308 B.R. 572 (2003) In re William B. MCRAE, Appellant/Debtor. No. 5:02cv385 MMP. United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Panama City Division. August 25, 2003. *573 *574 Ronald Aaron Mowrey, Mary Elizabeth Watts-Wilkie, Mowrey & Biggins PA, Tallahassee, FL, for Appellant. John Edward Venn, Jr., John E. Venn Jr., PA, Pensacola, FL, Pro se. ORDER PAUL, Senior District Judge. This cause comes before the Court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Florida,..

Which applicant(s) best meet the criteria for the issuance of certificates of need for nursing home beds in response to the publication of the need for 321 additional community nursing home beds in Agency For Health Care Administration District 3.Approval of beds in excess of numeric need for geographically underserved nursing home area in comparative review process.

At issue in this proceeding is whether petitioner's request to modify its certificate of need from a 60-bed child/adolescent psychiatric hospital to a 45- bed child/adolescent and 15-bed adult psychiatric facility should be approved.Proposal to convert 15 child/adolesent psychiatric beds to 15 adult psychiatric beds was not subject of CON and required CON review.

Whether the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services should issue certificates of need, in District 11, for the addition of 33 comprehensive medical rehabilitation beds to West Gables Rehabilitation Hospital, and/or for the establishment of a 45-bed comprehensive medical rehabilitation hospital to HealthSouth Rehabilitation Corporation.Conversion from skilled nursing facility to comprehensive medical rehabilitation beds when skilled nursing facility already provided rehab services; need from not normal payor trends, and demand for accredited brain program.

The issue presented is whether the application of Respondent Adventist Health System/Sunbelt, Inc. d/b/a East Pasco Medical Center for a certificate of need to add 24 acute care beds to its existing facility should be approved.Certificate Of Need for acute care beds denied where no numeric need shown and no facility specific special circumstances proven to justify increasing excess capacity.

The issue presented is whether Petitioner's application for Certificate of Need No. 6932 for the addition of 20 comprehensive medical rehabilitation beds in District V should be approved.Executed Stipulated Settlement dated August 18, 1993 was accepted.

Which, if any, of the four certificate of need applications for short-term psychiatric beds in Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services District 9 should be approved.No need for additional short term psychiatric beds even though numeric need indicated; low occupancy in like and existing providers below rule levels.

Whether the Certificate of Need application to establish adult open heart surgery services at Baptist Hospital, Pensacola, Florida, submitted in September 1991, includes a complete list of capital projects and an assessment of their impact on the applicant's ability to provide the proposed project, as required by Subsection 381.707(2), Florida Statutes (1991), 1/ and applicable rules.Certificate of need application incomplete without list of all capital projects and impact assessment statement.

The issue in these consolidated cases is whether proposed amendments to Rule 10-5.039, F.A.C., relating to certificates of need (CON) for hospital inpatient comprehensive medical rehabilitation (CMR) services, are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority, as defined in Section 120.52(8), F.S. An ancillary issue raised by Intervenor, Healthsouth, is whether an intervenor may challenge portions of a proposed rule not specifically identified by an original petitioner. In a prehearing stipulation filed on December 6, 1991, the parties stipulated that the following subsections of the proposed amendments remained at issue: Subsection (2)(b): definition of charity care; Subsection (2)(k): definition of specialty bed; Subsection (5)(c): CMR bed need methodology; Subsection (5)(d): existing CMR bed occupancy threshold; Subsection (5)(e): existing provider expansion (at issue from perspective of whether proposed amendment unreasonably restricts expansion of existing CMR providers); Subsection (5)(f)2: conversion of acute care beds for CMR expansion; Subsection (5)(g): priority considerations for CON review; Subsection (10): required utilization reports; and Subsection (11): applicability of amendments. Also remaining at issue was the sufficiency of the economic impact statement. The validity of the following additional provisions were raised only by intervenors, Continental Medical Systems of Florida, Inc. or Healthsouth: Subsection (3)(c): 60-bed minimum unit size for freestanding facilities; Subsection (5)(e): existing provider expansion (from perspective of whether proposed amendment unreasonably allows expansion of existing providers); and Subsection (7)(b): CARF accreditation.Proposed Comprehensive Medical Rehabilitation Certificate Of Need rules valid and needed to meet current conditions in med rehab service delivery. Issues by Intervenor not timely raised.

The issue in this case is whether the Respondent, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), should grant the application of the Petitioner, RHPC, Inc., d/b/a Riverside Hospital (Riverside), for a certificate of need, CON Action No. 6582, for the addition of 31 acute care beds.No need for Certificate Of Need for more hospital beds under rule. No "not normal" circumstances. Equal treatment issue stipulated; challenge to competitor dropped.