Case Name: TARPON SPRINGS GENERAL HOSPITAL, Appellant, v. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY MEDICAL FACILITIES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1979-01-19
Citations: 366 So. 2d 185
Docket Number: No. JJ-296
Parties: TARPON SPRINGS GENERAL HOSPITAL, Appellant, v. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY MEDICAL FACILITIES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellee.
Judges: MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 366
Pages: 185–186

Head Matter:
TARPON SPRINGS GENERAL HOSPITAL, Appellant, v. OFFICE OF COMMUNITY MEDICAL FACILITIES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellee.
No. JJ-296.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Jan. 19, 1979.
Rehearing Denied March 2, 1979.
Gayle Smith, Swedmark, of Madigan, Parker, Gatlin, Swedmark & Skelding, Tallahassee, for appellant.
George L. Waas, Tallahassee, for appel-lee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The hearing officer's order, adopted as the final order of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), recommended appellant be denied a certificate of need to expand its facilities in a proposed $6.6 million expenditure. The hearing officer agreed with earlier recommendations of the Florida Gulf Health Systems Agency that the proposed bed expansion was unnecessary, that the costs of the project would increase medical costs to patients and that less expensive alternatives were available. See § 381.494(5)(e), Fla.Stat. (1977).
Appellant contends that the denial was based, in part, on HRS's definition of "service area" contained in its state medical facilities plan. See § 381.494(6)(c). That definition is based on county lines, and appellant points out that, although it is located within Pinellas County, currently over-, bedded according to the state plan, it is within three miles of Pasco County, which is underbedded according to the state plan. Appellant argues the definition is arbitrary and is a rule never promulgated under Ch. 120.
We do not reach appellant's contentions because the record shows that both the local health systems agency and HRS analyzed the needs of Pasco County before denying appellant's certificate. The final order and the recommendation of the local agency noted that Pasco County had a projected deficit in 1982 of 54 beds, but that two other hospitals in Pasco County were acces sible to patients within appellant's service area.
We also disagree with appellant's argument that the order is not based on competent, substantial evidence. See Bolinger v. Division of Retirement, 335 So.2d 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.