TITLE
18. PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING
BOARD OF MEDICINE
Initial Agency Notice
Title of Regulation:
18VAC85-101. Regulations Governing the Practice of Radiologic Technology.
Statutory Authority: § 54.1-2400
of the Code of Virginia.
Name of Petitioner: Virginia Society of Radiologic
Technologists.
Nature of Petitioner's Request: To amend sections on
renewal, reinstatement, or reactivation to require a licensee to hold current American
Registry of Radiologic Technologists or Nuclear Medicine Technology Certification
Board credentials in good standing for biennial renewal, reinstatement, or
reactivation of one's license under the Board of Medicine.
Agency Plan for Disposition of Request: In accordance
with Virginia law, the petition will be filed with the Registrar of Regulations,
published on March 30, 2020, and posted on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall at
www.townhall.virginia.gov.
Comment on the petition will be requested until April 29, 2020, and may be
posted on the Town Hall or sent to the board. Following receipt of all comments
on the petition to amend regulations, the matter will be considered by the
Advisory Board on Radiologic Technology and by the full board at their meetings
in June of 2020.
Public Comment Deadline: April 29, 2020.
Agency Contact: William L. Harp, M.D., Executive
Director, Board of Medicine, 9960 Mayland Drive, Suite 300, Richmond, VA 23233,
telephone (804) 367-4558, or email william.harp@dhp.virginia.gov.
VA.R. Doc. No. R20-26 Filed February 26, 2020, 12:03 p.m.
w ––––––––––––––––––
w
TITLE 24. TRANSPORTATION AND
MOTOR VEHICLES
COMMISSION ON THE VIRGINIA ALCOHOL
SAFETY ACTION PROGRAM
Agency Decision
Title of Regulation: 24VAC35-30.
VASAP Case Management Policy and Procedure Manual.
Statutory Authority: § 18.2-270.2 of the Code of
Virginia.
Name of Petitioner: Cynthia Ellen Hites.
Nature of Petitioner's Request: "I, Cynthia Hites,
citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia, pursuant to § 2.2-4007 of the
Code of Virginia, do humbly submit this petition for the following amendment to
Virginia Administrative Code 24VAC35-30-150. Currently, Alcohol Safety Action
Program (ASAP) case managers can deny citizens' right to due process by
choosing to restart an ASAP client's court imposed ignition interlock sentence.
Upon suspicion of an ignition interlock violation, ASAP case managers should
initiate a non-compliance hearing for that offender. However, ASAP case
managers are usurping the jurisdiction of the court, endowed by
§§ 18.2-271.1 and 18.2-271.2 of the Code of Virginia, by personally
altering or extending the sentences of their clients. ASAP case managers serve
in a probationary capacity, and as such, are precluded from considering
evidence surrounding ignition interlock violation accusations. Despite this,
ASAP case managers are choosing to impose punishment on citizens without the
benefit of a trial. The current verbiage of the statute is as follows:
'24VAC35-30-150. Reporting. ASAPs shall work with the courts and service
providers to establish reports essential to the probationary function of the
case manager.' To clarify for all ASAP and VASAP personnel, and reiterate
wherein lies judicial authority, I request the addition of the following
language to 24VAC35-30-150: '24VAC35-30-150. Reporting. ASAPs shall work with
the courts and service providers to establish reports essential to the
probationary function of the case manager. Under no circumstance shall an ASAP
case manager alter any court-imposed sentence, or attempt to personally
adjudicate a suspected ignition interlock violation.' This simple change will
help protect Virginians from being unjustly penalized before all evidence and
accusations against them can be presented in a court of law."
Agency Decision: Request denied.
Statement of Reason for Decision: The Commission on the Virginia Alcohol
Safety Action Program considered this petition at its December 13, 2019,
quarterly meeting and decided to take no action on the petitioner's request.
Agency Contact: Richard
Foy, Regulatory Coordinator, Commission on the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action
Program, 701 East Franklin Street, Suite 1110, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone
(804) 786-5895, or email rfoy@vasap.virginia.gov.
VA.R. Doc. No. R19-32 Filed March 10, 2020, 2:57 p.m.
Initial Agency Notice
Title of Regulation:
24VAC35-60. Ignition Interlock Regulations.
Statutory Authority: § 18.2-270.2
of the Code of Virginia.
Name of Petitioner: Cynthia Hites.
Nature of Petitioner's Request: "I, Cynthia Hites, a citizen of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, pursuant to § 2.2-4007 of the Code of Virginia,
do humbly submit this petition for the following amendment to the specific
verbiage within Virginia Administrative Code 24VAC35-60-70, F, 6: \"The
results of the test shall be noted through the use of green, yellow, and red
signals or similar pass/fail indicators. No digital blood alcohol concentration
shall be indicated to the offender.\" With the insertion of the word
\"warn,\" I request the statute be amended to read: \"The
results of the test shall be noted through the use of green, yellow, and red
signals, or similar pass/warn/fail indicators. No digital blood alcohol
concentration shall be indicated to the offender.\" ASAPs can cite an
offender with a violation if that offender fails to reach \"zero\"
BrAC within 15 minutes of a failed IID reading. The problem lies in the fact
that, currently, the State and the Interlock companies operate on two separate
standards of \"zero.\" Most people assume a Virginia ignition
interlock prevents a car from starting when alcohol is detected. This is not
true. In the small window between .000 and .02, a green light comes on, the IID
display reads \"Start Engine,\" the car is permitted to start, and
the printed datalog reads \"Standing Pass.\" The problem is, that
without a yellow caution light, <.02, when the green light is displayed
and the car starts, the driver can only assume they\'ve reached zero and cleared
the violation. No one has any idea they need more blows to reach zero and avoid
a violation. This is why the law says \"green, yellow and red,\"
because without the yellow, the disparity between the two standards of zero
leaves open a small \"window of fraud.\" This allows an ASAP to claim
an accusation of \"At 2:13 p.m. a BAC reading of 0.035 was
registered. It was not cleared to zero within 15 minutes.\" When, really,
at 2:13 p.m. a .035 reading was indeed registered, however at
2:18 p.m. a .016 pass is logged, and a subsequent .012 passing test is
recorded before turning off the car. This client and the passenger never saw a
yellow light on the Alcolock device. They had no idea they didn\'t reach zero,
and this pending case wasn\'t filed until almost 6 months after the event. I
also experienced yellow light fraud. While 2 months sober, on July 21, 2016 a
failed rolling retest with a BrAC of 0.058, plummeted within nine minutes to a
passing .019. This could not be ethanol, and it PASSING, yet it was considered
a violation. I coincidentally have a video of the entire event. The green light
appearing, the \"Start Car\" message, and my confusion as to what was
occurring. The yellow caution light is shown and explained in the Alcolock LR
Instruction Manual, and the Alcolock training video echoes the same device
feature. \"Depending on your jurisdiction, if your breath sample contains
an amount of alcohol over the warning threshold but not enough alcohol to fail
a test, the handset will indicate \"Caution\" and the indicator light
will turn yellow. Please note that if you are aware your alcohol level is
rising when you receive a \"Caution\" do not start the vehicle engine
since you are not likely to pass a retest and it may not be safe to drive. When
you receive a \"Caution\" message, you will have two options. You may
wait 5 minutes and try the test again if you are certain there is no alcohol in
your body, or you may press the bottom button to acknowledge that you intend to
drive with alcohol in your system. If your breath sample contains an amount of
alcohol above the fail level the handset will indicate a \"Lockout\"
message with a timer...\" Relying upon a non-ethanol-specific device, with
its yellow caution light disabled, the ASAPs are able to cooperate with IID
companies to violate totally compliant and unsuspecting citizens. Couple the
absence of the yellow light, with automatically restarting 6 month IID time,
and filing violations late, offenders are allowed to be suspended in a
perpetual, indefensible loop, while their fees get divvied between the
respective IID company, VASAP and ASAPs. It\'s an unsettling cooperation
between the State and the contracted vendors, and perhaps amending the wording
of law will prompt companies to comply with what\'s already mandated. The
enigmatic yellow caution light."
Agency Plan for Disposition of Request: This petition will be considered by the
Commission on the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program at its quarterly
meeting on June 5, 2020.
Public Comment Deadline: May 29, 2020.
Agency Contact: Richard
Foy, Regulatory Coordinator, Commission on the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action
Program, 701 East Franklin Street, Suite 1110, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone
(804) 786-5895, or email rfoy@vasap.virginia.gov.
VA.R. Doc. No. R20-27 Filed March 10, 2020, 5:27 p.m.