BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 289
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 289 (Ed Hernandez)
As Amended August 6, 2012
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :36-2
BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS 8-0 HEALTH
16-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Hayashi, Allen, Butler, |Ayes:|Monning, Logue, Atkins, |
| |Eng, Hill, Ma, Smyth, | |Bonilla, Eng, Garrick, |
| |Silva | |Gordon, Hayashi, |
| | | |Roger Hern�ndez, Bonnie |
| | | |Lowenthal, Mansoor, |
| | | |Mitchell, Pan, |
| | | |V. Manuel P�rez, Silva, |
| | | |Williams |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fuentes, Harkey, | | |
| |Blumenfield, Bradford, | | |
| |Charles Calderon, Campos, | | |
| |Davis, Donnelly, Gatto, | | |
| |Hall, Hill, Lara, | | |
| |Mitchell, Nielsen, Norby, | | |
| |Solorio, Wagner | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Allows the Department of Public Health (DPH) to
approve additional providers of clinical laboratory instruction.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Allows DPH to approve any of the following to provide
instruction in clinical laboratory technic which in DPH's
judgment will adequately prepare individuals to meet the
requirements for licensure or performance of duties under laws
and DPH regulations governing clinical laboratory technology:
SB 289
Page 2
a) A California licensed clinical laboratory;
b) An accredited United States (U.S.) college or
university;
c) A U.S. military medical laboratory specialist program of
at least 52 weeks in duration; or,
d) A laboratory owned and operated by the U.S. government.
2)Defines a clinical training site as any place, establishment,
or institution used by a DPH-approved program for the training
of clinical laboratory scientists (CLSs) or limited CLSs to
conduct training or instruction of licensed trainees or
phlebotomy students in clinical laboratory practice,
techniques, theory or other training, as specified.
3)Revises and recasts existing definitions and makes other
technical, non-substantive and clarifying changes.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides for the licensure and regulation of clinical
laboratories and their personnel by DPH under the Laboratory
Field Services (LFS).
2)Authorizes DPH to approve schools seeking to provide
instruction in clinical laboratory technic which in the
judgment of DPH will provide instruction adequate to
prepare individuals to meet the requirements for
licensure or performance of duties, as specified.
3)Provides that it is unlawful for any person to operate a
school or conduct any course for the purpose of training
or preparing persons to perform duties, as specified,
without approval by DPH.
4)Establishes educational and examination requirements for
a number of clinical lab personnel, including CLS and
limited CLS licensees and trainees and a variety of CLS
sub-specialties.
SB 289
Page 3
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, negligible costs, if any.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "In order to be trained as a
CLS in California, the LFS has interpreted its regulations for
the past 40 years to mean that the 50-week CLS training program
be undertaken at a single site, usually a hospital or a biotech
lab. A CLS training program is costly for the host institution,
running anywhere from $55,000 to $110,000 a year per student.
Thus, running a CLS training program can be quite prohibitive
for an institution to undertake.
"SB 289 would broaden the definition of an approved training
site, and allow an institution of higher education to be an
approved training entity for a CLS training program. Please
note that the students would not train at the institution of
higher education; rather, (the bill) would allow the institution
to act as the central administrator by coordinating the 50-week
program among different hospitals/labs."
Analysis Prepared by : Angela Mapp / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301
FN: 0004692