context: We review de novo the legal question of whether the 2001 and 2008 rules amending the Board's patient copy rule violate HIPAA and its related regulations.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.parenthetical: court generally defers to statute's interpretation by agency charged with its enforcement
citation_a.sentence: Cf. Meridian Ranch Metropolitan Dist., 240 P.3d at 387, 2009 WL 3765490 (court generally defers to statute's interpretation by agency charged with its enforcement).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 681 P.2d 503, 503
citation_b.parenthetical: in reviewing an agency action, courts shall determine all legal questions, interpret the statutory and constitutional provisions involved, and shall apply such interpretation to the facts duly found or established
citation_b.sentence: See Transponder Corp., 681 P.2d at 503 (in reviewing an agency action, courts shall determine all legal questions, interpret the statutory and constitutional provisions involved, and shall apply such interpretation to the facts duly found or established). Moreover, because the Board is charged with administering and enforcing state public health laws and not federal health laws, we need not defer to the Board's HIPAA interpretations.