Board debates retired-status reentry language; votes to begin rulemaking on exam and fee updates
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The board debated whether returning licensees should be required to take a Pearson VUE PANRE test at a test center versus allowing the PANRE-LA option; after discussion the board approved initiating rulemaking to adopt revised regulatory text for CCR sections 1399.507 and 1399.515, and directed staff to submit the package for review.
The California Physician Assistant Board on Nov. 17 took up regulatory language to clarify how licensees in retired status may return to active licensure, focusing on which NCCPA recertification pathways the board will accept.
Staff presented proposed amendments to California Code of Regulations sections 1399.507 and 1399.515 to ensure the reentry process for licensees who have been in retired status for more than five years is clear, including an exam requirement and updated delinquency fees. The package also clarifies the type of exam evidence acceptable to show competency for reinstatement.
Board members engaged in a detailed debate about which NCCPA product to accept for reentry. One board member argued in-person, proctored Pearson VUE administration of the PANRE (the recertifying exam) most reliably protects the public and prevents cheating; another cautioned that the PANRE-LA (longitudinal assessment) is an NCCPA-vetted pathway that many employers accept and could create fewer barriers for PAs returning to practice. Staff and several members noted that NCCPA rules limit which pathways are available to licensees depending on their certification status and that some licensees who have let NCCPA certification lapse may not be eligible for the LA option.
Expressing the need for more information from NCCPA and further legal/implementation review, several members moved to table the item; others moved to adopt the proposed text now to align board regulations with legislative intent and public-protection concerns. The board ultimately voted to authorize staff to submit the proposed regulatory text for 16 CCR sections 1399.507 and 1399.515 to the Department of Consumer Affairs and related agencies for rulemaking and to authorize the executive officer to complete non-substantive changes and proceed if no adverse recommendations were received.
Board members also acknowledged the need for follow-up to verify NCCPA policy details and to refine language in rulemaking to avoid unintentionally restricting acceptable pathways for reinstatement.