered entities seeking to submit a dispute should carefully review the final rule, paying close attention the filing and timeframe requirements contained in the rule.

Photo of Richard Davis Richard Davis

Richie has extensive experience with the 340B Program and has worked with both contract pharmacies and covered entities to develop and optimize their program participation. His practice also focuses on a wide variety of pharmacy regulatory issues, including controlled substances and state licensure…

Richie has extensive experience with the 340B Program and has worked with both contract pharmacies and covered entities to develop and optimize their program participation. His practice also focuses on a wide variety of pharmacy regulatory issues, including controlled substances and state licensure compliance.

Read more about Richard DavisEmailRichard's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Michael French Michael French

Mike has unique experience in the 340B Program, utilizing his former 340B consulting background to blend legal analysis with operational and financial considerations. Mike has assisted an extensive list of 340B stakeholders optimize available 340B benefit while ensuring compliance with the 340B Program’s…

Mike has unique experience in the 340B Program, utilizing his former 340B consulting background to blend legal analysis with operational and financial considerations. Mike has assisted an extensive list of 340B stakeholders optimize available 340B benefit while ensuring compliance with the 340B Program’s complex regulatory structure.

Read more about Michael FrenchEmailMichael's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Brenda Maloney Shafer Brenda Maloney Shafer

Brenda is a member of Quarles & Brady’s Health Law Practice Group. Her practice focuses primarily in health law and, in particular, health care regulatory and transactional work. Along with her law degree, she holds a Master’s of Law in Health Law. A…

Brenda is a member of Quarles & Brady’s Health Law Practice Group. Her practice focuses primarily in health law and, in particular, health care regulatory and transactional work. Along with her law degree, she holds a Master’s of Law in Health Law. A particular area of focus is counseling clients regarding compliance with the 340B Drug Pricing Program.

Read more about Brenda Maloney ShaferEmailBrenda Maloney's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Madison Hartman Madison Hartman

Madison has growing experience in the 340B Program, and has assisted with providing updates to stakeholders in the ever-changing landscape of 340B.

Read more about Madison HartmanEmailMadison's Linkedin Profile
  • Posted in:
    Food, Drug & Agriculture
  • Blog:
    To Be or Not to 340B Blog
  • Organization:
    Quarles & Brady LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status

New to the Network

  • Agha Law blog
  • Woven Legal Blog
  • Bid Protests
  • Contract Claims
  • Federal Procurement
Copyright © 2024, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo