The 2023 Florida Statutes
|
||||||
|
The Radiological Personnel Certification Act (“RPCA”) provides the legal framework for the use of radiation and radiation-emitting equipment in Florida. Fla. Stat. §§ 468.3001 et seq. It is unlawful under the RPCA for a person to use radiation, practice radiologic technology, or perform any of the duties of a radiologic assistant unless they are “the holder of a certificate ... and [are] operating under the direct supervision or general supervision of a licensed practitioner in each particular case.” Fla. Stat. § 468.302(1)(b). For purposes of the RPCA, “certificate” is defined as the “certification granted and issued by the [Florida DOH].” Fla. Stat. §§ 468.301(3), (6). The certification process requires an applicant to meet several criteria including the submission of an application fee and proof of completion of certain educational requirements and courses. Fla. Stat. § 468.304. Practicing radiologic technology without an active certificate from the Florida DOH is a criminal offense. Fla. Stat. § 468.311(1).The Radiological Personnel Certification Act ("RPCA") provides the legal framework for the use of radiation and radiation-emitting equipment in Florida. Fla. Stat. §§ 468.3001 et seq. It is unlawful under the RPCA for a person to use radiation, practice radiologic technology, or perform any of the duties of a radiologic assistant unless they are "the holder of a certificate . . . and [are] operating under the direct supervision or general supervision of a licensed practitioner in each particular case." Fla. Stat. § 468.302(1)(b). For purposes of the RPCA, "certificate" is defined as the "certification granted and issued by the [Florida DOH]." Fla. Stat. §§ 468.301(3), (6). The certification process requires an applicant to meet several criteria including the submission of an application fee and proof of completion of certain educational requirements and courses. Fla. Stat. § 468.304. Practicing radiologic technology without an active certificate from the Florida DOH is a criminal offense. Fla. Stat. § 468.311(1).State Farm makes numerous allegations in support of its claim that the services rendered were unlawful and therefore non-compensable. State Farm claims that in 2009 and 2010, Defendant Velasco performed X-rays on patients, including State Farm insureds, without the certification required by the Radiological Personnel Certification Act (“RPCA”), Florida Statute § 468.3001. Id. at ¶¶ 73–76. State Farm asserts that Defendants B & A, Genao, Alonso, and Velasco knew or should have known that Velasco lacked certification from the Department of Health, as required under the RPCA. Id. at ¶ 83. Additionally, State Farm claims that Defendant B & A's employment of Defendant Maza, who held a certification from the State of Florida as a Basic Machine Operator (“BMO”), was in violation of Florida law regulating the use of BMO's, as it was a clinic owned by a layperson, and not the office of a licensed practitioner. See id. at ¶ 87; see also Fla. Stat. §§ 468.301(1) and 468.302(3)(a). State Farm also contends that B & A and its Medical Directors failed to make a good faith effort to collect deductibles and/or copays, in violation of Florida law. Id. at ¶¶ 61–70.. . . . §§ 468.3001 et seq. . . .
. . . certification required by the Radiological Personnel Certification Act (“RPCA”), Florida Statute § 468.3001 . . .