(1) Profession monitoring program reports submitted shall be classified as either acceptable or not acceptable. Definitions of these terms are as follows:
(a) "Acceptable" means in compliance with professional standards (no significant departures from professional standards noted), but reviewers may have minor comment(s) for the practitioner's consideration.
(b) "Not acceptable" means not in compliance with professional standards as the reviewers have noted significant departures from such standards and/or the report is significantly inaccurate.
(2) Responses are required from those practice units whose reports are classified as not acceptable or from practice units that have submitted a peer review report that is other than pass or pass with deficiencies. The board may also require a written comprehensive statement of future procedures to be followed that will ensure an improvement in the quality of future reports.
(3) For those practice units which are required to submit responses under (2), the board will consider the review of the practice unit in closed, executive session. The board may recommend one or more of the following actions:
(a) completion of specific CPE courses pursuant to ARM 24.201.2155;
(b) third-party review of work papers;
(c) third-party review of other reports and work papers;
(d) pre-issuance reviews of reports by permit holders approved by the board;
(e) inspection of quality controls by a third party;
(f) participation in an approved peer review program; and
(g) withdrawal and/or reissuance of a report.
(4) The enforcement coordinator will monitor practice unit compliance with board recommendations set forth under (3) and shall refer noncompliant practice units to the board for possible initiation of the disciplinary process under subchapter 24.