Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elective Facial Cosmetic Surgery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dental Board approves legislative proposal to clarify elective facial cosmetic surgery permits
Summary
The Dental Board voted to send a legislative proposal amending Business and Professions Code section 1638.1 to the California Legislature to clarify permit categories for elective facial cosmetic surgery.
The Dental Board of California voted to approve a legislative proposal to amend Business and Professions Code section 1638.1 on Feb. 7, clarifying how elective facial cosmetic surgery (EFCS) permits may be limited by procedural category.
The change aims to resolve ambiguity about what "classes of procedures" means under current law and to align the permitting language with two EFCS permit categories described in statute: category 1 (cosmetic contouring of osteocartilaginous facial structure, e.g., rhinoplasty or otoplasty) and category 2 (cosmetic soft-tissue contouring or rejuvenation, e.g., facelifts, lip augmentation, blepharoplasty).
Brent Nelson, the board's legislative and regulatory specialist, introduced the item and asked staff to present technical corrections. Jody Ortiz, chief of licensing and examination, explained the board's concern that subdivision (e)(1) of section 1638.1 still allowed issuance of a permit "that contains limitations if the credentialing committee is not satisfied that the applicant has trained or competence to perform certain classes of procedures," language Ortiz called "ambiguous" in light of the new statutory categories.
Ortiz said staff recommended removing unnecessary language and clarifying that any limitation should specify which permit category (category 1 or category 2) the permit covers rather than leaving open a broader interpretation of "classes of procedures." The staff recommendation also included a technical punctuation correction to another subdivision.
A motion to approve the staff'recommended proposal for submission to the California State Legislature was made and seconded; the board recorded its votes by roll call and the motion passed.
The board did not alter the substance of the two EFCS categories described by staff; instead, the approved legislative proposal directs statutory text to mirror those categories and to remove an ambiguous cross-reference that staff said had been inadvertently left unchanged during earlier amendments.
No public comment was recorded on the item during the meeting.
