Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, provides for the licensure or registration and regulation of veterinarians and veterinary technicians by the Veterinary Medical Board of California and makes a violation of that act a crime. Existing law requires the board to adopt a regular inspection program that provides for random, unannounced inspections and authorizes the board to inspect at any time a premises in which veterinary medicine, veterinary dentistry, or veterinary surgery is being practiced.
This bill would require the board to appoint a voluntary, advisory multidisciplinary committee consisting of no more than 9 members to assist, advise, and make recommendations for the implementation of rules and regulations necessary to ensure proper administration and enforcement of the act, and would make this provision inoperative on July 1, 2011, and repealed on January 1, 2012. The bill would require the board
to prioritize its investigative and prosecutorial resources in a specified manner and to annually report and make publicly available the number of disciplinary actions that are taken in each priority category. The bill would require, if the board determines, as a result of inspection, that a premises or place is not in compliance with board standards, that the board provide a notice of deficiencies and a reasonable time for compliance prior to commencing further action.
Existing law authorizes the executive officer of the board to, upon completion of an investigation, issue a citation to a veterinarian or unlicensed person for violations of the act, as specified. Existing law requires that, before issuing a citation, the executive officer submit the alleged violation for review and investigation to at least one designee of the board who is a veterinarian licensed in, or employed by, the state. Existing law provides that a citation may contain a civil penalty and
requires the board to adopt regulations covering the assessment of civil penalties that give due consideration to the appropriateness of the penalty with respect to various factors, including, but not limited to, the gravity of the violation.
This bill would require that consideration of the gravity of the violation include whether the violation is minor. In addition, the bill would specifically require that the designee to whom the alleged violation is submitted prior to issuing a citation be licensed in, or employed by, the state either full time or part time and not be out of practice for more than 4 years.
Existing law requires the board to establish an advisory committee on issues pertaining to the practice of registered veterinary technicians and vests that committee with various powers and duties.
This bill would require that the committee consist of 5 members to be
appointed by the board commencing January 1, 2009, as specified. The bill would specify the term length and term limit for committee members and would enact other related provisions.
Existing law requires that an applicant for registration as a veterinary technician furnish satisfactory evidence of graduation from a 2-year curriculum in veterinary technology in a college or postsecondary institution approved by the board. Alternatively, existing law authorizes an applicant to furnish satisfactory evidence of the equivalent of that requirement as determined by the board.
This bill would specify that education or a combination of education and clinical practice experience may constitute the equivalent of that requirement, as determined by the board.
Existing law authorizes the board to make a charge for official documents pertaining to the board’s affairs. Existing law requires the
board to set and collect various other fees, including, but not limited to, a national licensing examination fee for veterinarians, a registration fee for veterinary technicians, a diversion program registration fee, and an application fee for schools seeking approval of a registered veterinary technician curriculum. Existing law sets the maximum amounts of those fees, as specified, and requires deposit of revenue from those fees into the Veterinary Medical Board Contingent Fund, a continuously appropriated fund.
This bill would add a provision to the act requiring a registered veterinary technician to notify the board of his or her new mailing address within 30 days of changing that address and to indicate, in the application for renewal of registration, whether he or she has changed his or her mailing address. The bill would add a fee of $25 for failing to report that change in mailing address. The bill would delete the provision authorizing the board to make a
charge for official documents pertaining to the board’s affairs and instead provide that any charge for duplication or other services be set at the cost of rendering the service, except as specified. The bill would also increase the maximum amounts that the board may set for certain other fees, as specified, and would delete the provision of existing law requiring the board to set and collect the fee for the national licensing examination. The bill would require that a school or institution seeking approval of a registered veterinary technician curriculum pay an application fee set by the board not to exceed $300 and also pay the actual costs of an inspection conducted by the board, as specified. The bill would make other nonsubstantive, technical changes. By increasing the source of funds for a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation.
Because this bill would create new requirements within the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, the
violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.