AB 120 - An Act to Amend Sections 809, 809.2, and 809.3 Of, and to Add Sections 809.04, 809.07, and 809.08 To, the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Healing Arts.

An Act to Amend Sections 809, 809.2, and 809.3 Of, and to Add Sections 809.04, 809.07, and 809.08 To, the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Healing Arts.

AB 120 — 2009-2010 Legislature

Summary

Existing law provides for the professional review of specified healing arts licentiates through a peer review process conducted by peer review bodies, as defined.

This bill would encourage a peer review body to obtain external peer review, as defined, for the evaluation or investigation of an applicant, privilegeholder, or member of the medical staff in specified circumstances.

This bill would require a peer review body to respond to the request of another peer review body and produce the records reasonably requested concerning a licentiate under review, as specified. The bill would specify that the records produced pursuant to this provision are not subject to discovery, as specified, and may only be used for peer review purposes.

Existing law requires the governing body of acute care hospitals to give great weight to the actions of peer review bodies and authorizes the governing body to direct the peer review body to investigate in specified instances. Where the peer review body fails to take action in response to that direction, existing law authorizes the governing body to take action against a licentiate.

This bill would prohibit a… More

Existing law provides for the professional review of specified healing arts licentiates through a peer review process conducted by peer review bodies, as defined.

This bill would encourage a peer review body to obtain external peer review, as defined, for the evaluation or investigation of an applicant, privilegeholder, or member of the medical staff in specified circumstances.

This bill would require a peer review body to respond to the request of another peer review body and produce the records reasonably requested concerning a licentiate under review, as specified. The bill would specify that the records produced pursuant to this provision are not subject to discovery, as specified, and may only be used for peer review purposes.

Existing law requires the governing body of acute care hospitals to give great weight to the actions of peer review bodies and authorizes the governing body to direct the peer review body to investigate in specified instances. Where the peer review body fails to take action in response to that direction, existing law authorizes the governing body to take action against a licentiate.

This bill would prohibit a member of a medical or professional staff from being required to alter or surrender staff privileges, status, or membership solely due to the termination of a contract between that member and a health care facility, except as specified. The bill would specify that a peer review body is entitled to review and make timely recommendations to the governing body of a health care facility, and its designee, if applicable, regarding quality considerations relating to clinical services when the selection, performance evaluation, or any change in the retention or replacement of licensees with whom the facility has a contract occurs. The bill would require the governing body to give great weight to those recommendations.

Existing law provides various due process rights for licentiates who are the subject of a final proposed disciplinary action of a peer review body, including authorizing a licensee to request a hearing concerning that action. Under existing law, the hearing must be held before either an arbitrator selected by a process mutually acceptable to the licensee and the peer review body or a panel of unbiased individuals, as specified. Existing law prohibits a hearing officer presiding at a hearing held before a panel from, among other things, gaining direct financial benefit from the outcome.

This bill would additionally require the hearing officer to be an attorney licensed in California, except as specified, and to disclose all actual and potential conflicts of interest, as specified. The bill would specify that the hearing officer is entitled to determine the procedure for presenting evidence and argument and would give the hearing officer authority to make all rulings pertaining to law, procedure, or the admissibility of evidence. The bill would authorize the hearing officer to recommend termination of the hearing in certain circumstances.

Existing law gives parties at the hearing certain rights, including the right to present and rebut evidence. Existing law requires the peer review body to adopt written provisions governing whether a licensee may be represented by an attorney and prohibits a peer review body from being represented by an attorney where a licensee is not so represented, except as specified.

This bill would give both parties the right to be represented by an attorney but would prohibit a peer review body from being represented if the licensee notifies the peer review body within a specified period of time that he or she has elected to not be represented, except as specified.

The bill would also provide that it shall become operative only if SB 820 is also enacted and becomes operative. Hide

Learn More

At LegInfo.ca.gov

Title

An Act to Amend Sections 809, 809.2, and 809.3 Of, and to Add Sections 809.04, 809.07, and 809.08 To, the Business and Professions Code, Relating to Healing Arts.

Author(s)

Mary Hayashi

Co-Authors

• Bill Emmerson

Subjects

• Healing arts: peer review

Major Actions

Introduced	1/15/2009
Referred to Committee
Passed Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection	5/12/2009
Passed Assembly	6/03/2009
Passed Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development	7/06/2009
Passed Senate	8/17/2009
Passed Assembly	9/11/2009
Presented to the governor (enrolled)	9/28/2009
Vetoed by Governor	10/11/2009
Vetoed by Governor	10/11/2009

Bill History

• All Votes
• All Actions

	Chamber/Committee	Motion	Date	Result
currently selected	Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection	Do pass as amended.	5/12/2009	This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection 11 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this vote	Assembly	AB 120 HAYASHI Assembly Third Reading	6/03/2009	This bill PASSED the Assembly 78 voted YES 0 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
select this vote	Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development	Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Rules.	7/06/2009	This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development 9 voted YES 0 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
select this vote	Senate	Special Consent #14 AB120 Hayashi By Aanestad	8/17/2009	This bill PASSED the Senate 35 voted YES 0 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
select this vote	Assembly	AB 120 HAYASHI Concurrence in Senate Amendments	9/11/2009	This bill PASSED the Assembly 78 voted YES 0 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting

	Action	Date	Description
	Introduced	1/15/2009
		1/15/2009	Read first time. To print.
		1/16/2009	From printer. May be heard in committee February 15.
		3/26/2009	Referred to Coms. on B. & P. and JUD. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.
		3/27/2009	Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.
		4/13/2009	From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.
		4/14/2009	In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
		5/07/2009	From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.
		5/11/2009	Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.
currently selected	Vote	5/12/2009	Do pass as amended.
		5/14/2009	From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (May 12).
		5/18/2009	Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
		5/19/2009	Read second time. To third reading.
		6/01/2009	Read third time, amended, and returned to third reading. (Page 1819.).
		6/03/2009	Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 2018.)
select this vote	Assembly Vote on Passage	6/03/2009	AB 120 HAYASHI Assembly Third Reading
		6/04/2009	In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
		6/18/2009	Referred to Coms. on B., P. & E.D. and RLS.
		6/22/2009	From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.
		6/29/2009	In committee: Testimony taken. Hearing postponed by committee. In committee: Further hearing to be set.
select this vote	Vote	7/06/2009	Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Rules.
		7/07/2009	From committee: Amend, do pass as amended, and re-refer to Com. on RLS. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (July 6).
		7/08/2009	Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on RLS.
		7/13/2009	Withdrawn from committee. Ordered placed on second reading file.
		7/14/2009	Read second time. To third reading.
		7/15/2009	Ordered to Special Consent Calendar.
		8/17/2009	Read third time, passed, and to Assembly. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 1842.)
		8/17/2009	In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 19 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
select this vote	Senate Vote on Passage	8/17/2009	Special Consent #14 AB120 Hayashi By Aanestad
		8/20/2009	To inactive file on motion of Assembly Member Hayashi.
		9/09/2009	From inactive file. To unfinished business file.
		9/11/2009	Senate amendments concurred in. To enrollment. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 3357.)
select this vote	Assembly Vote on Passage	9/11/2009	AB 120 HAYASHI Concurrence in Senate Amendments
		9/28/2009	Enrolled and to the Governor at 11:30 a.m.
	Vetoed	10/11/2009	Vetoed by Governor.
		10/26/2009	Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
		1/14/2010	Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.