Assemblymember Rebecca Edgeworth (Assembly District 35) presented Assembly Bill 221, which seeks to remove duplicative regulatory burdens on clinicians who hold both a medical doctorate (MD) and a dental doctorate (DMD) and who practice only dental procedures. The measure would exempt those practices from separate medical-board inspections when they are already regulated by the State Board of Dental Examiners.

"These seven practitioners shouldn’t be subject to double inspection that forces them to close or cut days of practice," Edgeworth told the committee, describing an administrative burden that deters clinicians from maintaining both credentials in Nevada.

Why it matters: Edgeworth said the double-inspection practice arose after a 2008 outbreak triggered increased medical-board oversight; AB221 aims to align inspection responsibility with the dental board for MD‑DMD clinicians performing dental services, removing duplicative fees and lost practice time.

Agency recalculation and fiscal impact
An earlier DHHS fiscal note estimated a small general-fund impact (about $8,925). Cody Finney, administrator of the Division of Public and Behavioral Health, told the committee the division reconsidered and concluded that the administrative impact could be absorbed within current resources and that the bill carries a zero fiscal impact.

"We did reconsider that and determine that we could absorb that reduction, and we do not need any adjustment to the budget related to that," Finney said.

Edgeworth and DHHS said the bill was narrowly targeted: only clinicians who practice dental procedures and already are regulated and inspected by the dental board would be affected. Edgeworth said Nevada is one of two states that still requires the double oversight for this narrow set of clinicians.

Public input and next steps
There was no public testimony for or against the bill at the hearing. Department and sponsor testimony indicates agreement on the policy and the absence of a remaining fiscal impact. The committee closed the hearing without taking immediate action, and the bill will proceed according to committee scheduling.

Ending: AB221's sponsor described it as a narrow fix to an unintended regulatory duplication; the administering divisions told the committee they can implement the change without new appropriations.