User login
The FBI is raising concerns that language in the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact violates federal regulations over criminal background checks. The government pushback could mean implementation delays of telemedicine legislation that 17 states have enacted.
In a letter to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, an FBI attorney wrote that the state’s compact law does not meet federal rules that allow the sharing of information with states for purposes of criminal background checks. In addition, no federal statutory authority exists for the FBI to share criminal files with a “private” entity such as the interstate commission, wrote Christopher B. Chaney, an attorney in the FBI Office of the General Counsel in Clarksburg, W.Va. The FBI sent a letter expressing the same concerns to the Montana Department of Justice regarding Montana’s compact law.
The Minnesota Board of Medical Practice has requested that the FBI reverse its findings, writing in an Aug. 3 letter that the agency does not appear to fully understand how the compact works. The board is scheduled to begin issuing licenses via the compact in January 2017, said Ruth Martinez, the board’s executive director.
“We believe it’s an erroneous conclusion that they’ve drawn,” Ms. Martinez said in an interview. “We are very actively engaged in rule-writing and in preparing technology and so forth to be ready to issue licenses, and we feel very confident that this determination will be overturned.”
The Montana Board of Medical Examiners meanwhile is aware of the FBI’s letter and is closely monitoring the situation in Minnesota before taking action, said Ian Marquand, executive officer for the Montana Board of Medical Examiners.
“We are still digesting this and are anxious to see what happens with the Minnesota situation,” Mr. Marquand said in an interview. “That may provide the road map.”
The Interstate Medical Licensure Compact is aimed at making it easier for telemedicine physicians to gain licenses in multiple states. Under the model legislation, developed by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), physicians designate a member state as the state of principal licensure and select the other states in which they wish to be licensed. The state of principal licensure then verifies the physician’s eligibility and provides credential information to the interstate commission, which collects applicable fees and transmits the doctor’s information to the other states. Upon receipt in the additional states, the physician would be granted a license.
In July 2015, the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration awarded the FSMB a grant to support establishment of the commission and aid with the compact’s infrastructure.
There is nothing unique about Minnesota’s compact law, Ms. Martinez said. The statute is based on the same model legislation that passed in 16 other states. She believes that Minnesota’s law is merely one of the first to be reviewed by the FBI. Both Minnesota and Montana officials had requested that their respective state departments of justice determine if the compact laws met public law standards pertaining to criminal history records.
Ms. Martinez said that she hopes that the board’s letter to the FBI will help explain how the compact process works and prevent further federal rejections in other jurisdictions. She notes for example that the FBI incorrectly characterizes the interstate commission as a “private” entity in its letter, when the commission is a corporate body and a joint agency of the member states. The FBI also misunderstands how the commission interacts with the individual state licensing boards and the process of licensure, according to the board’s reply letter. It is not the commission that will be using FBI data, but the member states that will be utilizing the information in the course of verification, writes Rick Masters, special counsel to the National Center for Interstate Compacts.
The Federation of State Medical Boards is closely watching the matter and supports the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice, said Lisa A. Robin FSMB’s chief advocacy officer.
“The FSMB, along with the Council of State Governments (CSG), agrees with and supports the Minnesota board’s position in this matter,” Ms. Robin said in an emailed statement. “The compact’s statutory language does not alter state-based responsibility for the administration of criminal background checks, nor does it seek to extend this responsibility beyond individual state medical boards.”
At press time, the FBI’s Mr. Chaney had not responded to a message seeking comment.
On Twitter @legal_med
The FBI is raising concerns that language in the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact violates federal regulations over criminal background checks. The government pushback could mean implementation delays of telemedicine legislation that 17 states have enacted.
In a letter to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, an FBI attorney wrote that the state’s compact law does not meet federal rules that allow the sharing of information with states for purposes of criminal background checks. In addition, no federal statutory authority exists for the FBI to share criminal files with a “private” entity such as the interstate commission, wrote Christopher B. Chaney, an attorney in the FBI Office of the General Counsel in Clarksburg, W.Va. The FBI sent a letter expressing the same concerns to the Montana Department of Justice regarding Montana’s compact law.
The Minnesota Board of Medical Practice has requested that the FBI reverse its findings, writing in an Aug. 3 letter that the agency does not appear to fully understand how the compact works. The board is scheduled to begin issuing licenses via the compact in January 2017, said Ruth Martinez, the board’s executive director.
“We believe it’s an erroneous conclusion that they’ve drawn,” Ms. Martinez said in an interview. “We are very actively engaged in rule-writing and in preparing technology and so forth to be ready to issue licenses, and we feel very confident that this determination will be overturned.”
The Montana Board of Medical Examiners meanwhile is aware of the FBI’s letter and is closely monitoring the situation in Minnesota before taking action, said Ian Marquand, executive officer for the Montana Board of Medical Examiners.
“We are still digesting this and are anxious to see what happens with the Minnesota situation,” Mr. Marquand said in an interview. “That may provide the road map.”
The Interstate Medical Licensure Compact is aimed at making it easier for telemedicine physicians to gain licenses in multiple states. Under the model legislation, developed by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), physicians designate a member state as the state of principal licensure and select the other states in which they wish to be licensed. The state of principal licensure then verifies the physician’s eligibility and provides credential information to the interstate commission, which collects applicable fees and transmits the doctor’s information to the other states. Upon receipt in the additional states, the physician would be granted a license.
In July 2015, the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration awarded the FSMB a grant to support establishment of the commission and aid with the compact’s infrastructure.
There is nothing unique about Minnesota’s compact law, Ms. Martinez said. The statute is based on the same model legislation that passed in 16 other states. She believes that Minnesota’s law is merely one of the first to be reviewed by the FBI. Both Minnesota and Montana officials had requested that their respective state departments of justice determine if the compact laws met public law standards pertaining to criminal history records.
Ms. Martinez said that she hopes that the board’s letter to the FBI will help explain how the compact process works and prevent further federal rejections in other jurisdictions. She notes for example that the FBI incorrectly characterizes the interstate commission as a “private” entity in its letter, when the commission is a corporate body and a joint agency of the member states. The FBI also misunderstands how the commission interacts with the individual state licensing boards and the process of licensure, according to the board’s reply letter. It is not the commission that will be using FBI data, but the member states that will be utilizing the information in the course of verification, writes Rick Masters, special counsel to the National Center for Interstate Compacts.
The Federation of State Medical Boards is closely watching the matter and supports the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice, said Lisa A. Robin FSMB’s chief advocacy officer.
“The FSMB, along with the Council of State Governments (CSG), agrees with and supports the Minnesota board’s position in this matter,” Ms. Robin said in an emailed statement. “The compact’s statutory language does not alter state-based responsibility for the administration of criminal background checks, nor does it seek to extend this responsibility beyond individual state medical boards.”
At press time, the FBI’s Mr. Chaney had not responded to a message seeking comment.
On Twitter @legal_med
The FBI is raising concerns that language in the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact violates federal regulations over criminal background checks. The government pushback could mean implementation delays of telemedicine legislation that 17 states have enacted.
In a letter to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, an FBI attorney wrote that the state’s compact law does not meet federal rules that allow the sharing of information with states for purposes of criminal background checks. In addition, no federal statutory authority exists for the FBI to share criminal files with a “private” entity such as the interstate commission, wrote Christopher B. Chaney, an attorney in the FBI Office of the General Counsel in Clarksburg, W.Va. The FBI sent a letter expressing the same concerns to the Montana Department of Justice regarding Montana’s compact law.
The Minnesota Board of Medical Practice has requested that the FBI reverse its findings, writing in an Aug. 3 letter that the agency does not appear to fully understand how the compact works. The board is scheduled to begin issuing licenses via the compact in January 2017, said Ruth Martinez, the board’s executive director.
“We believe it’s an erroneous conclusion that they’ve drawn,” Ms. Martinez said in an interview. “We are very actively engaged in rule-writing and in preparing technology and so forth to be ready to issue licenses, and we feel very confident that this determination will be overturned.”
The Montana Board of Medical Examiners meanwhile is aware of the FBI’s letter and is closely monitoring the situation in Minnesota before taking action, said Ian Marquand, executive officer for the Montana Board of Medical Examiners.
“We are still digesting this and are anxious to see what happens with the Minnesota situation,” Mr. Marquand said in an interview. “That may provide the road map.”
The Interstate Medical Licensure Compact is aimed at making it easier for telemedicine physicians to gain licenses in multiple states. Under the model legislation, developed by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), physicians designate a member state as the state of principal licensure and select the other states in which they wish to be licensed. The state of principal licensure then verifies the physician’s eligibility and provides credential information to the interstate commission, which collects applicable fees and transmits the doctor’s information to the other states. Upon receipt in the additional states, the physician would be granted a license.
In July 2015, the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration awarded the FSMB a grant to support establishment of the commission and aid with the compact’s infrastructure.
There is nothing unique about Minnesota’s compact law, Ms. Martinez said. The statute is based on the same model legislation that passed in 16 other states. She believes that Minnesota’s law is merely one of the first to be reviewed by the FBI. Both Minnesota and Montana officials had requested that their respective state departments of justice determine if the compact laws met public law standards pertaining to criminal history records.
Ms. Martinez said that she hopes that the board’s letter to the FBI will help explain how the compact process works and prevent further federal rejections in other jurisdictions. She notes for example that the FBI incorrectly characterizes the interstate commission as a “private” entity in its letter, when the commission is a corporate body and a joint agency of the member states. The FBI also misunderstands how the commission interacts with the individual state licensing boards and the process of licensure, according to the board’s reply letter. It is not the commission that will be using FBI data, but the member states that will be utilizing the information in the course of verification, writes Rick Masters, special counsel to the National Center for Interstate Compacts.
The Federation of State Medical Boards is closely watching the matter and supports the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice, said Lisa A. Robin FSMB’s chief advocacy officer.
“The FSMB, along with the Council of State Governments (CSG), agrees with and supports the Minnesota board’s position in this matter,” Ms. Robin said in an emailed statement. “The compact’s statutory language does not alter state-based responsibility for the administration of criminal background checks, nor does it seek to extend this responsibility beyond individual state medical boards.”
At press time, the FBI’s Mr. Chaney had not responded to a message seeking comment.
On Twitter @legal_med
