WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

H 771

An act relating to exempting ambulatory surgical centers from certificate of need requirements

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Greg Burtt and 8 co-sponsors

The bill would exempt ambulatory surgical centers from certificate of need review, speeding ASC development and expansion.

Read first time and referred to the Committee on Health Care
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · H 771

Overview

House Bill H.771 (Session 2025-2026, Vermont) proposes exempting ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) from certificate of need (CON) requirements. The bill has multiple sponsors and was read for the first time and referred to the Health Care Committee on January 23, 2026. If enacted, the bill would alter the state’s oversight framework for healthcare facility expansion and new ASC projects by removing CON review for ASCs.

Purpose and intent

  • To reduce regulatory barriers for ambulatory surgical centers seeking to establish, expand, or modify facilities or services.
  • To shift ASC development from a CON review framework to potentially a less burdensome or different regulatory pathway, aiming to streamline access to ambulatory surgical services for patients.

Key provisions (as proposed)

  • Exemption from CON requirements: Ambulatory surgical centers would be exempt from the state’s certificate of need process. This typically means that the construction, expansion, or modification of ASCs would not require formal CON approval or related state-issued authorizations that are currently mandated for healthcare facilities.
  • Scope of exemption: The bill specifically targets ambulatory surgical centers. It is unclear from the summary whether other facility types retain CON oversight or whether other conditions accompany the exemption (e.g., reporting, siting, or financial disclosure requirements). The text would define ASC to which the exemption applies.
  • Related regulatory considerations: The bill would not necessarily repeal all other regulatory authorities (e.g., licensure, payer, safety, and quality standards) but would remove CON as a gatekeeping mechanism for ASC expansion.

Affected parties and entities

  • Ambulatory surgical centers: Primary beneficiaries of the exemption, potentially allowing faster development, expansion of services, or introduction of new procedures.
  • Patients and communities: Potentially gain earlier access to ASC services; however, oversight and long-term planning originally provided by CON reviews would shift.
  • Other stakeholders: Hospitals, potential competitors, and regulators who currently participate in CON proceedings or monitor ASC growth may experience changes in process dynamics and competitive landscape.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduction status: Read first time and referred to the Committee on Health Care (January 23, 2026).
  • Next steps: The Health Care Committee would review, possibly amend, and advance the bill through hearings and votes. If approved by committee, the bill would proceed to the full House for debate and potential passage, followed by Senate consideration and any final actions or governor’s approval.
  • Effective date: The summary does not specify an effective date; the bill text would establish when any exemption takes effect (e.g., upon passage or a specified future date).

Potential implications

  • Regulatory impact: Removing ASC CON requirements could accelerate project timelines for ASC development and expansion but may reduce centralized state planning and oversight that CON processes provide.
  • Market effects: Could influence where ASCs locate, how quickly services expand, and how capital is allocated within outpatient surgical care.
  • Patient safety and quality: The change would shift oversight emphasis from CON screening to other regulatory mechanisms (licensure, accreditation, safety and quality standards). Stakeholders may seek assurances that appropriate protections remain in place.

Notes

  • Specific details, such as the exact definition of an ASC for the exemption, any accompanying conditions, transition provisions, or exceptions, would be found in the bill’s text and accompanying fiscal impact statement.
  • As introduced, the proposal reflects a policy choice to liberalize ASC development relative to CON regimes, consistent with broader debates about healthcare regulation, access, and cost.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.