Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Veterans Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill allowing VA health-care providers to write medical-equipment exceptions in NH
Summary
House Bill 6 32 would allow Department of Veterans Affairs health-care providers to write medical equipment exceptions (for example, for tinted windows after an eye injury or prosthetic accommodations) in New Hampshire when the clinician is serving in a VA facility but licensed in another state.
Representative Henry Giesen opened the hearing on House Bill 6 32, which would allow certain VA health-care providers to complete medical-equipment exception paperwork in New Hampshire. "What this bill does is it allows VA health care providers to write for medical equipment exceptions within the state of New Hampshire," Giesen said.
Why the bill was filed: Giesen said a rule drafted by the body that writes DMV rules unintentionally restricted who could sign medical-exception forms to providers licensed in New Hampshire. That rule, he said, effectively disqualified most VA clinicians who are licensed in other states but work in the Manchester VA facility on federal assignment or contract. "After talking with Doctor Forester the chief medical officer of the Manchester VA, he believed ... there was exactly 1 New Hampshire licensed health care provider in the entire Manchester VA network," Giesen said, describing that outcome as an unintended barrier that forces veterans to seek an outside provider or use a community-care referral to obtain routine equipment exceptions.
Veteran testimony: Christopher Derry, a 25-year military veteran who sought the committee’s attention, described a personal impact: he said his prior approval was later disapproved after the rule change and that the Manchester VA was unable to sign forms that New Hampshire rules required a state-licensed provider to sign. Derry described the consequence as leading some veterans to seek local providers or the Community Care Network at personal cost or delay. "I applied for the waiver appropriately ... and then late 2023 ... it was disapproved, pending this new written language," Derry told the committee.
Technical approach: Giesen said the bill relies on the existing statutory definition of "medical provider" in state law to avoid inadvertently redefining who may write those prescriptions. He urged the committee to recommend the bill "ought to pass expeditiously without amendment," and said he would consider sponsoring any needed germane fixes in a later session.
Committee action: The committee heard public testimony and closed the hearing; a written record shows several people registered in favor and none opposed in the hearing period recorded in the transcript.
What it does not do: The bill does not create a new class of providers; it seeks to preserve the ability of authorized VA clinicians to sign equipment-exception paperwork without forcing veterans to secure a state-licensed second opinion.
