BRN advisory committee reviews SB1451 changes that expand 103 nurse practitioner practice and clarify retired certifications

The Board of Registered Nursing’s Impact Committee on Tuesday reviewed proposed regulatory changes to implement Senate Bill 1451 and AB 890 that alter how nurse practitioner (NP) classifications known as “103” and “104” will be verified and regulated.

The committee heard that SB1451 removes the previous requirement that an applicant’s national certification, the setting used for their transition-to-practice hours, and the attesting provider all be in the same clinical population or specialty. Loretta Melby, executive officer, told members the 103 application has been updated to reflect that change and that ‘‘the practice area still stands for the 104.’’

Committee members said the statutory changes could broaden the kinds of specialty work a 103 can perform. Dr. Andrea Espinosa pressed staff on public-safety protections, asking whether the change allows a nurse practitioner trained primarily in family medicine to claim independent practice in a specialty such as rheumatology or orthopedics. Melby and other staff repeatedly pointed to statutory language requiring that a 104 ‘‘shall not practice beyond the scope of their clinical and professional education and training, including specific areas of concentration’’ and that national certification be a limiting factor; Melby referenced the statutory citation read aloud in the meeting as ‘‘business and professions code 27 30 2837.104’’ (as spoken during the meeting).

Marissa Clark, BRN chief of legislation, said a regulatory change will explicitly allow retired or legacy national certifications to satisfy the national-certification requirement. Clark described a draft change to 16 CCR 14 81 that would add language making clear national certifications retired before Jan. 1, 2017, remain allowable if issued by an accrediting body specified in the regulation.

Dr. Espinosa and other committee members urged continued monitoring after the new classifications take effect. BRN staff said the first 104s will not practice until January 2026 and that the agency will track disciplinary metrics as those practitioners enter independent practice. Reza (board counsel) and staff emphasized the board must implement statute as written and that any further changes would require the formal regulatory process.

Committee Chair Samantha Gamble Sparr closed by asking members to raise any further specific regulatory language changes in subsequent agenda items; staff said proposed regulatory text is posted and that public comments will be accepted during the formal rule‑making comment period.

The committee did not take a regulatory vote on these specific statutory implementation edits at this meeting; staff said the group will review proposed language and public comments as part of the rule‑making process.