DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
[Filed July 23, 1997, 10:14 a.m.]
Preproposal statement of inquiry was filed as WSR 96-18-094.
Title of Rule: Physician's license revocation.
Purpose: The proposed rule articulates the rights of the licensee and the administrative procedures for the licensee, the commission and staff of the commission to conduct a review of the decision to revoke a licensee's license.
Other Identifying Information: SHB 2188.
Statutory Authority for Adoption: RCW 18.71.019.
Statute Being Implemented: RCW 18.71.019.
Summary: The respondent may now request a review of the revocation decision made by a panel of the commission by the remaining members of the commission not involved in the initial decision.
Reasons Supporting Proposal: Administrative procedures to hold a review by the commission and delineation of which members can participate in the review process are required to be able to enforce the intent of the legislature.
Name of Agency Personnel Responsible for Drafting: Mike Farrell in consultation with Margaret Bichl, 1300 S.E. Quince Street, (509) 459-3643; Implementation: Beverly Teeter, 1300 S.E. Quince Street, (360) 664-8690; and Enforcement: Bonnie King, 1300 S.E. Quince Street, (360) 664-2965.
Name of Proponent: Commission and Department of Health, governmental.
Rule is not necessitated by federal law, federal or state court decision.
Explanation of Rule, its Purpose, and Anticipated Effects: SHB 2188 provides for a process by which the licensee may request a review by the remaining members of the Medical Quality Assurance Commission who did not participate in the investigation or the panel's decision to revoke a physician's license. The rule sets out the administrative procedure for holding a review and delineates which members of the commission are disqualified from participating in the review.
Proposal does not change existing rules. The proposed rule adds a new section.
No small business economic impact statement has been prepared under chapter 19.85 RCW. This rule change does not exceed the more than minor cost threshold, therefore, a small business economic impact statement is not required.
Section 201, chapter 403, Laws of 1995, does not apply to this rule adoption. This rule does not subject a person to a penalty or sanction; does not establish, alter or revoke a qualification or standard for physician licensure; and does not make significant amendment to a policy or regulatory program. This rule establishes a procedure for a licensee to request a review by the remaining commission members when a panel of the commission orders a revocation of the license.
Hearing Location: Sea-Tac Hilton Hotel, on September 26, 1997, at 1:30 p.m.
Assistance for Persons with Disabilities: Contact Terry Taylor by September 12, 1997, TDD (800) 833-6388, or FAX (360) 586-4573.
Submit Written Comments to: Terry Taylor, FAX (360) 586-4573, by September 26, 1997.
Date of Intended Adoption: September 29, 1997.
July 8, 1997
WAC 246-919-520 Revocation of a physician's license. This section sets forth the procedure by which a respondent may request a review by the medical quality assurance commission of its decision to revoke the respondent's license under RCW 18.71.019:
(1) If the commission issues a final order revoking a respondent's license following an adjudicative proceeding, the respondent may request a review of the decision by a review panel of the commission.
(2) The respondent shall file a written request with the commission within twenty days of effective date of the final order. The respondent may not request an extension of the twenty-day period to file a request for review.
(3) The respondent's request for review of the final order does not change the effective date of the final order.
(4) A review panel shall review the final order. The review panel is composed of the members of the commission who did not:
(a) Review the initial investigation and make the decision to issue a statement of charges against the respondent in this matter; or
(b) Hear the evidence at the adjudicative proceeding and issue the final order revoking the respondent's license.
(5) Within seven days of receipt of the request for review of the final order, a scheduling order is issued setting a date for the review hearing, and a date for the filing of written argument by the parties. The review hearing must take place within sixty days of the respondent's request for review of the final order.
(6) The review panel shall convene in person for the review hearing on the date set in the scheduling order. If a commission member is unavailable to meet on the scheduled date, a pro tempore member shall take that person's place on the review panel. At the review hearing, the review panel:
(a) Shall review the final order;
(b) Shall review written argument presented by the parties; and
(c) May hear oral argument by the parties.
(7) If the review panel determines that revocation of the respondent's license is not the appropriate sanction, it shall issue an amended order setting the appropriate sanction(s) necessary to protect the public.
(8) If the review panel determines that revocation of the
respondent's license is appropriate, it shall issue an order confirming