Kamlesh B. Arya
Delaware Board of Occupational Therapy Practice
Submitted: November 19, 2013
Upon Consideration of Appellant's Appeal of a Decision of the Delaware Board of Occupational Therapy Practice.
AFFIRMED. Dear Ms. Arya, Ms. Oliva, and Ms. Singh
Kamlesh B. Arya Appellant
Patricia Davis Oliva, Esquire Jennifer L. Singh, Esquire Deputy Attorneys General Delaware Department of Justice Attorneys for Appellee
RICHARD R. COOCH RESIDENT JUDGE
This appeal stems from a decision of the Appellee Delaware Board of Occupational Therapy Practice ("the Board") on May 17, 2013 to discipline Kamlesh B. Arya ("Appellant"), a Board-licensed occupational therapist, for failure to comply with continuing education requirements and false attestation that she had completed them. Appellant has appealed the decision and requests the discipline be removed. Because Appellant has failed to show that the Board committed legal error or that its decision was not otherwise supported by substantial evidence, the decision of the Board is hereby AFFIRMED.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Appellant applied for a renewal of her occupational therapy license on August 21, 2012 through a State of Delaware website created to allow Delaware professionals to renew their licenses online. On her online application, Appellant attested to having properly completed the continuing education requirements.
Appellant's application was selected for a post-renewal documentation audit and she submitted her verification log and related paperwork to the Board. After the audit, it became apparent that while Appellant had completed the required number of continuing education credit hours for license renewal, she failed to complete them in more than one of seven permitted categories, as required by the Board.  As a result, a Rule to Show Cause Hearing was held March 5, 2013 to determine if discipline was warranted.
At the hearing, Appellant offered that the mistakes were "partly" her fault, but blamed confusion regarding the rules and the web program for her false attestation and failure to complete the continuing education requirements.Appellant partially explained this confusion by asserting that she had never worked in Delaware. The Hearing Officer found that Appellant failed to satisfy the continuing education requirements without justification, and recommended discipline to the Board. A letter notifying Appellant of the recommendation and the Board's impending decision was sent to her containing the following passages:
Please note that if you have any exceptions, comments or arguments regarding the enclosed recommendation, you must file them in writing to the attention of the Board … within twenty (20) days of March 20, 2013…
Please note this is a recommendation to the Board. No action is required on your part at this time. The Board will review the recommendation and make the final decision.
Appellant did not submit any additional exceptions, comments, or arguments to the Board. Subsequently, the Board accepted the Hearing Officer's recommendation and issued an order to discipline Appellant on May 17, 2013.Appellant was required to earn "at least 1 acceptable continuing education credit in a category other than coursework and submit acceptable proof thereof … within 75 days…" to be applied as "make up" credit. Failure to do so would result in her license being suspended without further notice or hearing. Additionally Appellant was issued a letter of reprimand for her false attestation and was "flagged for audit" in the next ...