BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 975|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 975
Author: Wright (D)
Amended: 5/14/12
Vote: 21
SENATE BUSINESS, PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMM. : 7-1, 5/7/12
AYES: Price, Emmerson, Correa, Hernandez, Negrete McLeod,
Vargas, Wyland
NOES: Corbett
NO VOTE RECORDED: Strickland
SUBJECT : Professions and vocations: regulatory
authority
SOURCE : American Council of Engineering Companies of
California
DIGEST : This bill provides that the regulatory boards
within Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) shall have the
sole and exclusive authority to license and regulate the
practice of professions and vocations regulated by those
boards; provides that no city, county, city and county,
school district, other special district, local or regional
agency, or joint powers agency, shall impose a licensing
requirement upon a person licensed to practice a profession
or vocation regulated by a DCA board; makes legislative
findings and declarations.
ANALYSIS :
CONTINUED
SB 975
Page
2
Existing law:
1.Provides for the licensing and regulation of more than
2.4 million professionals in more than 255 professions
and 100 businesses by some 40 boards, bureaus, committees
(boards) and other programs within the DCA under various
licensing acts within the Business and Professions Code
(BPC).
2.Requires the DCA boards to license, register, or certify
practitioners, to assure that the licensed professional
has met the minimum qualifications for licensure,
investigate and resolve complaints between consumers and
licensed professionals, and discipline licensees for
violation of any laws or their licensing acts, including
those who may practice outside of their scope of practice
or are involved in unlicensed activity.
3.Requires certain licensed professions to meet specified
continuing education requirements in order to renew a
license.
4.Provides that no city or county shall prohibit a person,
authorized by one of these boards in a particular
business from engaging in that business, and shall not
prohibit a healing arts professional licensed by one of
those boards from engaging in any act or performing any
procedure that falls within the professionally recognized
scope of practice of that licensee.
This bill:
1.Makes legislative findings and declarations, including:
A. If other state governmental entities or local
governmental entities were to require persons licensed
by a board within the DCA to satisfy additional
licensing requirements in order to practice their
professions or vocations, before or within the
respective governmental entity, this would impose
enormous regulatory burdens upon the licensed persons.
B. The practice of adopting continuing education
requirements through regulatory action, and the
CONTINUED
SB 975
Page
3
imposition of mandatory training programs to satisfy
requirements for licensure, certification, or
registration, is becoming more prevalent.
C. The imposition of educational and training
requirements by these governmental entities, in
addition to state licensing requirements, inhibits the
practice of those licensed professions.
D. Further, as additional licensing requirements are
imposed, it is becoming difficult and impractical for
the state and local governmental entities to
administer conflicting and diverse requirements,
resulting in greater confusion and increased costs.
E. It is therefore imperative that licensed
professions and vocations have a single set of
licensing requirements that apply uniformly throughout
the state and apply equally in all state and local
governmental entities, and that licensed professionals
clearly understand the expectations with which they
must comply in order to legally operate within their
scopes of practice in the state.
1.Provides that the boards within DCA shall have the sole
and exclusive authority to license and regulate the
practice of professions and vocations regulated by those
boards under the BPC.
2.Provides that no city, county, city and county, school
district, other special district, local or regional
agency or joint powers agency, shall impose a licensing
requirement upon a person licensed to practice a
profession or vocation regulated by a DCA board.
3.Specifies that a licensing requirement shall not be
imposed upon a person licensed to practice a profession
or vocation regulated by a DCA board other than by the
BPC or by a regulation adopted by a board through its
regulatory authority.
4.Defines, for the purposes of the bill, "licensing
requirements" to include:
CONTINUED
SB 975
Page
4
A. Additional training or certification requirements
to practice within the scope of practice of a
profession or vocation.
B. Continuing education requirements for renewal or
continuation of licensure.
C. Any additional expense or qualification requirement
beyond those in the BPC or in board regulations.
1.Provides that nothing in the bill shall be construed to
either:
A. Prohibit parties from contractually agreeing to
additional experience, qualifications, or training of
a licensee in connection with performance of a
contract.
B. Prohibit a licensee from voluntarily undertaking
satisfaction of certification programs not required
under the BPC for licensure by a board.
Background
Business Licensure/Continuing Education Examples. The
author raises the following examples of the types of
additional requirements that have been placed or proposed
to be placed upon licensed professionals by state or local
agencies:
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution District requires
participation in a mandatory Dust Control Training
Course. This course is mandatory training for anyone who
prepares and submits a Dust Control Plan to the District.
Dust Control Plans and best management practices on
construction projects already fall under the scope of
professional licensure and responsibility; such as
contractors and engineers.
The State Water Resources Control Board General
Construction permit requires already licensed civil
engineers, geologists, landscape architects,
hydrologists, and others to undergo a 2-3 day training
class and pass a certificate examination in order to
CONTINUED
SB 975
Page
5
prepare a storm water plan. The total cost for this
program is roughly $700-$800 per person. The training is
essentially reading through the permit requirements.
The California Commission on Disability Access has
invited the public to provide input or comments to its
Certified Access Specialist & Education Committee on
whether training and continuing education requirements
should be enacted for landscape architects, professional
engineers and contractors to provide these professionals
with sufficient knowledge of the state and federal
disability access laws and regulations.
The California Energy Commission Lead Commissioner for
Energy Efficiency recently conducted a workshop to take
public comment on proposals received from the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the
California Local Unions of Sheet Metal Workers. These
organizations propose that only contractors who are
trained and certified by specific certification programs
should be allowed to perform the "acceptance testing"
that is required of specific equipment by the Building
Energy Efficiency Standards.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/14/12)
American Council of Engineering Companies of California
(source)
Associated General Contractors
California Business Properties Association
California Chapter of the American Fence Association
California Fence Contractors Association
California Geotechnical Engineering Association
California Land Surveyors Association
California Landscape Contractors Association
California Manufactures and Technology Association
California Metals Coalition
California Pharmacists Association
California Retailers Association
Engineering Contractors Association
Flasher Barricade Association
CONTINUED
SB 975
Page
6
Marin Builders Association
National Federation of Independent Business
Southern California Contractors Association
State of California Auto Dismantlers Association
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/14/12)
California State Association of Electrical Workers
California State Pipe Trades Council
Department of Consumer Affairs
Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the American Council
of Engineering Companies of California (ACEC), this bill
seeks to address a growing practice for third party state
and local agencies, departments, local bodies (State Water
Resources Control Board, California Energy Commission,
local air pollution districts, among others) to impose a
training class and certificate program on licensed
professionals in the course of adopting regulations.
ACEC states that these training and certificate
requirements are created and imposed outside of, and in
addition to, the licensure requirements adopted by state
statute and enforced by DCA professional boards. Licensed
professionals must then comply with these mandates in order
to meet the permit requirements, even if the scope of work
is clearly already within their professional licensure as
determined by their DCA Board.
ACEC further argues that this forced "continuing education"
occurs outside of the state law that sets standards for
professional licensure and conduct through DCA. "This
practice incurs costs to business, individuals, and only
benefits the cottage industries of instructors and
certificate associations that collaborate in the imposition
of these programs."
ACEC contends that the bill would establish that the
boards, bureaus, and commissions in the DCA shall have the
sole responsibility in state government to license and
regulate the practice of professions regulated by the
Business and Professions Code, unless explicit statutory
authority directs a third party agency to implement such a
CONTINUED
SB 975
Page
7
program.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Department of Consumer
Affairs opposes this bill, stating: "The Department
believes that the proposed statutory language is simply
unneeded to protect its licensing boards and bureaus'
jurisdiction and could even result in unforeseen or
unintended problems between state agencies. Further, the
Department understands that this bill was introduced
following last year's AB 1210 (Garrick, 2011), which the
Governor did not sign. The State Water Resources Control
Board should be given time to follow the direction it
received in the Governor's veto message of that bill, which
may ultimately solve the problem of this bill's sponsor
without legislation."
JJA:nlm 5/15/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED