A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Board adopts updated examination regulation package; OPES recommends smaller tests and new passing‑score method to consider

October 02, 2025 | Structural Pest Control Board, Other State Agencies, Executive, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board adopts updated examination regulation package; OPES recommends smaller tests and new passing‑score method to consider
At the Oct. 1 meeting the Structural Pest Control Board approved an updated regulatory package to formalize examination outlines and exam procedures for operator, applicator and field‑representative licenses. Regulations counsel and staff said the package incorporates Office of Professional Examination Services (OPES) occupational‑analysis outlines and references federal EPA core standards; the board rescinded an earlier (Aug. 2024/March 2025) motion and voted 4‑0 to submit the updated text for review and to initiate rulemaking steps, authorizing the executive officer to make non‑substantive edits and proceed if no adverse recommendations are received.

Separately, OPES test specialists presented results of recent occupational analyses for Branch 2 field representatives and operators and made two recommendations. First, OPES recommended reducing the number of scoreable items on the Branch 2 field representative and operator examinations from 150 to 125 and adding 15 pretest (statistical‑validation) items; exam time would remain 2.5 hours. The board voted 4‑0 to adopt that change for new forms developed from the updated occupational analysis. Second, OPES recommended moving away from the statutory fixed 70% passing score to a criterion‑referenced passing‑score methodology that calibrates cut scores to each form’s difficulty; OPES explained that change would be more legally defensible and aligned with psychometric standards but would require statutory change and more stakeholder consultation. Board members requested more information and asked staff to return with comparisons from other DCA programs before considering a statutory proposal; no motion to change the statutory pass score was made.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep California articles free in 2026

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI
Family Portal
Family Portal