West Virginia Senate Bill SB 347

West Virginia 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/15/26
• Refer: 1/15/26

Caption

Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Technology Board of Examiners rule relating to standards of ethics

Summary

SB 347 relates to a rule of the Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Technology Board of Examiners concerning standards of ethics. Based on the bill caption and available context, the measure appears to address or approve regulatory standards governing the ethical conduct of licensed medical imaging and radiation therapy technology professionals in West Virginia. The bill text itself was not available in the provided materials, so the specific rule changes cannot be described in detail. In practical terms, the bill would affect the administrative rules that govern the board’s oversight of practitioners in this health-care licensing field. Depending on the rule’s contents, it could clarify professional conduct expectations, disciplinary standards, or other ethical requirements for individuals regulated by the board. The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, indicating it was under legal review rather than having completed final legislative action at the time of the provided status.

Impact

The bill would likely amend, approve, or otherwise affect the administrative rule framework for the Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Technology Board of Examiners, which regulates licensed imaging and radiation therapy professionals in West Virginia. Its impact would be on state regulatory law rather than broad statutory policy, potentially influencing licensing standards, ethics enforcement, and disciplinary procedures for practitioners and the board’s authority to administer them.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from the legislative record included here. The referral to Judiciary suggests the bill was being processed through the normal review path, and the available information does not indicate controversy or strong public debate. Overall sentiment cannot be determined from the supplied materials.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. If there were concerns, they would likely center on whether the board’s ethics standards are sufficiently clear, enforceable, and consistent with existing licensing law, but that is only an inference from the bill caption and not a recorded dispute. No named legislators, stakeholders, or interest groups are identified in the available context.