(1) Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, provides for the licensure and registration of veterinarians and the regulation of the practice of veterinary medicine, until January 1, 2022, by the Veterinary Medical Board in the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law, until January 1, 2022, authorizes the board to appoint an executive officer to perform duties delegated by the board. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for any person to violate or aid or abet in the violation of the act. Under the act, the repeal of the provision establishing the board renders the board subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature. The act restricts the review to those issues identified by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature and prohibits that review from involving the preparation or submission of a sunset review
document or evaluative questionnaire.
This bill would extend the provisions establishing the board and authorizing the board to appoint an executive officer until January 1, 2026. The bill would remove the prohibition on a sunset review document or evaluative questionnaire.
(2) Existing law requires the board to regulate and discipline registered veterinary technicians and veterinary assistants in the state, including establishing an application and examination process, and setting specified fees. Existing law requires the board, by means of examination, to determine the professional qualifications of all applicants who wish to register as veterinary technicians in California. The act requires that examination to consist of a national licensing examination and an examination specific to the animal health care tasks limited to California registered veterinary technicians, as approved by the board.
Existing law establishes requirements for eligibility to take the examination, including that the applicant be at least 18 years of age and furnish evidence of specified education.
This bill would set the application, registration, and renewal fees at $225 each. The bill would limit the examination for veterinary technicians to a national licensing examination. The bill, in lieu of the examination eligibility requirements, would instead require an applicant for registration to furnish satisfactory evidence of education, as described.
Existing law authorizes a veterinary assistant to apply for a veterinary assistant controlled substance permit, as specified, and requires the veterinary assistant to pay a controlled substance permit application fee equal to the amount the board
determines reasonably necessary to carry out the program, not to exceed $100. Existing law requires a veterinary assistant to renew a veterinary assistant controlled substance permit on or before the last day of the applicant’s birth month.
This bill would revise and recast the veterinary assistant controlled substance permit provisions. The bill would require a veterinary assistant to pay an application fee, a permit fee, and a renewal fee for the veterinary assistant controlled substance permit of $100 each. The bill would require the permit to expire midnight on the last day of the month in which the permit was issued.
This bill, beginning on and after January 1, 2023, would require a veterinary technician, veterinary assistant, and veterinary assistant controlled substances permitholder registered in the state to wear a name tag identification in any area of the veterinary premises that is accessible to members of the
public.
(3) Existing law requires the board, by means of examination, to ascertain the professional qualifications of all applicants for licenses to practice veterinary medicine in California. The act requires that examination to consist of a licensing examination that is administered on a national basis, a California state board examination, and an examination concerning the act and regulations administered by the board pursuant thereto. For purposes of reciprocity, the act provides an alternative licensing procedure in lieu of examination, that requires, among other things, that an applicant hold a current valid license in good standing in another state, Canadian province, or United States territory. Existing law requires the board to issue a temporary license valid for one year to an applicant accepted into a qualifying internship or residency program under specified conditions. Existing law requires applicants and licensees to pay various
fees related to the practice of veterinary medicine, including an application fee in an amount determined by the board, not to exceed $350.
This bill would revise and recast the examination and application requirements for applicants for veterinarian licenses to eliminate the California state board examination and to require, among other things, all applicants to disclose each state, Canadian province, or United States territory in which the applicant currently holds or has ever held a license to practice veterinary medicine, as provided. The bill would delete the above-described provision requiring the board to issue a temporary license.
This bill would require the application fee to be $350, and would require an application to be considered abandoned and the application fee forfeited if an applicant fails to complete their application within one year after it has been filed. The bill would require an applicant to notify
the board of any changes in mailing or employment address that occurred after filing the application.
The bill would revise and recast various veterinarian license fees, including removing the board’s authority to revise certain fees, as specified.
(4) Existing law requires all premises where veterinary medicine is being practiced to be registered with the board and requires every application for registration of veterinary premises to set forth the name of the responsible licensee manager who is to act for and on behalf of the licensed premises. Existing law specifies the initial and annual renewal fees for registration of a premises to be $400.
This bill would
specify that the owner or operator of a veterinary premises is required to submit a premises registration application to the board and would require the application to set forth the name of each owner or operator of the premises, including the type of corporate entity, if applicable, and the name of the premises, in addition to the name of the responsible licensee manager. The bill would require an operator or owner that is a veterinary corporation, as specified, or a corporation or other artificial legal entity to set forth in the application the names and titles of officers, directors, shareholders, and others, and to report any changes to the board within 30 days. The bill would provide that the premises registration is nontransferable. The bill would increase the initial and renewal fees for a premises to
$500 and $525, respectively.
Existing law requires the board to withhold, suspend, or revoke the registration of a veterinary premises under specified circumstances, including when the licensee manager ceases to become responsible for management of the registered premises and no substitution has been made by application.
This bill would additionally require the board to deny, suspend, or revoke registration of the veterinary premises if a premises registration holder who is not licensed under the act to practice veterinary medicine has practiced or influenced or exerted control over the provision of veterinary medicine.
This bill would prohibit a premises registration holder who is not a California-licensed veterinarian from interfering with, controlling, or otherwise directing the professional judgment of any California-licensed veterinarian or registered veterinary
technician.
(5) Existing law authorizes the board to establish one or more diversion evaluation committees to identify and rehabilitate veterinarians and registered veterinary technicians with impairment due to abuse of dangerous drugs or alcohol, affecting competency. Existing law requires the board to charge each veterinarian and registered veterinary technician who is accepted to participate in the diversion program a registration fee to be set by the board in an amount not to exceed $4,000, as provided.
This bill would rename the committees as wellness evaluation committees. The bill would authorize the board president to suspend any committee member pending an investigation into
allegations of existing alcohol or drug addiction and, after investigation, to remove them, as specified. The bill would delete the $4,000 limit on the
program registration fee and would instead require the board to charge a registration fee and reasonable administrative fees.
(6) Existing law authorizes the board to deny, revoke, or suspend a license or registration or to assess a fine for, among other things, false or misleading advertising and fraud, deception, negligence, or incompetence in the practice of veterinary medicine.
This bill would additionally authorize the board to deny, revoke, or suspend a license or registration or to assess a fine for, among other things, making any statement, claim, or advertisement that the licensee or registrant is a veterinary specialist or board certified unless the licensee or registrant is certified, as specified.
(7) Existing law prescribes the process by which the executive officer may issue a citation to a veterinarian, registered
veterinary technician, or unlicensed person acting as a veterinarian or a registered veterinary technician. Under the act, before a citation can be issued, the executive officer is required to 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. The act requires the designee to prepare a finding of fact and a recommendation upon conclusion of their review.
This bill would delete the process prescribed by the act and would instead authorize the executive officer to issue citations in accordance with provisions of law that authorize any board within the Department of Consumer Affairs to establish, by regulation, a system for the issuance of a citation to a licensee, which may contain an order of abatement or an order to pay an administrative fine assessed by the board, if the licensee is in violation of the applicable law.
Existing law prescribes the process by which a veterinarian, a registered veterinary technician, or an unlicensed person can administratively contest a civil citation or the proposed assessment of a civil penalty therefor. Existing law requires the cited person, within 10 business days after receipt of the citation, to notify the executive officer in writing of their request for an informal conference and requires the executive officer or their designee to hold an informal conference within 60 days after receiving the request.
This bill would revise and recast the procedure for contesting a violation under the act to, among other things, permit the cited person to request an informal conference within 30 days and authorize the executive officer or their designee to extend for good cause the 60-day period during which they are required to hold an informal conference. The bill would prohibit a cited person from requesting an
informal conference for a citation that was affirmed or modified following an informal conference.
(8) Existing law exempts a person from licensure and specified requirements imposed on licensees when the person engages in specified acts of veterinary care for an animal.
This bill would expand this exception to include persons
providing specified care to animals lawfully deposited with or impounded by a shelter, as defined, including administering nonprescription vaccinations, nonprescription medications, and medications pursuant to a written treatment plan. The bill would require the care to be performed pursuant to protocols written by veterinarians and by persons who receive proper
training, as defined. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
(9) This bill would make other conforming and nonsubstantive changes, including replacing gendered terms with nongendered terms, updating cross-references, and deleting obsolete provisions.
(10) 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.