California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 622 — Optometry.

Last action — June 28 set for final hearing canceled at the request of author.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

The Optometry Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of the practice of optometry by the State Board of Optometry, and defines the practice of optometry to include, among other things, the prevention and diagnosis of disorders and dysfunctions of the visual system, and the treatment and management of certain disorders and dysfunctions of the visual system, as well as the provision of rehabilitative optometric services, and doing certain things, including, but not limited to, the examination of the human eyes, the determination of the powers or range of human vision, and the prescribing of contact and spectacle lenses. Existing law authorizes an optometrist certified to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents to diagnose and treat specified conditions, use specified pharmaceutical agents, and order specified diagnostic tests. The act requires optometrists treating or diagnosing eye disease, as specified, to be held to the same standard of care to which physicians and surgeons and osteopathic physician and surgeons are held. The act requires an optometrist, in certain circumstances, to refer a patient to an ophthalmologist or a physician and surgeon, including when a patient has been diagnosed with a central corneal ulcer and the central corneal ulcer has not improved within 48 hours of the diagnosis. The act makes a violation of any of its provisions a crime. All moneys collected pursuant to the act, except where otherwise provided, are deposited in the Optometry Fund and continuously appropriated to the board to carry out the act. This bill would revise and recast those provisions. The bill would delete certain requirements that an optometrist refer a patient to an ophthalmologist or a physician and surgeon, including when a patient has been diagnosed with a central corneal ulcer and the central corneal ulcer has not improved within 48 hours of the diagnosis. The bill would additionally define the practice of optometry as the provision of habilitative optometric services, and would authorize the board to allow optometrists to use nonsurgical technology to treat any authorized condition under the act. The bill would additionally authorize an optometrist certified to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents to collect blood by skin puncture or venipuncture, to perform skin tests, as specified, to diagnose ocular allergies, and to use mechanical lipid extraction of meibomian glands and nonsurgical techniques. The bill would require the board to grant an optometrist certified to treat glaucoma a certificate for the use of specified immunizations if certain conditions are met, including, among others, that the optometrist is certified in basic life support. The bill would additionally authorize an optometrist certified to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents to, among other things, be certified to use anterior segment lasers, as specified, and to be certified to perform specified minor procedures, as specified, if certain requirements are met. The bill would require the board to charge a fee of not more than $150 to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of certifying an optometrist to use anterior segment lasers, a fee of not more than $150 to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of certifying an optometrist to use minor procedures, and a fee of not more than $100 to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of certifying an optometrist to use immunizations. Because this bill would increase those moneys deposited in a continuously appropriated fund, it would make an appropriation. Existing law establishes the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, which is vested with all the duties, powers, responsibilities, and jurisdiction of the State Department of Public Health relating to health planning and research development. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development designate a pilot project to test, demonstrate, and evaluate expanded roles for optometrists in the performance of management and treatment of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia. Because a violation of the act is a crime, this bill would expand the scope of an existing crime and would, therefore, result in a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. June 28 set for final hearing canceled at the request of author.

  2. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  3. June 21 hearing postponed by committee.

  4. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.

  5. July 14 set for second hearing canceled at the request of author.

  6. July 7 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  7. Referred to Com. on B. & P.

  8. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  9. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 4. Page 1070.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1034.) (May 18).

  12. Set for hearing May 18.

  13. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  14. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 794.) (April 27).

  15. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.

  16. Set for hearing April 27.

  17. April 13 hearing postponed by committee.

  18. Set for hearing April 13.

  19. Referred to Coms. on B., P. & E.D. and APPR.

  20. Read first time.

  21. From printer. May be acted upon on or after April 1.

  22. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Hernandez · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Hernandez

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.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

3rd Reading

Passed 33 Yea · 4 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 31302
Democratic 2100
Total 33402
% of votes cast 85%10%0%5%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Nay
Block — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Pan — Nay
Pavley — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Fuller — Not Voting
Galgiani — Yea
Runner — Nay
Bates — Not Voting
Beall — Yea
Huff — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Allen — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Hill — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Monning — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Roth — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Hall — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Nielsen — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

healthcare labor health-insurance
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 622 do?
The Optometry Practice Act provides for the licensure and regulation of the practice of optometry by the State Board of Optometry, and defines the practice of optometry to include, among other things, the prevention and diagnosis of disorders and dysfunctions of the visual system, and the treatment and management of certain disorders and dysfunctions of the visual system, as well as the provision of rehabilitative optometric services, and doing certain things, including, but not limited to, the examination of the human eyes, the determination of the powers or range of human vision, and the prescribing of contact and spectacle lenses. Existing law authorizes an optometrist certified to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents to diagnose and treat specified conditions, use specified pharmaceutical agents, and order specified diagnostic tests. The act requires optometrists treating or diagnosing eye disease, as specified, to be held to the same standard of care to which physicians and surgeons and osteopathic physician and surgeons are held. The act requires an optometrist, in certain circumstances, to refer a patient to an ophthalmologist or a physician and surgeon, including when a patient has been diagnosed with a central corneal ulcer and the central corneal ulcer has not improved within 48 hours of the diagnosis. The act makes a violation of any of its provisions a crime. All moneys collected pursuant to the act, except where otherwise provided, are deposited in the Optometry Fund and continuously appropriated to the board to carry out the act. This bill would revise and recast those provisions. The bill would delete certain requirements that an optometrist refer a patient to an ophthalmologist or a physician and surgeon, including when a patient has been diagnosed with a central corneal ulcer and the central corneal ulcer has not improved within 48 hours of the diagnosis. The bill would additionally define the practice of optometry as the provision of habilitative optometric services, and would authorize the board to allow optometrists to use nonsurgical technology to treat any authorized condition under the act. The bill would additionally authorize an optometrist certified to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents to collect blood by skin puncture or venipuncture, to perform skin tests, as specified, to diagnose ocular allergies, and to use mechanical lipid extraction of meibomian glands and nonsurgical techniques. The bill would require the board to grant an optometrist certified to treat glaucoma a certificate for the use of specified immunizations if certain conditions are met, including, among others, that the optometrist is certified in basic life support. The bill would additionally authorize an optometrist certified to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents to, among other things, be certified to use anterior segment lasers, as specified, and to be certified to perform specified minor procedures, as specified, if certain requirements are met. The bill would require the board to charge a fee of not more than $150 to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of certifying an optometrist to use anterior segment lasers, a fee of not more than $150 to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of certifying an optometrist to use minor procedures, and a fee of not more than $100 to cover the reasonable regulatory cost of certifying an optometrist to use immunizations. Because this bill would increase those moneys deposited in a continuously appropriated fund, it would make an appropriation. Existing law establishes the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, which is vested with all the duties, powers, responsibilities, and jurisdiction of the State Department of Public Health relating to health planning and research development. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development designate a pilot project to test, demonstrate, and evaluate expanded roles for optometrists in the performance of management and treatment of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia. Because a violation of the act is a crime, this bill would expand the scope of an existing crime and would, therefore, result in a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors SB 622?
SB 622 is sponsored by Hernandez.
What is the current status of SB 622?
This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 622?
Track SB 622 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 622

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.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 622

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →