Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Regulatory Actions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Licensing committee advances regulation packages; board repeals obsolete rule and rescinds earlier applicant-exam order
Summary
The board approved licensing-committee recommendations to initiate rulemaking on an inactive-license regulation, voted to repeal an obsolete CCR §315, and rescinded a 2016 order to seek authority to require applicant mental/physical examinations, citing limitations from AB 2138.
The Board of Chiropractic Examiners approved several licensing-committee regulatory recommendations intended to streamline existing rules and remove redundant or obsolete regulations.
On the committee’s recommendation, the board approved proposed regulatory text to adopt California Code of Regulations Title 16 §310.3 related to inactive license status and directed staff to submit the text to the Department of Consumer Affairs and the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency for review. The motion authorized the executive officer to initiate rulemaking, make non‑substantive edits and set hearings if requested.
The board also voted to repeal CCR Title 16 §315, which staff described as redundant given statutory authority in the Business and Professions Code that already allows boards to order licensees to be examined when concerns about competency arise. Staff noted §315 was last amended in 1977 and that the repeal is primarily a cleanup proposal.
Separately, the board moved to rescind its August 29, 2016 order to initiate rulemaking that would have required applicants to undergo mental or physical examinations. Staff explained that AB 2138 (effective 2020) narrowed the grounds on which a board may deny an application — principally limiting denials to cases of conviction of a crime or formal disciplinary action — and left the board without clear evidence-based grounds to require an examination of an applicant outside the denial process.
Staff emphasized two available pathways: (1) deny an application when substantially‑related convictions or disciplinary actions exist and, if denied, proceed to order evaluations as part of that process; or (2) license the applicant and exercise statutory authority over licensees to require examinations when information emerges after licensure. For these reasons, staff recommended rescinding the 2016 motion and focusing regulatory resources on higher-priority packages.
The motions to submit the §310.3 text, repeal §315, and rescind the 2016 order each passed on roll-call votes. Staff said the licensing committee will continue work on other packages — including practice-location rules, display of license, retired-license status and chiropractic college curriculum alignment with CCE — and plans to bring further proposals to the board for consideration.
