SB 588 — Medical records: reproduction fees.
Last action — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
(1) Before the filing of an action or the appearance of a defendant in an action, existing law requires certain enumerated health care providers to make all of a patient's records under their custody or control available for inspection and copying by an attorney at law, or his or her representative, who presents a written authorization therefor, as specified. Existing law authorizes any person or enumerated health care provider to charge all reasonable costs incurred in making the patient records available against the person whose written authorization required the availability of the records, as specified. Where the medical records are delivered to the attorney or the attorney's representative for inspection or photocopying at the record custodian's place of business, existing law prohibits the fee for complying with the authorization from exceeding $15 dollars, plus actual costs, as specified. This bill would provide that, where the records are delivered to the attorney or the attorney's representative for inspection or copying at the record custodian's place of business and if any portion of the patient's medical records is stored on paper, the fee for complying with the authorization would be $15 dollars, plus actual costs, as specified. If any portion of the records is stored electronically and is inaccessible for inspection or copying, the bill would authorize the health care provider, in its sole discretion, to produce a paper copy of the electronic records for the attorney to inspect and copy, and to charge specified fees. The bill would delete the provision that authorizes all reasonable costs to be charged against the person whose written authorization required the production of copies of the records, and would instead require an attorney who requests that the health care provider provide paper or electronic copies of the medical records to pay certain fees, including a search and retrieval fee of $30 dollars; a fee of 50 cents per page for the first 25 pages and 25 cents for each additional page, as specified; a fee of 50 cents per page for reproduction of documents stored on microfilm, oversize documents, or documents requiring special processing; actual postage charges, as specified; and the actual cost, if any, charged to the witness by a third party for the retrieval and return of records held offsite by that third party. The bill also would require the health care provider to provide electronic copies of a patient's medical records that are stored electronically, under specified conditions. This bill would, no later than December 1 of each year, require the Director of the California Department of Health Care Services to examine the need to increase or decrease the specified fees by making a calculation based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, as specified, and would authorize the Director to increase or decrease the fees at his or her sole discretion. The bill would prohibit the fees from remaining unchanged for 3 consecutive years unless the Consumer Price Index does not change during that 3-year period. The bill would require any changes to the rates to be effective on January 1 following the December 1 calculation and to be published on the Department of Health Care Services Internet Web site on or before that date. (2) Existing law provides for procedures for the production of business records pursuant to a subpoena duces tecum. Existing law authorizes all reasonable costs, as specified, incurred by a nonparty witness to be charged against the party serving the subpoena duces tecum. This bill would clarify that the reasonable costs incurred by a nonparty witness do not apply to fees incurred in response to a subpoena for the production of medical records. Instead, the fees established for the production of medical records pursuant to an authorization would apply to the production of medical records in response to a subpoena.
Bill Text
- Amended 04/08/13 - Amended Senate Current pdf April 08, 2013
- Introduced 02/22/13 - Introduced pdf February 22, 2013
- SB588 View text html
Action History
-
Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 617.) (April 17). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
-
Set for hearing April 17.
-
Referred to Coms. on HEALTH and JUD.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 25.
-
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Emmerson · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Emmerson
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 89% | 0% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Not Voting |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 588 do?
- (1) Before the filing of an action or the appearance of a defendant in an action, existing law requires certain enumerated health care providers to make all of a patient's records under their custody or control available for inspection and copying by an attorney at law, or his or her representative, who presents a written authorization therefor, as specified. Existing law authorizes any person or enumerated health care provider to charge all reasonable costs incurred in making the patient records available against the person whose written authorization required the availability of the records, as specified. Where the medical records are delivered to the attorney or the attorney's representative for inspection or photocopying at the record custodian's place of business, existing law prohibits the fee for complying with the authorization from exceeding $15 dollars, plus actual costs, as specified. This bill would provide that, where the records are delivered to the attorney or the attorney's representative for inspection or copying at the record custodian's place of business and if any portion of the patient's medical records is stored on paper, the fee for complying with the authorization would be $15 dollars, plus actual costs, as specified. If any portion of the records is stored electronically and is inaccessible for inspection or copying, the bill would authorize the health care provider, in its sole discretion, to produce a paper copy of the electronic records for the attorney to inspect and copy, and to charge specified fees. The bill would delete the provision that authorizes all reasonable costs to be charged against the person whose written authorization required the production of copies of the records, and would instead require an attorney who requests that the health care provider provide paper or electronic copies of the medical records to pay certain fees, including a search and retrieval fee of $30 dollars; a fee of 50 cents per page for the first 25 pages and 25 cents for each additional page, as specified; a fee of 50 cents per page for reproduction of documents stored on microfilm, oversize documents, or documents requiring special processing; actual postage charges, as specified; and the actual cost, if any, charged to the witness by a third party for the retrieval and return of records held offsite by that third party. The bill also would require the health care provider to provide electronic copies of a patient's medical records that are stored electronically, under specified conditions. This bill would, no later than December 1 of each year, require the Director of the California Department of Health Care Services to examine the need to increase or decrease the specified fees by making a calculation based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, as specified, and would authorize the Director to increase or decrease the fees at his or her sole discretion. The bill would prohibit the fees from remaining unchanged for 3 consecutive years unless the Consumer Price Index does not change during that 3-year period. The bill would require any changes to the rates to be effective on January 1 following the December 1 calculation and to be published on the Department of Health Care Services Internet Web site on or before that date. (2) Existing law provides for procedures for the production of business records pursuant to a subpoena duces tecum. Existing law authorizes all reasonable costs, as specified, incurred by a nonparty witness to be charged against the party serving the subpoena duces tecum. This bill would clarify that the reasonable costs incurred by a nonparty witness do not apply to fees incurred in response to a subpoena for the production of medical records. Instead, the fees established for the production of medical records pursuant to an authorization would apply to the production of medical records in response to a subpoena.
- Who sponsors SB 588?
- SB 588 is sponsored by Emmerson.
- What is the current status of SB 588?
- This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 588?
- Track SB 588 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 588
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 588
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →