BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Hearing Date:July 1, 2013 |Bill No:AB |
| |186 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Ted W. Lieu, Chair
Bill No: AB 186 Author: Maienschein
As Amended: June 24, 2013Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Professions and vocations: military spouses: temporary
licenses.
SUMMARY: Requires all licensing entities under the Department of
Consumer Affairs (DCA) to provide military spouses and domestic
partners, who hold a valid professional license in another state, an
18 month provisional license to practice in California.
Existing law:
1) Provides for the licensure and regulation of various professions
and vocations by boards within the DCA.
2) Defines "license" as a license, certificate, registration or other
means to engage in a business or profession regulated by the
Business and Professions Code (BPC). (BPC � 23.7)
3) Defines "board" as a board, bureau, commission, committee,
department, division, examining committee, program or agency within
the DCA. (BPC � 22)
4) Defines "military service" as federal service after October 1,
1940, where a military member is on active duty with any branch of
service as well as training or education under the supervision of
the United States preliminary to induction into the military
service.
(BPC � 10460 (c))
5) Defines "active service" or "active duty" as the period during
which a person in military service is absent from duty on account
AB 186
Page 2
of sickness, wounds, leave, or other lawful cause.
(BPC � 10460 (c))
6) Specifies that a board within DCA shall expedite the licensure
process for an applicant who meets both of the following
requirements: (BPC � 155.5)
a) Supplies evidence satisfactory to the board that the
applicant is married to, or in a domestic partnership or other
legal union with, an active duty member of the Armed Forces of
the United States who is assigned to a duty station in this
state under official active duty military orders.
b) Holds a current license in another state, district, or
territory of the United States in the profession or vocation for
which he or she seeks a license from the board.
This bill:
1) Requires the boards within DCA to issue a 12-month temporary
license to an applicant who is a military spouse or domestic
partner while the license application is being processed, if:
a) The applicant supplies satisfactory evidence that the
applicant is married to, or in a domestic partnership or other
legal union with, an active duty member of the Armed Forces of
the United States who is assigned to a duty station in this
state under official active duty military orders;
b) The applicant holds a current license in another state,
district or territory of the United States in the profession or
vocation for which he or she seeks a license from the board;
c) The applicant submits an affidavit attesting that the
information submitted in the application is accurate;
d) The applicant submits written verification from the
applicant's original licensing jurisdiction stating that the
applicant's license is in good standing;
e) The applicant, upon the board's request, submits fingerprints
for a background check;
f) The applicant has not committed any act in any jurisdiction
that constitutes grounds for the denial, suspension, or
revocation of the professional license by the board under the
AB 186
Page 3
Business and Professions Code (BPC) at the time the act was
committed; and,
g) The applicant was not disciplined by a licensing entity in
another jurisdiction and is not the subject of an unresolved
complaint, review procedure, or disciplinary proceeding
conducted by a licensing entity in another jurisdiction.
2) Specifies that a board within DCA may adopt necessary regulations
to enact this legislation.
3) Indicates that any temporary license for the practice of medicine
may be immediately terminated if it is found that the individual
violated any requirements or provided inaccurate information that
would affect their eligibility for licensure.
4) Permits the boards within DCA to issue a notice to cease the
practice of medicine immediately upon receipt of the notification
of the termination of the temporary license.
5) Specifies that the provisions of the bill shall not apply to a
board within DCA that has established a temporary licensing process
before January 1, 2014.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee
analysis dated April 22, 2013, if the BreEZe system is fully
implemented prior to the completion of the regulations for the new
provisional license type, the cost to DCA would be under $100,000.
However if there are delays in the implementation of BreEZe, one-time
costs to DCA would be approximately $500,000.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the Author. According to the
Author, "The wait time for expedited licenses can be very long, and
spouses can't even begin seeking employment until their license has
been approved. A December article in USAA Magazine described the
process as taking many months even after all appropriate
documentation has been submitted, fees being paid, and tests taken
to receive the license. The unemployment rate amongst military
spouses is estimated to be about 26% which is three times the
national average."
2. Background. According to a 2005 study conducted by the RAND
AB 186
Page 4
National Defense Research Institute, the majority of military
spouses are less likely to be employed, more likely to be seeking
work and earn less than comparable civilian spouses. Military
spouses versus civilian spouses are more likely to live in
metropolitan areas. Moreover, they are more likely to have
graduated from high school and to have some college education.
These facts would ostensibly increase their employability.
However, due to "military lifestyle" which includes frequent moves,
deployments and long hours that keep service members from assisting
with parenting, employment opportunities for spouses are negatively
impacted.
Current data suggests:
68% of married military members report that their spouse's
ability to maintain a career impacts their decision to remain
in the military.
67% of military spouses report that they want or need to
work.
The annual percent of the military spouse population that
moves across state lines is14.5%, compared to 11% for civilian
spouses.
As much as 34% of military spouses in the labor force are
required to be fully licensed.
19% of employed spouses experience challenges maintaining
their licenses.
1. United States Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of the
Treasury (DOT) Report. On January 24, 2011, United States
President Barack Obama presented Strengthening Our Military
Families: Meeting America's Commitment, a document urging agencies
to support and improve the lives of military families.
As a result of the President's directive, the United States DOT and
the United States DOD issued a joint report to highlight the impact
of state occupational licensing requirements on the careers of
military spouses, who frequently move across state lines. Released
in February 2012, the report, Supporting our Military Families:
Best Practices for Streamlining Occupational Licensing Across State
Lines revealed that approximately 35% of military spouses work in
professions that require state licenses or certification and that
military spouses are ten times more likely to have moved to another
AB 186
Page 5
state in the last year compared to their civilian counterparts.
The report also listed jobs military spouses commonly accepted and
revealed how licensing requirements impacted employment
opportunities: "Teaching is the most common occupation among
military spouses, followed by child care services, and nursing.
While many of the common occupations among military spouses are not
licensed, some of the most popular professions, including teaching
and nursing, do require licensure. In a 2008 Defense Manpower Data
Center survey of active duty military spouses, participants were
asked what would have helped them with their employment search
after their last military move. Nearly 40% of those respondents
who have moved indicated that 'easier state-to-state transfer of
certification' would have helped them."
As a result of the survey, the United States DOT and DOD issued
several recommendations, including the authorization of temporary
licenses for military spouses if the applicant met state
requirements. The report's recommendation specified: "Temporary
licenses allow applicants to be employed while they fulfill all of
the requirements for a permanent license, including examinations or
endorsement, applications and additional fees. In developing
expedited approaches that save military spouses time and money, DOD
does not want to make licensure easier for military spouses to
achieve at the expense of degrading their perceived value in their
profession."
2. Military Spouses Employment Partnership. On June 29, 2011, the
Military Spouse Employment Partnership (MSEP) was launched at the
Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. The MSEP program is an
expansion of the Army Spouse Employment Partnership program and is
focused on helping military spouses from all branches of the
military attain financial security and achieve educational and
employment goals.
Through a website, the MSEP creates a gateway for military spouses and
corporate and non-profit organizations to interact. The MSEP has
been the latest development in an effort backed by President Barack
Obama's administration to do more to help military families. In
May of 2012, 34 companies joined the MSEP and pledged to recruit,
hire, promote and retain military spouses in portable careers.
3. Expedited Licensure for Military Spouses. In 2012, AB 1904 (Block,
Chapter 399, Statutes of 2012) was passed. This bill required all
licensing entities under the DCA to issue an expedited license to
the spouse or domestic partner of a military member on active duty,
AB 186
Page 6
beginning January 1, 2013. To date, there is no available data on
how many expedited licenses have been granted by the DCA licensing
entities to military spouses or domestic partners.
4. Arguments in Support. The American Legion-Department of
California , AMVETS- Department of California , California State
Commanders Veterans Council , VFW- Department of California and
Vietnam Veterans of America- California State Council wrote a joint
letter of support for the bill. In it they indicate, "We support
this bill because it will help qualified military spouses to be
employed in their licensed field of expertise quickly under a
provisional license rather than having to wait to get a job until
they get through the process of obtaining a California license if
they already are licensed in another state."
Brigadier General Vincent A. Coglianese writes, "The White House
Joining Forces initiative has called attention to the barriers
currently preventing military spouses from maintaining employment
on a normal progression path regardless of relocation.
Consequently, the majority of military spouses are less likely to
be employed, more likely to be seeking work and earn less than
comparable civilian spouses, despite possessing more education and
employable skills than the average population. One often-faced
barrier is the lack of broad-based reciprocity among the states for
recognizing professional licenses or certificates held by military
spouses. This bill, by requiring boards?to issue a temporary
license to the spouse of a service member, would help address this
barrier."
The Commander, Navy Region Southwest supports the bill and writes,
"On behalf of Navy installations in California, I am writing in
support of AB 186. The ability of a military spouse to continue
their professional life is an important part of maintaining
households during periods of long deployments, and is especially
needed for military families based in higher cost urban areas such
as southern California."
The National Military Family Association , the California
Association for Health Services at Home and the San Diego Military
Advisory Council also support the bill. They believe that the lack
of broad-based reciprocity among the states to recognize
professional licenses or certificates creates a significant barrier
to employment. With each government ordered move, military spouses
incur high costs for recertification and delays before they are
able to work. They believe that provisional licenses will permit
military spouses to become employed quickly, financially benefiting
AB 186
Page 7
the family and the state of California.
The Department of Defense states, "We appreciate any concern for
protecting the public and would not want a spouse to be licensed
when they are not qualified or would pose a danger to those they
served. The spouses we are referring to in this bill are all
licensed in another state. We understand that the reason for
licensing is to safeguard the public, and we believe (as several
other states believe) that providing a temporary license to a
military spouse who is already licensed in another state and who
has had experience in that licensed occupation presents little risk
to the public."
5. Support if Amended. The Board of Behavioral Sciences (BBS)
submitted a letter reflecting their support if amended position.
In it they state, "The BBS supports the intent of this bill to
assist spouses of military members to quickly obtain employment.
However, the Board respectfully requests three additional
amendments in order to ensure consumer protection is upheld:
An amendment to require that the temporary license
applicant provide a transcript to the licensing board;
An amendment requiring the temporary license applicant to
pass the Board's California Law and Ethics examination prior to
the issuance of the temporary license; and,
An amendment allowing delayed implementation to
accommodate DCA's transition to the new BreEZe database
system."
The California Board of Accountancy (CBA) also supports the bill if
amended. In their letter they write, "The CBA supports the
military and their families; however, it would like to request an
amendment to clarify that an individual's license must be current,
active and unrestricted with the authority to practice the
identified profession in the state that issued the individual's
license."
The Medical Board of California indicates, "The Board is supportive
of this bill if it is amended to include language that would allow
for termination of the temporary license if it is found that the
individual issued the temporary license violated any requirements
in the bill or provided substantive inaccurate information that
would affect their eligibility for licensure. The Board has
requested this amendment in order to ensure consumer protection and
AB 186
Page 8
has been working with the author's office to draft language that
will address the Board's concerns, which the author's office has
agreed to take. Once this language is amended into the bill, the
Board will be supportive of AB 186." (Note: The Author has taken
the amendments suggested by the MBC)
1. Oppose Unless Amended. The American Association for Marriage and
Family Therapy- California Division opposes the bill unless the
following three amendments are taken:
Require either a 12-hour course in California Law and
Ethics or successful completion of a state-administered
California Law and Ethics exam prior to the issuance of the
license;
Require that the licensee provide proof that their license
is active and in good standing prior to the issuance of the
license; and,
Require that the licensure requirements of the applicant's
home state be substantially equivalent to those of California.
The Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists
opposes the bill unless amended. In their letter they write, "The
Board voted to oppose AB 186 unless amended because it would not be
able to comply with the proposed law in all cases. Most engineers
coming to California with a current license in another state can be
issued a California license through comity in a matter of weeks.
Civil, Geotechnical and Structural engineers, Land Surveyors and
Geologists coming to California must take and pass California exams
specific to their discipline before they can be issued a license,
which would also include a provisional license. The California
examinations cover seismic issues specific to California,
consequently, the Board would be negligent if it issued a license
to someone who may not be familiar with the terrain, soils, and
seismic issues of this State. Fortunately these five disciplines
can practice, and therefore work, in California under the
responsible charge of another licensee who can review their work
and sign and stamp plans, but they cannot be issued a license until
they have passed the state specific examination."
The California Architects Board opposes the bill unless amended.
They write, "Although the Board unequivocally supports members of
our nation's Armed Forces and initiatives that address the
challenges facing military families, it cannot waive the California
Supplemental Examination requirement (CSE). The CSE is a critical
AB 186
Page 9
licensure requirement which all licensees in our state must
complete, demonstrating competence in California's seismic,
accessibility, energy and legal requirements. The Board cannot
waive the CSE requirement and simultaneously meet its mandate to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the public."
1. Arguments in Opposition. The Board of Chiropractic Examiners (BCE)
opposes the bill. They contend, "The Board fears that issuing a
license to applicants prior to completing the full background check
and license verification would put the public at risk of potential
harm. Affidavits do not ensure that the information included in
the application is truthful. Additionally, the mandate to issue
temporary licenses in this bill conflicts with the Chiropractic
Initiative Act. The Act defines the educational requirements,
fees, and conditions under which the BCE may issue a license to
practice chiropractic. Lastly, the Act prohibits the BCE from
reciprocating licenses with states that do not have similar
requirements and do not reciprocate licenses with California. The
Act was created through an initiative measure in 1922 and can only
be changed through a ballot initiative. Therefore, the BCE is
unable to comply with the provisions in this bill."
The Contractors State License Board (CSLB) also opposes the bill.
In their letter they write, "The Board respectively requests an
amendment to provide an exemption from the bill's provisions.
..CSLB supports the goal of assisting military families. However,
as required by recent legislation, CSLB expedites applications for
military spouses and does not believe its licensing process is so
long as to require the need for a temporary license. Additionally,
as there is no exam requirement for the temporary license, these
individuals will have the ability to contract but will not be
required to be familiar with California law or building code
requirements with which they need to comply. We believe this may
put California consumers at risk."
2. Policy Issues for Consideration. The goal and spirit of this
legislation is to promote expedited licensure for military spouses
and domestic partners. As illustrated in the background section of
this analysis, the need for this action has been well studied and
documented. Further, there is a federal effort to encourage state
licensing entities to adopt policies that will assist in expediting
the licensure process for military spouses. In response, the
California Legislature passed AB 1904 in 2012. Despite this, AB
186 attempts to promote even more timely expedition of licenses by
the DCA licensing entities by granting an immediate provisional
license for a military spouse to practice in California.
AB 186
Page 10
Despite this measure's laudable efforts, it is equally important to
note that the expediting of licensure should not result in
compromised consumer protection or limit the authority of the
licensing entities to exercise discretion when issuing licenses.
Specifically, as noted in the United States DOT and DOD
recommendations, "In developing expedited approaches that save
military spouses time and money, DOD does not want to make
licensure easier for military spouses to achieve at the expense of
degrading their perceived value in their profession." Further,
this bill raises concerns about the ability of the DCA licensing
entities to carry out the bill's mandates. Notably, as indicated
in the opposition letters submitted by several licensing boards,
this bill raises questions about consumer protection as necessary
background checks and verification of California specific
coursework, examinations and training requirements would be waived
if a provisional license was immediately granted to a military
spouse or domestic partner. Lastly, this bill may be premature as
there has not been adequate time to study the results of the new
expedited licensure requirements that went into effect on January
1, 2013.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
American Legion- Department of California
AMVETS- Department of California
Brigadier General Vincent A. Coglianese
California Architects Board
California Association for Health Services at Home
California State Commanders Veterans Council
Commander, Navy Region Southwest
National Military Family Association
San Diego Military Advisory Council
United States Department of Defense
VFW- Department of California
Vietnam Veterans of America- California State Council
Support if Amended:
Board of Behavioral Sciences
California Board of Accountancy
Medical Board of California
AB 186
Page 11
Oppose Unless Amended:
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy- California
Division
Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists
California Architects Board
Oppose:
Board of Chiropractic Examiners
Contractors State License Board
Consultant:Le Ondra Clark, Ph.D.