Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Regulation Retired Status topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PA board initiates rulemaking to limit 'retired' restorations to five years and require DOJ fingerprint check
Summary
The board approved revised regulatory language to amend Title 16 CCR section 1399.515: it would add a five‑year limit for restoring retired licenses, clarify when fingerprinting is required for reactivation, and repeal expired grandfathering provisions. The board voted to initiate rulemaking and forward the package to control agencies.
The California Physician Assistant Board on April 21 voted to adopt revised regulatory language and initiate rulemaking to amend Title 16, California Code of Regulations section 1399.515 (retired‑status restoration and fingerprinting).
Legislative and regulatory staff told the board the proposed amendments do four main things: add a five‑year limit on restoring a retired PA license (to align with Business and Professions Code 3526 and rules for cancellations), require fingerprint submission to the Department of Justice for reactivation only if the licensee’s fingerprints are not already available in DOJ databases, repeal an obsolete fee‑waiver grandfathering clause that expired in 2020, and update the retired‑status application form for formatting, letterhead and minor language changes.
Regulations counsel explained the five‑year limit was added to ensure currency of knowledge for applicants who would otherwise be able to restore licenses after long absences from practice. The change brings the retired‑status restoration pathway into parity with the statutory limits on reinstating cancelled licenses.
Board members discussed the proposed language, asked about the review process (DCA legal/budget office, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, then the Office of Administrative Law) and the practical effect of the five‑year cap: an applicant retired more than five years would need to apply for a new license under the initial licensure regulation (1,399.506) and meet the existing requirements for initial licensure.
The board adopted the revised package and directed staff to move it forward through DCA and the agency review process. The motion rescinded the previously approved draft language (attachment 2) and approved the replacement language (attachment 1) for initiation of rulemaking.
Vote: the motion passed on roll call with unanimous recorded support from members present. Recorded yes votes at roll call were Juan Armenta, Eric Bergenson, Philip DiVizio, Diego Insunta, Vasco Deonkiewicz, Edwin Perez, Bhavna Prakash and Deborah Snow. No dissent was recorded.
Next steps: staff will submit the rulemaking package and form updates through DCA review and then to the Office of Administrative Law for the public‑notice and comment period.
