BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1092


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  May 13, 2015


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                                 Jimmy Gomez, Chair


          AB  
          1092 (Mullin) - As Amended May 4, 2015


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Business and Professions       |Vote:|13 - 0       |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill establishes a registration program for Magnetic  
          Resonance Imaging (MRI) technologists under the California  
          Department of Public Health (CDPH).


          FISCAL EFFECT:






                                                                    AB 1092


                                                                    Page  2







          1)One-time GF costs over the first two years, likely in the  
            range of $1 million over two years.  This includes development  
            of policies and procedures, promulgation of regulations,  
            mailing regulatory advisory packages to the regulated  
            community, and information technology costs. 


          2)Ongoing costs, likely in the range of $200,000 for staff and  
            IT support, would be fee-supported GF costs.  Assuming 3,000  
            registrants, fees would be approximately $80.  


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose.  This bill is intended to gather more data on who is  
            performing MRI and provide oversight of MRI-related accidents.  
             The author believes of the regulatory approaches available,  
            registration is the least burdensome option for providers, and  
            will permit collection of information that can further inform  
            regulatory strategy. The author concludes this bill is a good  
            step towards better MRI safety and practices.


          2)Background. According to the FDA, MRI is a medical imaging  
            procedure that uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to  
            produce cross-sectional images of organs and internal  
            structures in the body.  Although MRI is safer than the more  
            stringently regulated ionizing radiation techniques, such as  
            computed tomography (CT), fluoroscopy, and radiography  
            (X-ray), MRI machines are not without safety concerns.  For  
            example, loose, ferrous metal objects may cause damage or  
            injury if pulled toward the magnet.  The magnet can also cause  
            pacemakers, artificial limbs, and other implanted medical  
            devices containing ferrous metal to malfunction or heat up.    
            MRI technologists are not overseen by any state entity in  
            California, though private certifications exist and are widely  
            required in order to work as an MRI technologist. Two other  
            states, Oregon and West Virginia, require licenses for MRI  






                                                                    AB 1092


                                                                    Page  3





            technologists. 


          3)Staff Comments. This bill is silent with respect to where fees  
            are deposited.  Staff suggests a relevant special fund be  
            identified and the bill be amended to clearly state the  
            program is supported by those fee revenues in the identified  
            fund.  


          Analysis Prepared by:Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081