Where the jurisdiction strip merges with merits, deference still applies, since otherwise there would be a wider scope of review, contrary to law's intent.
Implementation provisions referencing statute that the agency is interpreting doesn't preclude implementation rulemaking as to the latter, since the latter recites other implementation mechanisms.
Agency reading is reasonable, given text and statutory context, so jurisdiction strip applies.
Arguendo, even without a basis for Article III jurisdiction, under statutory jurisdiction, the rulemaking doesn't conflict with a law regulating such reimbursements.