NOTA prohibits the knowing acquisition, receipt, or transfer of "any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce.
Second, and more significantly, the growing use of AUKPD and NEAD chains reinforces the notion, explored more fully in Part IV, that the Norwood Act provides a nonexclusive exemption, or safe harbor, from the definition of valuable consideration.
We address the legality of RTT under NOTA's prohibition against valuable consideration in part IV, below.
In this part, we consider whether NOTA's ban on valuable consideration applies to each of these expenses by examining the statute's text and legislative history, as well as the Norwood Act's amendments to NOTA.
As previously discussed, NOTA prohibits the knowing acquisition, receipt, or transfer of "any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce.
Under the plain language of the statute, items one and two of the RTT reimbursements discussed above and categorized in table 1 are exempt from NOTA's definition of valuable consideration, provided they are reasonable in amount.
It is thus tempting to conclude that, under the plain language of NOTA's text, the prohibition against valuable consideration in exchange for a human organ has no bearing on these reimbursements.
A skeptic could argue that, when Carlos agrees to donate his kidney through RTT so that Diana can receive the immunosuppression and medical transport necessary to complete her transplant, Carlos has received valuable consideration in exchange for his kidney.
Yet, Congress has explicitly exempted KPD from NOTA's prohibition against the exchange of valuable consideration for transplantable organs (though, as discussed in part IV.
Standing alone, then, neither the text nor legislative history of NOTA answers the question of whether Diana's RTT reimbursements constitute valuable consideration under NOTA.
Although NOTA is today most often discussed in connection with its prohibition of valuable consideration, it is important to remember that such a ban was not the central purpose of the statute, and was added to the statute relatively late.