GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW California Regulatory Notice Register REGISTER 2021, NUMBER 53-Z P UBLISHED WEEKLY BY THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW D ECEMBER 31, 2021 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS TITLE 2. F AIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION Conflict–of–Interest Codes — Notice File Number Z2021-1221-08 ........................................ 1759 AMENDMENT MUL TI-COUNTY: Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency TITLE 2. SECRET ARY OF STATE California Business Connect Related Regulations — Notice File Number Z2021-1220-01 ...................... 1760 TITLE 14.

FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Commercial Harvest of Kelp and Other Aquatic Plants — Notice File Number Z2021-1221-07 ................. 1764 TITLE 16. ARCHITECTS BOARD Public Presentments and Advertising Requirements — Notice File Number Z2021-1220-03 .................... 1769 TITLE 16. DENT AL BOARD Senate Bill 501 — Anesthesia and Sedation — Notice File Number Z2021-1221-06 ........................... 1772 TITLE 17. AIR RESOURCES BOARD Area Designations for State Ambient Air Quality Standards — Notice File Number Z2021-1214-04 .............. 1779 TITLE 22/MPP .

DEP ARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES CalWORKS Homeless Assistance, Domestic Abuse, Family Reunification, and Natural Disasters — Notice File Number Z2021-1221-02 ............................................... 1784 GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Elk Creek Fish Passage and Sediment Reduction Project (Tracking Number: 1653-2021-087-001-R1) Del Norte County .................... 1787 (Continued on next page) Time- Dated Material

(Continued on next page) DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Lower Flynn Creek Infiltration Pilot Project (Tracking Number: 1653-2021-084-001-R1) Mendocino County ............................... 1788 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Strawberry Creek at Clam Beach Fish Passage Improvement Project (Tracking Number: 1653-2021-085-001-R1) Humboldt County .................. 1790 FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Notice of Final Consideration of Petitions ............................................................ 1791 FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Notice of Findings, Upper Klamath-Trinity River Spring Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) .......... 1792 OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD Public Meeting and Business Meeting ............................................................... 1800 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Cultivation Project at 9500 Batchelder Road (Tracking Number: 2080-2021-014-05) Santa Barbara County ...................................... 1801 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for 7369 State Highway 246, Lompoc, CA, 93436 (Tracking Number: 2080-2021-013-05) Santa Barbara County .......................... 1802 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Colgan Village Residential Housing Project (Tracking Number: 2080-2021-015-03) Sonoma County .................................. 1806 PROPOSITION 65 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT Notice to Interested Parties — Chemical Listed Effective December 31, 2021, to Cause Reproductive Toxicity: Perfluorononanoic Acid (PFNA) and its Salts ................................. 1806 DECISION NOT TO PROCEED GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Concerning Amendments to the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Originally Published in Notice Register 2021, Number 6-Z, February 5, 2021 ............................... 1807

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY ACTIONS Regulations filed with Secretary of State ............................................................. 1807 The California Regulatory Notice Register is an official state publication of the Office of Administrative Law containing notices of proposed regulatory actions by state regulatory agencies to adopt, amend or repeal regulations contained in the California Code of Regulations. The effective period of a notice of proposed regulatory action by a state agency in the California Regulatory Notice Register shall not exceed one year [Government Code § 11346.4(b)].

It is suggested, therefore, that issues of the California Regulatory Notice Register be retained for a minimum of 18 months. CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER is published weekly by the Office of Administrative Law, 300 Capitol Mall, Suite 1250, Sacramento, CA 95814-4339. The Register is printed by Barclays, a subsidiary of West, a Thomson Reuters Business, and is offered by subscription for $205.00 (annual price). To order or make changes to current subscriptions, please call (800) 328−4880. The Register can also be accessed at http://www.oal.ca.gov .

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1759 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS Information contained in this document is published as received from agencies and is not edited by Thomson Reuters. TITLE 2.

FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fair Political Practices Commission, pursuant to the authority vested in it by Sections 82011, 87303, and 87304 of the Government Code to review proposed conflict– of–interest codes, will review the proposed/amended conflict–of–interest codes of the following: CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODES AMENDMENT Multi–County: Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency A written comment period has been established commencing on December 31, 2021 and closing on February 14, 2022.

Written comments should be directed to the Fair Political Practices Commission, Attention Daniel Vo, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811. At the end of the 45–day comment period, the proposed conflict–of–interest code(

s) will be submitted to the Commission’s Executive Director for his review, unless any interested person or his or her duly authorized representative requests, no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period, a public hearing before the full Commission. If a public hearing is requested, the proposed code(

s) will be submitted to the Commission for review. The Executive Director of the Commission will review the above–referenced conflict–of–interest code(s), proposed pursuant to Government Code

Section 87300, which designate, pursuant to Government Code

Section 87302, employees who must disclose certain investments, interests in real property and income. The Executive Director of the Commission, upon his or its own motion or at the request of any interested person, will approve, or revise and approve, or return the proposed code(

s) to the agency for revision and re– submission within 60 days without further notice. Any interested person may present statements, arguments or comments, in writing to the Executive Director of the Commission, relative to review of the proposed conflict–of–interest code(s). Any written comments must be received no later than February 14, 2022. If a public hearing is to be held, oral comments may be presented to the Commission at the hearing.

COST TO LOCAL AGENCIES There shall be no reimbursement for any new or increased costs to local government which may re - sult from compliance with these codes because these are not new programs mandated on local agencies by the codes since the requirements described herein were mandated by the Political Reform Act of 1974. Therefore, they are not “costs mandated by the state” as defined in Government Code

Section 17514. EFFECT ON HOUSING COSTS AND BUSINESSES Compliance with the codes has no potential effect on housing costs or on private persons, businesses or small businesses. AUTHORITY Government Code Sections 82011, 87303 and 87304 provide that the Fair Political Practices Commission as the code–reviewing body for the above conflict–of– interest codes shall approve codes as submitted, revise the proposed code and approve it as revised, or return the proposed code for revision and re–submission.

REFERENCE Government Code Sections 87300 and 87306 pro - vide that agencies shall adopt and promulgate conflict– of–interest codes pursuant to the Political Reform Act and amend their codes when change is necessitated by changed circumstances. CONTACT Any inquiries concerning the proposed conflict– of–interest code(

s) should be made to Daniel Vo, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811, telephone (916) 322–5660. AVAILABILITY OF PROPOSED CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODES Copies of the proposed conflict–of–interest codes may be obtained from the Commission offices or the respective agency. Requests for copies from

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1760 the Commission should be made to Daniel Vo, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811, telephone (916) 322–5660. TITLE 2. SECRETARY OF STATE TITLE 2. ADMINISTRATION DIVISION 7. SECRETARY OF STATE

CHAPTER 8.5. BUSINESS ENTITY NAMES AMENDING

SECTION 21005

CHAPTER 9. BUSINESS PROGRAMS AMENDING SECTIONS 21903, 21904, 21905 ADOPTING

SECTION 21902.5 REPEALING

SECTION 21905.5

CHAPTER 13. UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE

ARTICLE 5. INFORMATION REQUEST AND SEARCH RESPONSE AMENDING

SECTION 22601.5 Notice is hereby given that the Secretary of State (SOS) intends to amend the regulations described below after considering all comments, objections, and recommendations regarding the proposed action. Hearing Date: No hearing date is scheduled. A public hearing will be held if any interested person, or his or her duly authorized representative, submits a written request for a public hearing to the contact person listed no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period. Written Public Comment Period: December 31, 2021, through February 14, 2022.

PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION The Secretary of State proposes the following regulatory action: Amend provisions of Title 2 California Code of Regulations sections 21005, 21903, 21904, 21905 and 22601.5, repeal

section 21905.5 and adopt

section 21902.5 to reflect the changes and revisions of several paper–driven filing processes to online filing functionalities. The proposed changes will clarify

definitions, amounts of fees charged, electronic signatures, the requirements for paper and online filings, and clarify ambiguities in anticipation of the California Business Connect (CBC) project’s “Go– Live” date on March 31, 2022. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Authority cited: Corporations Code sections 8, 17, 17.1, 110, 201, 2106, 2601, 5008, 5122, 7122, 9122, 10010, 10013, 12214, 12302, 13409, 15901.08, 15901.09, 15909.05, 17701.08, 17701.09 and 17708.02. Government Code

section 12182. Commercial Code

section 9526. Civil Code

section 1633.2(h). Reference cited: Corporations Code sections 8, 17, 17.1, 110, 167, 171, 201, 2101, 2106, 2601, 5008, 5122, 6910, 7122, 8910, 9122, 12302, 13409, 15901.02, 15901.08, 15901.09, 15909.02, 15909.05, 17701.02, 17701.08, 17701.09, 17708.02 and 17708.05. Government Code

section 12182. Commercial Code

section 9526. Civil Code

section 1633.2(h). INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW The Secretary of State proposes to amend sections 21005, 21903, 21904, 21905 and 22601.5, adopt

section 21902.5 and repeal

section 21905.5 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, which implement, interpret or make specific sections of the Corporations Code sections 8, 17, 17.1, 110, 167, 171, 201, 2101, 2106, 2601, 5008, 5122, 6910, 7122, 8910, 9122, 12302, 13409, 15901.02, 15901.08, 15901.09, 15909.02, 15909.05, 17701.02, 17701.08, 17701.09, 17708.02 and 17708.05. Government Code

section 12182. Commercial Code

section 9526. Civil Code

section 1633.2(h). These sections concern the amounts of fees charged, the types of services offered, electronic signatures and requirements for paper and online filings. The proposed amendments are intended to coincide with the California Business Connect (CBC) project’s “Go–Live” date on March 31, 2022.

The specific benefits anticipated by the proposed amendment of these regulations includes changes coinciding with the implementation of the California Business Connect project which would make it easier to conduct business in California as filings are more streamlined and efficient with the transition to automated and online filings. Amending the regulations will help persons and businesses submit documents for filing online with easier understandable fees and processing times. The amended regulations would clarify any ambiguous fees for businesses.

The purpose of the proposed amendments is to reflect the Secretary of State’s goal of transitioning from several paper–driven filing processes to online filing functionalities. These amendments allow the public to submit business documents online which are then reviewed by the Secretary of State’s staff in a more timely and efficient manner. The public may now electronically sign documents submitted online, which reduces the need of printing

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1761 and scanning. Expedited services are now enhanced for online filings as the processes will be streamlined for quicker reviews. As customers have control over when they want to submit a document and when they want a document to be precleared before filing, the filing dates will now be in the control of the customer. Other proposed amendments also clarify when a document is being reviewed for a name availability to clear any ambiguities to customers as to when the final determination is made for the availability of the proposed name.

As business filings are transitioning towards the more efficient online processes, the time between a name reservation and the submitted document for review will be shorter and the proposed amendment clarifies that a final determination for the name availability is made when the document is submitted for review rather than when the name reservation was made. The amendment would reduce confusion and possible rejections and document returns.

The additional amendments would also eliminate outdated services that are no longer offered as more and more documents are being made available online for customers to view or request through a self– service method. Copy fees and service fees are also revised to reflect the most current available services. Amendments would also remove any redundant and excess fees as the increase in online filings will create a larger electronic database for customers to request copies more efficiently.

The amendment to revise the requirement for Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) search requests to “city and state” would also assist the public and the Secretary of State to process search requests at a more efficient manner and to reduce the search turnaround times. All these proposed amendments would further the goal to make it easier to do business in California and transition from antiquated processes to more modern procedures.

The Secretary of State has considered any other related regulations and statutes on this matter and has determined that this proposed amendment is not inconsistent or incompatible with existing regulations and statutes.

The Secretary of State is the only state office responsible for the filing documents pursuant to the California General Corporations Law, the Social Purpose Corporations Act, the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law, the Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation Law, the Nonprofit Religious Corporation Law, the Cooperative Corporation Law, the Uniform Limited Partnership Act of 2008, and the California Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act.

Specifically, through this proposed rulemaking, the Secretary of State proposes to amend California Code of Regulations, Title 2, in the following respects: 1) Changes to Subsection 21005(

b) as it updates the ambiguity of when a final determination of a proposed name is made when there has been a name reservation. The phrase “has been reviewed by” will make clear that a final determination is made during the time the document submitted is being reviewed by the SOS for filing and not the time when the document is submitted for filing or when the name reservation was made. 2) Adoption of

Section 21902.5 allows customers to sign documents submitted online to the SOS electronically to make it easier for customers to execute documents without needing to scan wet signatures. 3) Changes to Subsection 21903(c)(3) as it adds the term “requests” and replaces the word “certificate” to “name.” This would clarify the ambiguity that name reservations fees are also processing fees, consistent with all other handling fees charged, and is charged per name request for a name reservation, rather than the actual name reservation certificate. 4) Changes to Subsection 21903(c)(7) as it removes the phrase “and certificates of incumbency.” This would remove an outdated term that is no longer used. 5) Deletion of Subsection 21903(c)(8) as it removes a method of transmission that is no longer provided. 6) Deletion of Subsection 21903(c)(9) as it removes a method of requests that is no longer provided. 7) Deletion of Subsection 21903(c)(10) as it removes a method of requests that is no longer provided. 8) Changes to Subsection 21903(

d) as it deletes the phrase “certificates, or requests for certified or uncertified copies as to the same debtor, corporation or other business entity, or for” to clear any ambiguities and simplify the copying fees in this section. 9) Changes to Subsection 21904(a)(6) as it adds the phrase “within the last 6 months” and the phrase “Any change to the entity record invalidates the precleared document” to add a date limit and make clear any changes to the entity record would invalidate the precleared document to prevent precleared documents from being returned when an entity’s record has changed from when the preclearance was approved and when it has been submitted for filing. 10) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(1) as it deletes the phrase “or submit electronically through the Secretary of State’s designated website” for preclearance documents to permit only preclearance paper filings to allow Secretary of State’s staff to determine, in writing, a precleared

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1762 document conforms to law to ensure no delays from any online submissions. 11) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(1)(

C) as different classes of preclearance service are no longer offered. 12) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(1)(

D) as it adds “Requisite Secretary of State prescribed cover sheet including a” to ensure all preclearance requests are made on a uniform cover sheet with all the required information and is renumbered as the existing

Section 21904(c)(1)(

C) is being deleted. 13) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(1)(

E) as the existing

Section 21904(c)(1)(

D) is being renumbered. 14) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(6) to add the phrase “for a 4 hour expedite” as 4 hour expedites are more time sensitive and the preclearance response would accelerate the review process to ensure the document is reviewed before the 4 hour deadline. 15) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(7) as it deletes the phrase “The classes of preclearance service for an eligible document submitted pursuant to subsection (

C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (

c) are the following:” as the four classes of service are revised to only one service, a 24– hour response. 72–hour, 5 business day and 10 business day, services will no longer be offered. 16) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(7)(

A) as it deletes the phrase “Class I service: a” as the four classes of service are revised to only one service, a 24– hour response. 72–hour, 5–business day and 10– business day services will no longer be offered and the subsection is renumbered to Subsection 21904(c)(7) as the additional subsections regarding the services are deleted. 17) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(7)(

B) as the four classes of service are revised to only one service. 18) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(7)(

C) as the four classes of service are revised to only one service. 19) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(7)(

D) as the four classes of service are revised to only one service. 20) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(8) as it deletes the fees for the three other classes of services as they are no longer offered. 21) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(9) which replaces the reference to Subsection (

D) to Subsection (

C) as Subsection 21904(c)(1)(

D) is being renumbered to Subsection 21904(c)(1)(C). 22) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(9)(

B) as the telephone facsimile delivery will no longer be offered. 23) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(9)(

C) as the existing

Section 21904(c)(9)(

B) is being deleted. 24) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(9)(

D) as the existing

Section 21904(c)(9)(

C) is being renumbered. 25) Changes to Subsection 21904(c)(9)(

E) as the existing

Section 21904(c)(9)(

D) is being renumbered. 26) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(10) as the four classes of service are revised to only one service. Online submissions are no longer offered. 27) Deletion of Subsection 21904(c)(11) as the four classes of service are revised to only one service. Online submissions are no longer offered. 28) Changes to Subsection 21904(d)(2)(

B) as two copies of the document are no longer required. Only the preclearance approval number is required to save on excess paper. 29) Changes to Subsection 21904(d)(2)(

C) as it replaces the phrase “Copy of the preclearance response”, as it is no longer required, to “The preclearance document is required if submitting for a 4 hour expedite,” as 4 hour expedites are more time sensitive and the preclearance response would accelerate the review process to ensure the document is reviewed before the 4 hour deadline. 30) Changes to Subsection 21904(d)(3) as it adds the term “completed” to clarify any ambiguities as precleared documents are not required to be completed but documents submitted for review are required to be completed. 31) Deletion of Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

B) as two copies are no longer required to save on excess paper. 32) Changes to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

C) as 21905(c)(1)(

B) is being deleted. 33) Changes to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

D) as the existing 21905(c)(1)(

C) is being renumbered and deletes the term “Written” as the request may not be written on paper and adds the phrase “personally delivered” and “must be on a Secretary of State prescribed cover sheet” to ensure all requests for a 4 hour expedite are on a uniform form with all the required information. 34) Changes to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

E) as the existing 21905(c)(1)(

D) is being renumbered. 35) Changes to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

F) as the existing 21905(c)(1)(

E) is being renumbered. 36) Changes to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

G) as the existing 21905(c)(1)(

F) is being renumbered. 37) Changes to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

H) as existing 21905(c)(1)(

G) is being renumbered.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1763 38) Changes to Subsection 21905(e)(1) as it adds the phrase “the eligible document was personally delivered to the Secretary of State” to require all 4 hour expedites are submitted personally rather than online due to the time sensitive nature of the service. 39) Changes to Subsection 21905(

i) as it replaces the reference to Subsection (

F) to Subsection (

E) as Subsection 21905(c)(1)(

F) is being renumbered to Subsection 21905(c)(1)(E). 40) Deletion of

Section 21905.5 as requests for a specific filing date are no longer offered. The filing date will be consistent with statute for when the document is submitted for filing or if an applicable request for a future filing date is made. 41) Changes to Subsection 22601.5 as it replaces the term “address” with “city and state” to clear any ambiguities regarding the definition of address. WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person, or the interested person’s authorized representative, may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action to the Secretary of State.

The written comment period closes on February 14, 2022. The Secretary of State will consider only comments received at the Secretary of State’s office by that time.

Submit comments to: Lauro Feliciano, Attorney Secretary of State 1500 11th Street, Third Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916–695–1290 The backup contact person for comment submission is: Janessa Huez, Assistant Chief Counsel Secretary of State 1500 11th Street, Third Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916–695–1242 All inquiries regarding this proposed rulemaking, including requests for obtaining the Final Statement of Reasons, should be directed to Lauro Feliciano at the address listed above.

DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The Secretary of State has made the following initial determinations: 1. Mandate on local agencies and school districts: None. 2. Costs or savings to any state agency: None beyond those budgeted or expected to be budgeted for the Secretary of State. 3. Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code sections 17500 through 17630: None. 4. Other nondiscretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies: None. 5. Costs or savings in federal funding to the state: None. 6.

Significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states: None. 7. Cost impacts on a representative private person or businesses: The Secretary of State anticipates negligible overall cost savings to private persons and businesses. The proposed changes to the regulations will help persons and businesses determine the applicable fees and services offered in person and online.

This should result in fewer documents being submitted in person and more documents submitted online, which will save those individuals and businesses time and money. The net result is expected to be neutral or result in a very small savings to applicants. 8. Adoption of these amendments will not: (

A) create or eliminate jobs within California; (

B) create new businesses or eliminate existing businesses within California; or (

C) affect the expansion of businesses currently doing business within California. 9. Significant effect on housing costs: None. 10. Effect on small business: None. The proposed amendments do not impose any mandatory fees on small businesses or require any forms or reports be prepared or filed by any business. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS/ASSESSMENT The proposed regulatory amendments reflect the changes and revisions of several paper–driven filing processes to online filing functionalities. The proposed changes will clarify

definitions, amounts of fees charged, the requirements for paper and online filings, and clarify ambiguities. Accordingly, no jobs in California will be created or eliminated, no new businesses in California will be created or existing businesses eliminated, and no existing businesses in California will be expanded or eliminated. Additionally, there are no anticipated benefits of the regulation pertaining to the health and welfare of the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1764 California residents, to worker safety, or the state’s environment. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5(a)(13), the Secretary of State must determine that no reasonable alternative it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective as and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Secretary of State invites persons to present statements or arguments with respect to alternatives to the proposed amendments during the written comment period. AVAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS AND TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS The Secretary of State will have the entire rulemaking file available for inspection and copying throughout the rulemaking process at the above address. As of the date this notice is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the regulations as proposed, and the Initial Statement of Reasons.

The rulemaking file includes all the information upon which the proposed action is based. Copies are posted on the Secretary of State’s website at http://www.sos. ca.gov/admin/regulations/proposed/ and may also be obtained from the contact person indicated above. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After considering all timely and relevant comments received, the Secretary of State may adopt the proposed regulations substantially as described in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

If the Secretary of State makes modifications that are sufficiently related to the originally proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 15 days before the Secretary of State adopts the regulations as revised. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of the contact person indicated above. The Secretary of State will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days after the date on which the modified regulations are made available.

AVAILABILITY OF RULEMAKING DOCUMENTS AND THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Copies of rulemaking documents can be accessed through the Secretary of State’s website at http:// www.sos.ca.gov/admin/regulations/proposed/. Upon completion, the Final Statement of Reasons will be posted on the Secretary of State’s website or obtained from the contact person indicated above. TITLE 14.

FISH AND GAME COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fish and Game Commission (Commission), pursuant to the authority vested by sections 713, 1050, 6651, 6653, 6653.5, 6700 and 6701 of the Fish and Game Code and to implement, interpret or make specific sections 51, 713, 1050, 6650, 6651, 6652, 6653, 6653.5, 6654, 6656, 6700, 6701, 6701.5, 6702, 6703, 6704, 6705, 6706, 6707 and 6680 of said Code, proposes to amend sections 165, and 165.5, and Appendix A, and add

Section 705.1, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR), regarding the commercial harvesting of kelp and other aquatic plants. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW Bull kelp ( Nereocystis luetkeana ) is a species of marine algae which forms the foundational physical structure of diverse marine habitats that provide a variety of ecosystem services and support numerous fisheries, cultural and ceremonial traditions, and diving and fishing tourism.

Bull kelp is an annual species, meaning the individuals live and reproduce within a lifetime of one year, although some individuals may live into a second year. The reproductive material of a bull kelp individual is located on its blades, near the surface of the water. Historically, bull kelp populations on the north coast have exhibited natural interannual spatial and temporal variability.

However, beginning in 2014, bull kelp populations in Mendocino and Sonoma counties declined dramatically outside of the range of normal variability due to elevated sea surface temperature, poor nutrient availability and drastic increases in purple sea urchin ( Strongylocentrotus purpuratus ) populations. Maximum annual bull kelp canopy area has remained below the 1984–2013 average from 2014 through the fourth quarter of 2020. Current uses for harvested bull kelp are for human consumption and to feed aquacultured abalone.

Existing commercial harvest regulations allow those harvesting for human consumption to take the entire

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1765 individual, and harvesters taking kelp for other purposes are allowed to cut up to four feet below the surface of the water. Because bull kelp reproductive material is on the part of the individual nearest to the surface, all harvest methods result in less available reproductive material. This has the potential to affect the number of future generations of bull kelp.

Due to the dramatic reduction in the north coast bull kelp population and the lack of scientific data to explain whether commercial harvest does or does not have an impact on the current kelp population, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) has determined that a precautionary management approach is warranted and is recommending amendments to harvest regulations in the interest of maintaining the bull kelp population that remains. The Department recommends temporarily amending commercial harvest regulations to limit bull kelp take on the north coast.

These harvest limits would sunset in three to five years, as determined by the Commission, to allow for the drafting and potential adoption of a comprehensive, statewide Kelp Restoration and Management Plan (KRMP). Additionally, the Department recommends regulations which apply to all commercial marine algae harvesters regardless of the species harvested, to update harvest logs, improve enforceability, and overhaul existing regulatory language to make corrections and better describe specific harvesting requirements. These regulations will not have a sunset date. CURRENT COMMERCIAL HARVEST REGULATIONS

Section 165, Title 14, CCR, outlines the licensing and harvesting provisions for the commercial harvest of kelp and other aquatic plants. Relevant to this rulemaking,

Section 165 includes the Kelp Harvesting License and associated fee, harvest royalty fee requirements, requirements for harvest reporting, geographical limitations for giant and bull kelp harvest, and prohibitions on the disturbance of certain aquatic plants. Current regulations

Section 165.5, Title 14, CCR, define the procedures to lease administrative kelp beds for the exclusive right to harvest kelp.

Section 165.5 also spatially describes the 87 administrative kelp beds under the following management categories: open, closed, leasable, and lease only. The designations were designed for optimal harvest while ensuring sustainable management of the resource and the species that depend upon kelp. PROPOSED TEMPORARY COMMERCIAL HARVEST REGULATIONS The Department is recommending temporary prohibitions or limits to kelp harvest in four north coast counties: Sonoma, Mendocino, Humboldt, and Del Norte.

The interim management measures are intended to protect the bull kelp resource while allowing for the Department, Tribes, industry, and interested stakeholders to collaboratively work towards developing the KRMP, a comprehensive management framework for giant and bull kelp. The proposed regulations for Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, and Sonoma counties would have a sunset date of three to five years, as determined by the Commission. The following summarize the Department–proposed options for Commission consideration: Subsection 165(c)(9)(A): Subsection 165(c)(9)(

A) Option 1: Bull kelp harvest closure in Sonoma and Mendocino counties regardless of intended use of harvested kelp. Subsection 165(c)(9)(

A) Option 2: Annual overall bull kelp harvest quota from 1 pound to 2,000 pounds (1 ton) wet weight for Sonoma and Mendocino counties, combined, between January 1–December 31. Harvest is limited for human consumption only. Subsection 165(c)(9)(B): The proposed regulations include an annual overall bull kelp harvest not to exceed an annual quota of 4 tons (8,000 Ibs.) wet weight for Del Norte and Humboldt counties combined. To allow the Department to monitor the harvest and avoid exceeding the annual harvest quota, in addition to the currently required monthly harvest reports, subsection (c)(9)(

C) lists options for weekly reporting via email of bull kelp harvest. Subsection 165(c)(9)(

C) Option 1: If subsection (c)(9)(

A) Option 1 is adopted by the Commission, weekly reporting of bull kelp harvest for Del Norte and Humboldt counties. Subsection 165(c)(9)(

C) Option 2: If subsection (c)(9)(

A) Option 2 is adopted by the Commission, weekly reporting of bull kelp harvest in Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, and Sonoma counties. Subsection 165.5(

c) specifies an option for the Commission decision: Option: Temporarily closes the three lease only administrative kelp beds 308, 309, and 312 in Mendocino, Humboldt, and Del Norte counties. As an alternative to the temporary closure, the Department is also proposing an option for a temporary hiatus on accepting lease applications for the lease only administrative kelp beds. The hiatus would be an

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1766 administrative action and as such, would not be written into regulation. The Department recommends that the temporary hiatus also have a sunset date of three to five years, to be determined by the Commission. ADDITIONAL PROPOSED COMMERCIAL HARVEST REGULATIONS Additional amendments are proposed that apply to all commercial algae harvesters and will not have a sunset date. Non–substantive and structural changes are proposed throughout sections 165 and 165.5 to improve specificity of language and correct typographical errors.

Additional substantive proposed amendments include: Modifications to the Kelp Harvesting Application form (DFW 658). The application form will be modified to include a Drying Permit option to comply with subdivision 6653.5(

b) of the Fish and Game Code and renamed the Kelp Harvesting License and Drying Application. Further edits to DFW 658 will include standard language used on other licenses. The Kelp Harvester’s Monthly Report will be consolidated from two separate forms, FG 113 (January 1, 1997), and FG 114 (Rev. 1/07), into a single double–sided form Commercial Kelp Harvester’s Monthly Report DFW 113 (REV. 11/01/21).

The new form will add reporting requirements including the number of individuals harvesting, separate weights for bull and giant kelp harvest, the central latitude/ longitude coordinates of bull kelp harvest locations, and listing the business name and individual harvester name to distinguish between the business and business contact. In addition, the new form will have Department contact information so that harvesters can reach readily available Department personnel with harvest report questions.

Additional minor editorial changes are being made to remove redundancy, update Department information, and ensure consistency with regulatory text. The regulation amendment will introduce the Commercial Edible Seaweed/Agarweed Aquatic Plant Harvester’s Monthly Report as form DFW 113A (New 11/01/21). This will provide a uniform way to report information already stipulated in current regulations, as well as new information similar to that required in the new version of DFW 113 (REV. 11/01/21) including the central latitude/longitude coordinates of bull kelp harvest locations.

The Release of Property form DFW 1108 (New 11/01/21) is introduced in this regulation amendment. The Release of Property form ensures that any inadvertent excess bull kelp harvested in the counties with annual quotas is not wasted. Finally,

Section 705.1, Title 14, CCR, is proposed to be added. This

section will incorporate by reference the Commercial Kelp Harvesting License and Drying Application, the Commercial Kelp Harvesters Monthly Report DFW 113 (REV. 11/01/21), the Commercial Edible Seaweed/Agarweed Aquatic Plant Harvester’s Monthly Report DFW 113A (New 11/01/21) and the Release of Property form DFW 1108 (New 11/01/21). The current Commercial Kelp Harvester License fee, which was established in Fish Game Code

Section 6651 and is annually updated pursuant to

Section 713 of the Fish and Game Code, will be listed in this section. BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS The goal of the regulation change is to protect and maintain the remaining bull kelp along the north coast to the maximum extent possible, and to support ongoing restoration efforts to improve the resource in future years. This will benefit the State of California by ensuring the continuance of the ecosystem services, fisheries, cultural and ceremonial traditions, and diving and fishing tourism supported by bull kelp.

In addition, the sunset date will provide time to draft and potentially adopt the KRMP that will provide a comprehensive management framework for giant and bull kelp. Additional benefits of the proposed regulations include providing Drying Permit compliance with the Fish and Game Code, providing harvesters with better defined and more precise reporting tools, and improving the Department’s ability to manage this resource. EVALUATION OF INCOMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING REGULATIONS The proposed regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations.

The Commission has reviewed its own regulations and finds that the proposed regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations. The Commission has searched the California Code of Regulations and finds no other State agency regulations pertaining to the commercial take of kelp and other marine algae, lease of kelp beds for exclusive harvest of Macrocystis and Nereocystis, Kelp Harvester’s license, and monthly harvest reports.

Furthermore, the proposed addition to refer harvesters for human consumption to the California Department of Public Health will ensure harvesters are aware of the regulatory agency for food manufactured and processed food for human consumption.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1767 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION NOTICE IS ALSO GIVEN that any person interested may present statements, orally or in writing, relevant to this action at a hearing to be held in Sacramento, California, on Wednesday, February 16, 2022, at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. The specific location for this meeting is still being determined. As soon as this information is available, but not less than thirty days before the hearing, a continuation notice will be sent to interested and affected parties providing an exact location.

The continuation notice will also be published in the California Regulatory Notice Register and published on the Commission’s website. It is requested, but not required, that written comments be submitted on or before 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2022, at the address given below, or by email to FGC@fgc.ca.gov. Written comments mailed, or emailed to the Commission office, must be received before 12:00 noon on February 14, 2022. All comments must be received no later than February 16, 2022, at the hearing in Sacramento, California.

If you would like copies of any modifications to this proposal, please include your name and mailing address. Mailed comments should be addressed to Fish and Game Commission, PO Box 944209, Sacramento, CA 94244–2090. AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regulation in underline and strikeout format can be accessed through the Commission website at www.fgc.ca.gov.

The regulations as well as all related documents upon which the proposal is based (rulemaking file), are on file and available for public review from the agency representative, Melissa Miller–Henson, Executive Director, Fish and Game Commission, 715 P Street, Box 944209, Sacramento, California 94244–2090, phone (916) 653–4899. Please direct requests for the above–mentioned documents and inquiries concerning the regulatory process to Melissa Miller–Henson or Sherrie Fonbuena at FGC@fgc.ca.gov or at the preceding address or phone number.

Environmental Scientist, Rebecca Flores Miller, Department of Fish and Wildlife, (via email to kelp@wildlife. ca.gov), has been designated to respond to questions on the substance of the proposed regulations. AVAILABILITY OF MODIFIED TEXT If the regulations adopted by the Commission differ from but are sufficiently related to the action proposed, they will be available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date of adoption. Any person interested may obtain a copy of said regulations prior to the date of adoption by contacting the agency representative named herein.

If the regulatory proposal is adopted, the final statement of reasons may be obtained from the address above when it has been received from the agency program staff. IMPACT OF REGULATORY ACTION/ RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT The potential for significant statewide adverse economic impacts that might result from the proposed regulatory action has been assessed, and the following initial determinations relative to the required statutory categories have been made: (

a) Significant Statewide Adverse Economic Impact Directly Affecting Business, Including the Ability of California Businesses to Compete with Businesses in Other States: The proposed action will not have a significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with business in other states. The Department reviewed reported bull kelp harvest from all edible seaweed harvesters in Mendocino and Sonoma counties as well as Del Norte and Humboldt counties for all years on record.

Within a seven–year time frame prior to the 2014 bull kelp decline (2007–2013), bull kelp represented about 11% (14,084 out of 131,384 pounds) of total edible seaweed take in Mendocino and Sonoma counties combined for nine permittees. For the seven years following the decline (2014–2020), bull kelp harvest represented about 3% (4,441 out of 129,437 pounds) of the total edible seaweed harvested for the six permittees who harvested during that time frame.

In Del Norte and Humboldt counties combined, bull kelp represented 12% (6,191 out of 49,758 pounds) of total edible seaweed take for three permittees between 2007–2013. In contrast, bull kelp take was 34% (23,522 out of 68,709 pounds) of the total edible seaweed harvested by two permittees from 2014–2020 in the same two counties.

Considering bull kelp harvest in Del Norte and Humboldt counties was greater proportionally, and canopy area did not decline dramatically compared to Mendocino and Sonoma counties during that timeframe, the Department determined capping harvest in Del Norte and Humboldt counties would maintain

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1768 current use and harvest post 2014. Commercial harvesters in Mendocino and Sonoma counties have indicated they would not shift harvest to Del Norte and Humboldt counties. Commercial harvest of wild marine algae is not allowed in nearby states of Oregon and Washington. Therefore, the industry is not competing with nearby markets for harvested kelp.

Finally, all other proposed regulatory amendments, including the requirement of a GPS unit to report the central latitude and longitude coordinates of bull kelp harvest, will have no impact on California businesses, including their ability to compete with businesses in other states. (

b) Impact on the Creation or Elimination of Jobs Within the State, the Creation of New Businesses or the Elimination of Existing Businesses, or the Expansion of Businesses in California; Benefits of the Regulation to the Health and Welfare of California Residents, Worker Safety, and the State’s Environment: The Commission does not anticipate any impacts on the creation or elimination of jobs, the creation of new business, the elimination of existing businesses or the expansion of businesses in California.

The Commission does not anticipate any benefits to health and welfare of California residents or worker safety. The Commission anticipates benefits to the state’s environment in the sustainable management of this resource. As a foundational species forming the physical structure of kelp forest habitats, bull kelp supports fisheries, cultural and ceremonial traditions, and tourism. (

c) Cost Impacts on a Representative Private Person or Business: The proposed weekly reporting requirement for bull kelp harvest from the current monthly requirement would introduce additional time that is estimated to be about $243.88 annually per harvester, or $2,438 for the 10 active harvesters. Additionally, if the harvester does not already have GPS capability, the business would need to incur the costs (up to approximately $200 one– time cost) of obtaining GPS capability to provide the central latitude and longitude locations of bull kelp harvest. (

d) Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/ Savings in Federal Funding to the State: Weekly reporting and the reporting of harvest coordinates will require some increase in work effort for staff within the Department totaling approximately $8,333, or $4,268 if a closure is chosen for Mendocino and Sonoma counties. In addition, if the bull kelp harvest closure option is chosen for Mendocino and Sonoma counties, then royalty fee revenue is anticipated to decline by an estimated $8.88. The royalty fee per wet pound is $0.012 x 740 pounds (2014–2020 Mendocino and Sonoma) average harvest = $8.88.

Management of bull kelp harvest quota and reporting of harvest coordinates will result in new duties for the Department.

Management tasks in counties with a harvest quota will include: weekly compiling and tracking of harvest and posting status updates on the Department webpage, comparison of weekly to monthly reporting and communications with license holders as needed if discrepancies occur in the reports, determining status of harvest toward the quota as needed, drafting and emailing notices to license holders prior to implementation of restrictions triggered by the quota, posting notice of temporary closure or closures on the Department webpage, and ensuring any harvest in excess of any established quota is forfeited to the Department through a Release of Property form.

Reporting of bull kelp harvest coordinates will require the Department to modify the current harvest database and enter coordinates into the harvest database, and verify coordinates reported by harvesters to determine county of harvest. (

e) Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. (

f) Programs Mandated on Local Agencies or School Districts: None. (

g) Costs Imposed on any Local Agency or School District that is Required to be Reimbursed Under

Part 7 (commencing with

Section 17500) of Division 4, Government Code: None. (

h) Effect on Housing Costs: None. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS It has been determined that the adoption of these regulations may affect small business. The Commission has drafted the regulations in Plain English pursuant to Government Code Sections 11342.580 and 11346.2(a)(1).

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1769 CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The Commission must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Commission, or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Commission, would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law. TITLE 16.

A RCHITECTS BOARD PUBLIC PRESENTMENTS AND ADVERTISING REQUIREMENTS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the California Architects Board (Board) is proposing to take the action described in the Informative Digest below, after considering all comments, objections, and recommendations regarding the proposed action. PUBLIC HEARING The Board has not scheduled a public hearing on this proposed action. However, the Board will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested person, or their authorized representative, no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period.

A hearing may be requested by making such request in writing addressed to the individuals listed under “Contact Person” in this Notice. COMMENT PERIOD Written comments, including those sent by mail, facsimile, or e–mail to the addresses listed under “Contact Person” in this Notice, must be received by the Board at its office not later than 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 15, 2022, or must be received by the Board at the hearing, should one be scheduled.

AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Pursuant to the authority vested by Business and Professions Code (BPC) sections 137 and 5526, and to implement, interpret or make specific Sections 137 and 5500.1 of the BPC, the Board is considering adopting

section 135 in

Article 5 of Division 2 of Title 16 of the California Code of Regulations 1 (CCR). INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW BPC

section 5526 authorizes the Board to adopt rules and regulations as may be necessary and proper. BPC

section 137 authorizes agencies within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including the Board, to promulgate regulations requiring licensees to include their license numbers in any advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public. The Board is proposing to adopt CCR

section 135 to establish the requirements to be followed by licensees when advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public are made. Architect license numbers are not currently required to be provided to the public on advertising, soliciting, or other presentments. This omission may result in unlicensed individuals contracting with consumers for architecture services that the individual is not professionally qualified or licensed to perform.

In addition, consumers are unable to check the license number of the architect to determine if the license is in good standing before consulting or contracting with that architect. To address these issues, the Board included in its 2019–2021 Strategic Plan an objective to “Collaborate with websites to restrict advertisements from unlicensed entities.” At the Board’s December 11, 2020 meeting, the Board voted to approve proposed language for a new CCR

section 135 to require that licensees include their license number in all advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public. The Board is proposing the following: ● A dopt CCR

section 135, subdivision (a), to require architects to include their name and license numbers in all forms of advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public in connection with the rendition of architectural services by the Architects Practice Act, including but not limited to any advertisement, card, letterhead, telephone listing, or Internet website, written solicitation to a prospective client or clients, or contract proposal. ● A dopt CCR

section 135, subdivision (b), to set advertising compliance standards for architects at a business entity that contains or employs two or more architects. Such compliance shall be deemed satisfied if the advertisements, solicitations, or presentments to the public include the name and 1 A ll CCR references are to title 16 unless otherwise noted.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1770 license number of at least one architect who is (1) in management control of the business entity, and (2) the owner, a part–owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity. ● Adopt CCR

section 135,

section 135, subdivision (c), to define the term “management control” to have the same meaning it has in 16 CCR 134. Protection of the public health, safety and welfare is the Board’s highest priority in exercising its licensing, regulatory, and disciplinary functions. The proposal would better protect the public by requiring an architect licensee, or a licensee within a business entity as specified above, to include their license number in all advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public to ensure the public knows they are engaging the services of a licensed architect.

With the license number information, consumers will be better informed of who is and who is not a licensed architect. Consumers will also be able to use the license number to search the Board’s website to confirm whether the advertising individual is licensed and qualified to provide architectural services.

CONSISTENCY AND COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING STATE REGULATIONS During the process of developing these regulations and amendments, the Board has conducted a search of similar regulations on this topic and has concluded that these regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations.

FISCAL IMPACT ESTIMATES Fiscal Impact on Public Agencies Including Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Cost/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: The proposed regulations do not result in any fiscal impact to the state, including costs or savings to state agencies or costs or savings in federal funding to the state. The Board notes, most licensees are already in partial or full compliance as a common professional practice standard and anticipates all licensees to be in compliance upon full implementation.

As a result, the Board does not anticipate any workload or costs resulting from the proposed regulations. The Board may receive inquiries (by phone or email) from licensees regarding compliance, but the Board already maintains staffing resources for these purposes. As a result, no additional costs are anticipated. The Board may also receive consumer complaints (by phone or email) related to non–compliance. In these circumstances the Board would contact the licensee (by phone and/or email) to remind and educate the licensee of the requirements.

However, the Board anticipates full compliance as licensees adopt the requirements as standard professional practice. In the event a non–compliant licensee continues to operate without complying with the regulations, the Board is authorized to issue a citation and fine up to $5,000. However, because any one–time update costs are estimated to be no more than $100, the Board anticipates these licensees will opt for compliance, in lieu of receiving a citation and fine. Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. Local Mandate: None.

Cost to Any Local Agency or School District for Which Government Code Sections 17500–17630 Require Reimbursement: None. Business Impact: The Board has made an initial determination that the proposed regulatory action would have no significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states, because the proposed regulations should not significantly impact advertising budgets. The Board licenses approximately 22,000 architects.

Those businesses impacted by this regulation would be limited to architecture businesses with licensed architects. The narrow scope of who this regulation impacts also minimizes the impact on business and competition in the state generally. Cost Impact on Representative Private Person or Business: While the exact costs are unknown, the Board is aware there may be minor costs of no more than $100 a representative private person or business would incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action to reprint or edit some presentments and advertising materials with their name and architect license number.

Effect on Housing Costs: None. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS The Board has determined that the proposed regulation may affect small businesses as there may be a minor cost of no more than $100 for businesses to reprint or edit advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public to include the architects’ name and license number.

RESULTS OF ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT/ANALYSIS Impact on Jobs/Businesses The Board has determined that this regulatory proposal will not have any impact on the creation of jobs or new businesses or the elimination of jobs or existing businesses or the expansion of businesses in the State of California.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1771 Business Reporting Requirements The proposed regulatory action does not require businesses to file a report with the Board. BENEFITS OF REGULATION The Board has determined that this regulatory proposal will benefit the health, safety, and welfare of California consumers.

By providing consumers with an architect’s name and license number in all advertising, soliciting, or other presentments to the public, consumers will be able to use the license number to identify licensed professionals and search the Consumer Affairs Systems database through the Board’s website to confirm whether the advertising individual is the individual associated with the license number. The proposal does not affect worker safety or the state’s environment.

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The Board must determine that no reasonable alternative is considered for the regulation or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposal described in this Notice, or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

Any interested person may submit written comments relevant to the above determinations to the Board at 2420 Del Paso Road, Suite 105, Sacramento, California 95834. INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS AND INFORMATION The Board has prepared an initial statement of the reasons for the proposed action and has available all the information upon which the proposal is based.

TEXT OF PROPOSAL Copies of the exact language of the proposed regulation, the initial statement of reasons, and all of the information upon which the proposal is based, may be obtained upon request from the California Architects Board at 2420 Del Paso Road, Suite 105, Sacramento, California 95834 or from the Contact Person listed below. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT The Board, upon its own motion or at the request of any interested party, may thereafter adopt the proposals substantially as described below or may modify such proposals if such modifications are sufficiently related to the original text.

With the exception of technical or grammatical changes, the full text of any modified proposal will be available for 15 days prior to its adoption from Idris Ahmed and will be mailed to those persons who submit written or oral testimony related to this proposal or who have requested notification of any changes to the proposal. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of Idris Ahmed at the address indicated above. The Board will accept written comments on the modified regulation for 15 days after the date on which they are made available, if modifications are made.

AVAILABILITY AND LOCATION OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS AND RULEMAKING FILE All the information upon which the proposed regulations are based is contained in the rulemaking file, which is available for public inspection by contacting the person named below. You may obtain a copy of the final statement of reasons once it has been prepared, by making a written request to the Contact Person named below or by accessing the website listed below.

CONTACT PERSON Inquiries or comments concerning the proposed rulemaking action may be addressed to: Name: Kimberly McDaniel Address: 2420 Del Paso Road, Suite 105 Sacramento, CA 95834 Telephone Number: (916) 575–7221 Fax Number: (916) 575–7283 E–Mail Address: kimberly.mcdaniel@dca. ca.gov The backup contact person is: Name: Idris Ahmed Address: 2420 Del Paso Road, Suite 105 Sacramento, CA 95834 Telephone Number: (916) 575–7207 Fax Number: (916) 575–7283 E–Mail Address: Idris.ahmed@dca.ca.gov

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1772 Website Access: Materials regarding this proposal can be found at https://www.cab.ca.gov/news/laws/ proposed_regulation.shtml. TITLE 16. DENTAL BOARD NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Dental Board of California (Board) is proposing to take the rulemaking action described below under the heading Informative Digest/Policy Statement Overview. Any person interested may present statements or arguments relevant to the action proposed in writing.

Written comments, including those sent by mail, facsimile, or e–mail to the addresses listed under Contact Person in this Notice, must be received by the Board at its office by 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 15, 2022. PUBLIC HEARING The Board has not scheduled a public hearing on this proposed action. The Board will, however, hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested person, or his or her authorized representative, no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period.

AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT The Board may, after considering all timely and relevant comments, adopt the proposed regulations substantially as described in this notice, or may modify the proposed regulations if such modifications are sufficiently related to the original text.

With the exception of technical or grammatical changes, the full text of any modified proposal will be available for 15 days prior to its adoption from the person designated in this Notice as the contact person and will be mailed to those persons who submit written or oral testimony related to this proposal or who have requested notification of any changes to the proposal.

AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Pursuant to the authority vested by Business and Professions Code (BPC) sections 1614, 1634.2, 1635.5, 1724, 1724.5, and 1646.2, and to implement, interpret or make specific BPC sections 27, 108, 1611.5, 1632, 1634.1, 1646.1, 1646.2, 1646.3, 1646.4, 1646.6, 1646.9, 1647.2, 1647.3, 1646.5, 1647.6, 1646.7, 1646.9, 1647.2, 1647.3, 1647.5, 1647.7, 1647.8, 1647.18, 1647.19, 1647.20, 1647.22, 1647.23, 1647.24, 1647.30, 1647.31, 1647.32, 1647.33, 1682, 1715, 1716.1, 1718.3, 1724, 1724.5, 1750.4, 1750.5, 1752.4, and 2827, the Board is considering changes to Division 10 of Title 16 of the California Code of Regulations as follows: INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW The Dental Board of California (Board) licenses and regulates dentists, registered dental assistants (RDA), and registered dental assistants in extended functions (RDAEF).

In addition, the Board is responsible for setting the duties and functions of approximately 50,000 unlicensed dental assistants. The Board’s highest priority is the protection of the public when exercising its licensing, regulatory, and disciplinary functions.

The Board assures the initial and continued competence of its licensees through licensure, investigation of complaints against its licensees, and discipline of those found in violation of the Dental Practice Act, monitoring licensees whose licenses have been placed on probation, and managing the Diversion Program for licensees whose practice may be impaired due to abuse of dangerous drugs or alcohol. The Dental Practice Act (“Act”) governs the use of general anesthesia, conscious sedation, and oral conscious sedation for pediatric and adult patients. SB 501 (Glazer,

Chapter 929, Stats. of 2018), beginning January 1, 2022, establishes new provisions governing the use of deep sedation and general anesthesia for dental patients. (BPC §§ 1646 et seq.) As enacted, SB 501 (Glazer,

Chapter 929, Stats. of 2018), beginning January 1, 2022, establishes new provisions in the Act governing the use of deep sedation and general anesthesia, moderate sedation, and pediatric minimal sedation for dental patients in

Article 2.75 (commencing with

Section 1646 of the Business and Professions Code (BPC)),

Article 2.84 (commencing with

Section 1647 of the BPC), and

Article 2.87 (commencing with

Section 1647.30 of the BPC) of the Act.

Among other requirements, the Act will require dentists to possess either a current license in good standing and a general anesthesia permit, or other specified credentials in order to administer or order the administration of deep sedation or general anesthesia on an outpatient basis. (BPC §§ 1646.1 and 1646.2.) The Act will also authorize a licensed physician and surgeon to administer deep sedation or general anesthesia if that physician and surgeon meets certain requirements, including holding a valid general anesthesia permit and a pediatric endorsement, if applicable. (BPC § 16 4 6.9.) The Act will require dentists to possess a pediatric endorsement of their general anesthesia permit to administer or order the administration of deep sedation or general anesthesia to patients under 7 years of age and will require dentists to be present in the dental office during the ordering and administration of general anesthesia or deep sedation. (BPC § 1646.1, subdivision (b).) The Act requires the presence of the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1773 operating dentist and at least 2 additional personnel for patients under 13 years of age for procedures involving deep sedation or general anesthesia and requires that certain personnel be present throughout the procedure and to maintain current certification in pediatric life support and airway management, as specified. (BPC § 1646.1, subdivision (d).) Dentists applying for a pediatric endorsement for the general anesthesia permit will have to provide proof of successful completion of an accredited or equivalent residency training program, and a certain number of cases of deep sedation or general anesthesia for patients under 7 years of age, along with current certification in specific life support training. (BPC § 1646.2, subdivision (c).) Presently, the Act prohibits a dentist from administering or ordering the administration of conscious sedation, as defined, on an outpatient basis unless the dentist meets certain licensing criteria. (BPC § 1647.19.) Effective January 1, 2022, changes to the Act under SB 501 will repeal existing provisions relating to the use of conscious sedation.

The term “conscious sedation” will be replaced with “moderate sedation,” meaning a drug–induced depression of consciousness during which a patient responds purposefully to verbal commands and meets other criteria. (BPC § 1647.1.) The Act will authorize dentists to administer or order the administration of moderate sedation on an outpatient basis to a dental patient if the dentist meets specified licensing criteria and has applied to the Board, submitted an application fee, and shown successful completion of training in moderate sedation. (BPC § 1647.2.) The Act will require a dentist who orders the administration of moderate sedation to be physically present in the treatment facility while the patient is sedated and would require the presence of additional specified personnel for sedation of patients 13 years of age or younger. (BPC § 1647.2, subdivision (c)(1).) Training in the administration of moderate sedation will be acceptable if it consists of a certain number of instructional hours and completion of cases and complies with certain guidelines for teaching pain control and sedation. (BPC § 1647.3, subdivision (c).) The Act will require a dentist to obtain a pediatric endorsement on the moderate sedation permit prior to administering moderate sedation to a patient under 13 years of age, except as specified, and will require a dentist to obtain specified training and apply on a form prescribed by the Board to receive a pediatric endorsement. (BPC § 1647.3, subdivision (d).) The Act also requires, as a condition of renewal, under amendments enacted by SB 501 (Chapter 929, Stats. of 2018), and effective January 1, 2022, that specified permitholders establish continuing competency to administer general anesthesia, deep sedation (“anesthesia”) or moderate sedation (“sedation”) by completing 20 cases of anesthesia or sedation for specified pediatric populations within the 24–month period immediately preceding each permit renewal period (BPC §§ 1646.2, 1647.3.) Existing regulations do not specify how the Board will determine compliance with these new requirements.

This proposal would specify these compliance requirements for permitholders who seek to administer anesthesia and sedation as provided under the Act.

The Act will establish new requirements for dentists administering or ordering the administration of minimal sedation, defined as a drug–induced state during which patients respond normally to verbal commands. (BPC § 1647.30.) Dentists may administer or order the administration of minimal sedation on pediatric patients under 13 years of age if the dentist possesses specified licensing credentials and follows certain procedures. (BPC § 1647.31.) Any dentist who desires to administer or order the administration of minimal sedation must apply on a form prescribed by the Board and submit an application fee. (BPC § 16 47. 32 .) In addition to the foregoing changes, SB 501 amended, added to, and repealed portions of Business and Professions Code sections 1601.8, 1646–1646.10, 1647–1647.9.5, 1682, 1724, and 1750.5.

The Board needs to make significant regulatory updates to the current anesthesia and sedation permit program regulations to implement the foregoing statutory changes and ensure minimum standards for the professions are met, including adding new forms, permit requirements, and fees, making revisions to renewal requirements, onsite inspection and evaluation standards, facility and equipment standards, Board–approved educational requirements for dentists and dental sedation assistants; and, repealing oral conscious sedation references and case documentation requirements.

In this rulemaking proposal, the Board proposes to: ● Adopt

section 1017.1 and a new title “Continued Competency Requirements for Renewal of Permits with Pediatric Endorsements,” to replace a prior repealed regulation entitled “Processing Times.” This change would prescribe the requirements to maintain continued competency in the administration of deep sedation, general anesthesia, and moderate sedation to patients under the age of 13 by prescribing the documentation or written confirmation general anesthesia and moderate sedation permit holders with pediatric endorsements must provide the Board at license renewal. ● Amend

section 1021 to (1) provide grammatical changes and other non–substantive changes to add references to the “Business and Professions Code” or the “Code” to existing subsections (a)–

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1774 (p); (2) strike references to “conscious sedation” and replace with references to “moderate sedation” in subsections (q), (s), and (u) (re– lettered from current (t)); and (3) establish fees for the following: (

q) an application for general anesthesia (dentist or physician) or moderate sedation permit ($524), (

s) application for pediatric minimal sedation permit ($459), (

t) pediatric minimal sedation permit renewal ($182), (ae) application for adult oral conscious sedation certificate ($459), (af) adult oral conscious sedation certificate renewal ($168), (ag) application for pediatric endorsement for general anesthesia permit (dentist or physician) ($532); and, (ah) application for pediatric endorsement for moderate sedation permit ($532). ● Amend

section 1043 to add the words “deep sedation” wherever the words “general anesthesia” are used, and strike the word “conscious” wherever it is used and replace it with “moderate” before the word “sedation” in the

definitions

section applicable to deep sedation and moderate sedation. This proposal would also capitalize the “C” in “code” throughout this section. ● Amend

section 1043.1 to establish permit application requirements for general anesthesia permits (which will include deep sedation) and moderate sedation permits and the requirements to pay a fee to process those applications as set forth in

Section 1021. The regulation will incorporate by reference the “Application for General Anesthesia Permit” Form GAP–1 (New 05/2021) and “Application for Moderate Sedation Permit” Form MSP–1 (New 05/2021).

The regulation will incorporate by reference a “Certification of Moderate Sedation Training” Form MSP–2 (New 05/2021) which must accompany the “Application for Moderate Sedation Permit.” The regulation will also require applicants who wish to administer or order the administration of deep sedation or general anesthesia to patients under seven years of age to separately apply for a pediatric endorsement to their permit and receive approval from the Board.

The regulation will require applicants who wish to administer or order the administration of moderate sedation to patients under 13 years of age to separately apply for a pediatric endorsement to their permit and receive approval from the Board. ● Amend

section 1043.2 to establish the number and qualifications of evaluators required to evaluate applicants for the issuance or renewal of general anesthesia and moderate sedation permits. Proposed amendments to

section 1043.2(

a) would require two or more persons for each evaluation team for the first evaluation or in the event an applicant has failed an evaluation; all subsequent evaluations would only require one evaluator. Proposed amendments to subsections (

b) and (

c) would add the words “deep sedation” wherever the words “general anesthesia” are used, and strike the word “conscious” wherever it is used and replace it with “moderate” before the word “sedation.” This proposal would also capitalize the “C” in “code” in subsection (b). In subsection (d), this proposal would require evaluators to possess a current, active, and unrestricted license from the Board or, the Medical Board of California for applicants qualifying under

Section 1646.9 of the Code. For purposes of this section, “unrestricted” would mean not subject to any disciplinary action such as revocation, suspension, or probation. ● Amend

section 1043.3 to revise facilities, equipment, records, and drug requirements for dental offices administering general anesthesia, deep sedation, or moderate sedation to adult and pediatric patients.

This proposal would add the words “deep sedation” wherever the words “general anesthesia” are used and strike the word “conscious” wherever it is used and replace it with “moderate” before the word “sedation.” Subsection (a): The office facilities and equipment maintenance requirement to be in “good operating condition” will be struck and replaced with a requirement that equipment be maintained, tested and inspected according to manufacturer specifications. For pediatric patients, equipment, medication and resuscitative capabilities would be required to be appropriately sized for use on pediatric patients.

Subsection (a)(7)(K): Existing requirements will be struck and replaced with a requirement that patients receiving moderate sedation, deep sedation or general anesthesia shall have ventilation continuously monitored during the procedure by at least two of three specified methods. Subsection (b)(3): This new subsection would require that records include: the category of the provider (as defined in BPC § 1680(z)(3)) responsible for sedation oversight, the category of the provider delivering sedation, the category of the provider monitoring the patient during

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1775 sedation, and whether the person supervising the sedation performed one or more of the procedures. Subsection (b)(4): This proposal would revise the current requirements to include written consent of the patient’s conservator, or the informed consent of a person authorized to give such consent for the patient pursuant to BPC

section 1682(e). ● Amend

section 1043.4 to add the words “deep sedation” wherever the words “general anesthesia” are used and strike the word “conscious” wherever it is used and replace it with “moderate” before the word “sedation”. This proposal would also capitalize the “C” in “code” wherever it occurs in this section. ● Amend sections 1043.5 and 1043.7 to replace “conscious” with “moderate” as SB 501 eliminates the use of term “conscious.” This proposal would also capitalize the “C” in “code” wherever it occurs in

section 1043.5. ● Amend

section 1043.6 to prescribe the grades evaluators will be required to use to recommend to the Board for inspections and evaluations of applicants for the general anesthesia and moderate sedation permits, which would include: (1) “Passed Evaluation” (met all required components of the onsite inspection and evaluation), (2) “Conditional Approval” (for failing to have appropriate equipment, proper documentation of controlled substances, or proper recordkeeping and must submit written proof, as specified, of correcting the deficiencies within fifteen (15) days of receiving notice), (3) “Failed Simulated Emergency” (Permit holder failed one or more simulated emergency scenario(

s) required for the on–site inspection and evaluation); or, (4) “Failed Evaluation” (Permit holder failed due to multiple deficient components required for the on–site inspection and evaluation or failed to comply with the conditions for issuance of a conditional approval as specified). The proposal would delete references to appeal procedures to the full board after failing an evaluation and also the process for requesting an independent reevaluation upon payment of an additional evaluation fee.

This proposal would require applicants (who have failed two previous inspections) to successfully complete remedial education in a subject within the scope of the onsite inspection and evaluation as determined by the Board prior to being retested if a third onsite inspection and evaluation is granted or prior to the issuance of a new permit. The proposal would also make other technical changes to add a relevant cross–reference to

Section 1646.9(d) (relating to physician and surgeon qualifications) and capitalize the “C” in Code wherever it appears in this section. ● Amend

section 1043.8 to replace “conscious” with “moderate” and cross–reference

section 1017 and 1017.1’s continuing competency requirements, and

section 1021 for the required fees for the permits. ● Adopt

section 1043.8.1 to establish the requirements for completed applications for pediatric endorsements to the general anesthesia and moderate sedation permits. The regulation will incorporate by reference the “Documentation of Deep Sedation and General Anesthesia or Moderate Sedation Cases for Pediatric Endorsement” Form PE–1 (New 05/2021). The

section would require an applicant for a pediatric endorsement who seeks to use general anesthesia or moderate sedation in the treatment of pediatric patients under 13 years of age or seven years of age to submit to the Board information to document each of the 20 cases of deep sedation and general anesthesia or moderate sedation required by Sections 1646.2 and 1647.3 of the Code on Form PE–1. This

section would further authorize the Board to require, upon request by the Board in any investigation of the information provided on Form PE–1, that applicants also provide documentation or patient records for each deep sedation and general anesthesia or moderate sedation pediatric case listed on Form PE–1, including preoperative evaluation, medical history, monitoring of vital signs throughout the procedure, and condition at discharge. Finally, this proposal would require applicants to submit legible copies of the information required by this

section with pediatric patient identifying information redacted. ● Adopt

Article 5.1 and title “Pediatric Minimal Sedation” to establish a new

article for the regulations relating to the pediatric minimal sedation permit. ● Adopt

section 1043.9 to establish

definitions for

Article 5.1 relating to the pediatric minimal sedation permit, including

definitions for “another sedation permit”, “outpatient basis”, and “pediatric patient,” as specified. ● Adopt

section 1043.9.1 to establish who must apply for the pediatric minimal sedation permit for the purposes of BPC

section 1647.31 and 1647.32. The regulation will incorporate by reference the “Application for Pediatric Minimal Sedation Permit” PMSP–1 (New 05/2021) and the “Certification of Pediatric Minimal Sedation Training” Form PMSP–2 (New 05/2021) that

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1776 must accompany the application and applicable fee as set by

Section 1021. This proposal would create an exemption for a licensed dentist who desires to administer or order minimal sedation if they possess another sedation permit from the Board (as defined in

section 1043.9). This

section would also require that the office in which the pediatric minimal sedation is administered meet the facilities and equipment standards set forth in

Section 1043.9.2. ● Adopt

section 1043.9.2 to establish the facility, equipment (including ancillary equipment as specified), emergency cart or kit, emergency drugs, and records requirements applicable to facilities in which pediatric minimal sedation is administered to patients. ● Amend

section 1044 to delete references to superseded articles and references to oral conscious sedation for minors, and clarify

definitions applicable to “outpatient basis” (means “outpatient setting” as referenced in Health and Safety Code

section 1248) in regulations in

Article 5.5, for oral conscious sedation. ● Amend

section 1044.1 to delete current references to current forms for applications for certificates for adult (OCS–1 Rev. 01/05) or minor (OCS–3 Rev. 03/07) conscious sedation and establish and incorporate by reference the “Application for Use of Oral Conscious Sedation on Adult Patients” Form OCS–C (New 05/2021). This proposal would also remove references to requirements for dentists who possess only an adult oral conscious sedation permit and oral conscious sedation certificate for minor patients references. This proposal would also replace the word “conscious” with the word “moderate” before the words “sedation permit.” ● Amend

section 1044.2 to make non–substantive, clarifying amendments including to remove an outdated reference to

section 16147.12(b), add a reference to “of the Code” (short form reference for Business and Professions Code) and capitalize the “B” in the word “board.” ● Amend

section 1044.3 to eliminate reference to the administration of and program coursework related to oral conscious sedation on minors since this is now replaced by pediatric minimal sedation. This

section would further be amended to shorten a reference to the Business and Professions Code to “Code,” strike a reference to “conscious” sedation and replace it with “moderate” sedation, and strike a reference to “the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry.” ● Repeal

section 1044.4 relating to requirements for documentation of 10 cases of oral conscious sedation based on its reference to an outdated experience pathway for applicants administering oral conscious sedation. ● Amend

section 1044.5 to revise facility, equipment, records, and drug requirements applicable to facilities in which oral conscious sedation is administered to patients. This proposal would add requirements for all equipment to be maintained, tested, and inspected according to the manufacturers’ specifications. This proposal would add requirements for obtaining the patient’s conservator, or the informed consent of a person authorized to give such consent for the patient and strike a reference to “the parent or legal guardian of the patient” (as this

section no longer pertains to minors). ● Amend

section 1070.8 to revise course requirements for the dental sedation assistant permit to include references to deep sedation, moderate sedation (and striking references to “conscious sedation”) and adding a requirement that didactic instruction include resuscitation of pediatric patients. The proposal would also include minor, technical and grammatical changes to the text for consistency of use of terms throughout the Division. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS This regulatory proposal will afford maximum protection to pediatric patients who receive sedation and anesthesia services in California.

The regulations will create an orderly process for applicants to obtain pediatric endorsements to the general anesthesia permit and moderate sedation permits. The application process will ensure that the Board grants permits and endorsements to only those applicants who are qualified to provide sedation and anesthesia services.

The renewal process will ensure permit holders possess continued competency in the administration of deep sedation or general anesthesia, by requiring general anesthesia permit holders to submit documentation of completion of twenty (20) cases of general anesthesia to pediatric patients in order to maintain continued competency. This proposal will also require moderate sedation permit holders to submit documentation of completion of twenty (20) cases of moderate sedation to pediatric patients in order to maintain continued competency.

Pediatric patients are our state’s most vulnerable patients and these requirements will ensure dentists possess competency at the time of renewal. The adoption of the forms incorporated by reference in this proposal will assist staff in ensuring an applicant meets the training requirements for the administration of general anesthesia, deep sedation,

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1777 moderate sedation, pediatric minimal sedation, oral conscious sedation for adults and training requirements applicable to pediatric endorsements. The amendments to the regulations governing onsite inspections and evaluations will ensure that evaluators are properly qualified and utilize appropriate standards. The regulations will provide clarity to regulated professionals about how these evaluations are graded and passing evaluations, and how to remedy areas in which they receive failing grades.

The fees established and amended in this proposal will ensure the Board has sufficient resources to process applications and ensure applicants meet legal requirements for permits and endorsements. This proposal will also amend faculty and course requirements for dental sedation assistant permit courses including instruction requirements. These amendments will ensure those obtaining this permit will be properly trained in all categories of anesthesia and sedation established by SB 501, and will properly monitor patients during procedures. DETERMINATION OF INCONSISTENCY/ INCOMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING REGULATION(

S) During the process of developing these regulations and amendments, the Board conducted a search of any similar regulations on this topic and concluded that these regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations.

INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE The following forms have been incorporated by reference: 1. “Application for General Anesthesia Permit” Form GAP–1 (New 05/2021) 2. “Application for Moderate Sedation Permit” Form MSP–1 (New 05/2021) 3. “Certification of Moderate Sedation Training” Form MSP–2 (New 05/2021) 4. “Documentation of Deep Sedation and General Anesthesia or Moderate Sedation Cases for Pediatric Endorsement” Form PE–1 (05/2021) 5. “Application for Pediatric Minimal Sedation Permit” PMSP–1 (New 05/2021) 6. “Certification of Pediatric Minimal Sedation Training” Form PMSP–2 (New 05/2021) 7. “Application for Use of Oral Conscious Sedation on Adult Patients” Form OCS–C (New 05/2021) DISCLOSURES REGARDING PROPOSED ACTION FISCAL IMPACT ESTIMATES Fiscal Impact on Public Agencies Including Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: The Board anticipates workload will be greatest in the first two years of implementation as existing and new applicants transition to the new permit types.

Permit application workload costs are estimated to range from approximately $141,000 to $447,000 per year and up to $2.5 million over a ten–year period. Permit application revenue is estimated to range from approximately $141,000 to $447,000 per year and up to $2.5 million over a ten–year period. Please see the Initial Statement of Reasons for further detail. Cost or Savings in Federal Funding to the State: None. Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. Local Mandate: None. Cost to Any Local Agency or School District for Which Government Code Sections 17500–17630 Require Reimbursement: None.

Business Impact: The Board has made an initial determination that the proposed regulatory action would have no significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. This initial determination is based upon the following facts. This regulation may have an economic impact on businesses, specifically, the Board’s licensees, permitholders and applicants.

The proposal would: (1) increase the fee for an application for the general anesthesia permit (for dentist and physician licensees) to $524, (2) increase the fee for an application for a moderate sedation permit to $524, (3) set a new fee for an application for pediatric minimal sedation permit at $459, (4) set a new pediatric minimal sedation permit renewal fee at $182, (5) increase the fee for an application for adult oral conscious sedation certificate to $459, (6) set a new fee for the application for pediatric endorsement for general anesthesia permit at $532; and, (7) set a new fee for the pediatric endorsement for moderate sedation permit at $532.

To the extent these applicants apply for such permits, or licensees opt to renew their licenses and permits, the proposed regulations will impact them. Licensees who seek to administer general anesthesia and moderate sedation to pediatric patients may incur costs to provide the Board documentation showing

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1778 completion of required cases at the time of renewal. However, those costs are anticipated to be minimal considering the number of cases required to be documented. There is no cost to California businesses except for those of dental offices in which deep sedation, general anesthesia, moderate sedation, pediatric minimal sedation, and oral conscious sedation for adult patients is administered. The cost includes application and renewal fees which are minimal in comparison with the income of such individuals.

According to online data, the annual salary of a dentist who practices in California averages $169,000 per year. In addition, these fees represent incremental increases compared with what is currently being charged by the Board for the same services (increases of $24, $91, $532, and $14). Cost Impact on Representative Private Person or Business: The Board has determined that the following individuals may be affected by the proposed changes to the Board’s anesthesia and sedation permit program.

Applicants and existing permit holders of the general anesthesia, moderate sedation, pediatric minimal sedation, or oral conscious sedation for adult’s permits, and pediatric endorsement for general anesthesia or moderate sedation permit holders that pay initial application and renewal fees. Licensees who seek to administer general anesthesia and moderate sedation to pediatric patients may incur costs to provide the Board documentation showing completion of required cases at the time of renewal. However, those costs are anticipated to be minimal considering the number of cases required to be documented.

The proposed regulations are anticipated to result in an economic impact to permit holders ranging from approximately $141,000 to $447,000 per year and up to $2.5 million over a ten–year period. Please see the Initial Statement of Reasons for further detail. Effect on Housing Costs: None. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS The Board has determined that the proposed regulations would not affect small businesses.

Although small businesses owned by licensees of the Board and small businesses that employ licensees of the Board may be impacted, the Board estimates that the fiscal impact would be minor and absorbable as described in the above Business Impact statement. The Board does not maintain data relating to the number of percentage of licensees who own a small business; therefore, the number or percentage of small businesses that may be impacted cannot be predicted.

RESULTS OF ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT/ANALYSIS Impact on Jobs/Businesses: The Board has made the initial determination that this regulatory proposal will not have a significant impact on the creation of jobs or the elimination of jobs or existing businesses or the expansion of businesses in the State of California because it would only impact individual applicants who are applying for the permits and/or endorsements.

Applicants and existing permit holders of the general anesthesia, moderate sedation, pediatric minimal sedation, or oral conscious sedation for adult’s permits, and pediatric endorsement for general anesthesia or moderate sedation permit holders will pay initial application and renewal fees.

However, these fees are minimal in comparison to the income of such individuals and represent incremental increases compared with what is currently being charged by the Board for the same services (increases of $24, $91, $532, and $14).The Board does not anticipate that this proposal will create or eliminate existing businesses in which anesthesia or sedation is administered as the cases required to document competency for the renewal of the general anesthesia and moderate sedation permits are minimal.

Benefits of Regulation: The Board has determined that this regulatory proposal will have the following benefits to health and welfare of California residents: This regulatory proposal affects the health and welfare of California residents because the proposed regulation will further increase the priority of the Board which is the protection of the public.

The adoption of the new permits and endorsements ensures that individual applicants will be current and up to date with the latest in sedation and anesthesia process/ methods to ensure that they can perform procedures on consumers consistent with minimum standards for safety and care. The proposal will also benefit the health and welfare of California residents by verifying continued competency is maintained by general anesthesia and moderate sedation permit holders.

This regulatory proposal does not affect worker safety because the regulations pertain to the Board’s adoption of new anesthesia/sedation permits and endorsements and would only impact individual applicants who are applying for the permits and/or endorsements and is not related to worker safety. This regulatory proposal does not affect the state’s environment because the regulations pertain to the Board’s adoption of new anesthesia/sedation permits and endorsements, and this proposal is not relevant to the state’s environment.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1779 INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS AND INFORMATION The Board has prepared an initial statement of the reasons for the proposed action and has available all the information upon which the proposal is based, which may be obtained from the contact person identified in this notice.

TEXT OF PROPOSAL Copies of the exact language of the proposed regulations, and any document incorporated by reference, and of the initial statement of reasons, and all of the information upon which the proposal is based, may be obtained at the hearing or prior to the hearing upon request from the Board at 2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 1550, Sacramento, California 95815 or by accessing the Board’s website at https://www. dbc.ca.gov/about_us/lawsregs/proposed_regulations. shtml.

A VAILABILITY AND LOCATION OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS AND RULEMAKING FILE All the information upon which the proposed regulations are based is contained in the rulemaking file which is available for public inspection by contacting the person named below. You may obtain a copy of the final statement of reasons once it has been prepared, by making a written request to the contact person named below or by accessing the website listed below.

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The Board must determine that no reasonable alternative it considered to the regulation or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposal described in this Notice, or would be more cost effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

Any interested person may present statements or arguments orally or in writing relevant to the above determinations.

CONTACT PERSON Inquiries or comments concerning the proposed rulemaking action may be addressed to: Name: Jessica Olney, Staff Services Manager I Dental Board of California Address: 2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 1550 Sacramento, CA 95815 Telephone Number: (916) 263–2373 Fax Number: (916) 263–2140 E–Mail Address: Jessica.Olney@dca.ca.gov The backup contact person is: Name: Sarah Wallace, Interim Executive Officer Dental Board of California Address: 2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 1550 Sacramento, CA 95815 Telephone Number: (916) 263–2187 Fax Number: (916) 263–2140 E–Mail Address: Sarah.Wallace@dca.ca.gov WEBSITE ACCESS Materials regarding this proposal can be found at the Board’s Website at https://www.dbc.ca.gov/about_ us/lawsregs/proposed_regulations.shtml.

TITLE 17. AIR RESOURCES BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED 2021 AMENDMENTS TO AREA DESIGNATIONS FOR STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS The California Air Resources Board (CARB or Board) will conduct a public hearing at the date and time noted below to consider approving for adoption the proposed 2021 amendments to Area Designations for State Ambient Air Quality Standards. Date: February 24, 2022 Time: 9:00 a.m. This public meeting may continue at 8:30 a.m., on February 25, 2022.

Please consult the public agenda, which will be posted ten days before the February 24, 2022 Board Meeting, for important details, including, but not limited to, the day on which this item will be considered and any appropriate direction regarding a possible remote–only Board Meeting. If the meeting is to be held in person — in addition to remote access — it will be held at the California Air Resources Board, Byron Sher Auditorium, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1780 WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD AND SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS In accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, interested members of the public may present comments orally or in writing during the hearing and may provide comments by postal mail or by electronic submittal before the hearing. The public comment period for this regulatory action will begin on December 31, 2021. Written comments not submitted during the hearing must be submitted on or after December 31, 2021 and received no later than February 14, 2022.

Comments submitted outside that comment period are considered untimely. CARB may, but is not required to, respond to untimely comments, including those raising significant environmental issues. The Board also encourages members of the public to bring to the attention of staff in advance of the hearing any suggestions for modification of the proposed regulatory action.

Comments submitted in advance of the hearing must be addressed to one of the following: Postal mail: Clerks’ Office, California Air Resources Board 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 Electronic submittal: https://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bclist.php Please note that under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.), your written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., your address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the public record and can be released to the public upon request.

Additionally, the Board requests but does not require that persons who submit written comments to the Board reference the title of the proposal in their comments to facilitate review. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE This regulatory action is proposed under the authority granted in California Health and Safety Code, sections 39600, 39601, 39608, and 40925.5. This action is proposed to implement, interpret, and make specific sections 39608 and 40925.5. INFORMATIVE DIGEST OF PROPOSED ACTION AND POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW (Gov.

Code, § 11346.5, subdivision (a)(3)) Sections Affected: Proposed amendment to California Code of Regulations, title 17, sections 60203, 60205, and 60210. BACKGROUND AND EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION CARB is charged with the responsibility of adopting ambient air quality standards in consideration of the public health, safety, and welfare (Health and Safety Code [H&SC]

section 39606). To date, CARB has adopted State ambient air quality standards (State standards) for ten pollutants, set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 17,

section 70200. The designation criteria are set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 17, sections 70300 through 70306, and appendices 1 through 3 thereof. Based on these designation criteria, H&SC

section 39608 further requires CARB to establish and annually review area designations for State standards. CARB may also consider other changes to the sections affected, as listed above in this notice, or other sections within the scope of this notice, during the course of this rulemaking process. OBJECTIVES AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION During the annual review, CARB determines whether changes to the existing area designations are warranted based on an evaluation of recent air quality data.

The proposed amendments to the area designations classify the air quality in communities as to whether it meets the State standards. Depending on the proposed changes to an area’s designation, the local air quality management district or air pollution control district (district) may be required to adopt and submit a plan to correct for deficiencies in meeting the State standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide (NO 2), and sulfur dioxide.

Districts may modify the emissions reduction strategy or alternative measure of progress in the plan if the district demonstrates to CARB’s satisfaction that the modified strategy is at least as effective in improving air quality as the strategy in the plan. The annual review and update of the area designations gives the public, businesses, and government an indication of whether the health–based standards are being met. This information allows the public to make more educated decisions regarding personal health and residency, as well as participation in outdoor activities.

In addition, businesses and government are given the opportunity to make informed decisions regarding worker health and safety. Objectives: This year’s review of the area designations is based on air quality data from 2018 through 2020. The proposed amendments provide for the following changes: ● NO2 Area Designations (section 60203);

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1781 ○ Redesignate the CA 60 Near–Road Portion of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties in South Coast Air Basin as Attainment. ● PM10 Area Designations (section 60205); and ○ Redesignate Mendocino County in the North Coast Air Basin as Attainment. ● PM2.5 Area Designations (section 60210). ○ Redesignate Santa Barbara County in the South Central Coast Air Basin as Attainment. Benefits: Environmental Justice.

Some communities experience higher exposures to air pollutants, and it is a priority of CARB to ensure that full protection is afforded to all Californians. Though the proposed amendments to the area designations do not contain any requirements for action, the area designations are designed to identify areas with unhealthful air quality, based on the most recently available complete data, and can help better inform actions to improve air quality.

CARB’s designations provide members of these communities with updated information about the air quality of their communities which, as stated, allows them to make more educated decisions regarding personal health and residency, as well as participation in outdoor activities. Safeguarding the quality of the physical environment. An area’s designation status provides a classification that assists local districts in more accurately assessing local air quality.

As discussed above, depending on the proposed changes to an area’s designation, a district may be required to adopt and submit a plan to correct for deficiencies in meeting the State standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. As a result, indirect benefits to the quality of the physical environment may result if the district adopts or amends its regulations with a goal toward achieving the State standards. Encouraging a regional approach to the State ambient air quality, whenever possible.

The proposed designations by discrete areas allow each local district to assess the air quality of individual areas and address their unique situations and needs. This approach allows each local district to identify the most cost– effective, efficient, and acceptable approach to achieve the State standards. Consistency with the State goal of providing a decent home and suitable living environment. The annual review and update of the area designations gives local districts an updated and more accurate indication of whether the health–based standards are being met.

This information allows local districts to make informed decisions regarding appropriate actions to meet the State standards. Protection of worker safety. The annual review and update of the area designations gives the public, businesses, and government an updated and more accurate indication of whether the health–based standards are being met. This information also allows businesses and government the opportunity to make better informed decisions regarding worker health and safety.

COMPARABLE FEDERAL REGULATIONS There are no comparable federal or local regulations that address area designations for the State standards. AN EVALUATION OF INCONSISTENCY OR INCOMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING STATE REGULATIONS (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subdivision (a)(3)(D)) The proposed changes, as well as the process for affecting those changes, to the area designations are consistent and compatible with existing State regulations. In proposing the designation changes, CARB has considered the data for record (defined in the California Code of Regulations, title 17,

section 70301(a)), 1 which meet the representativeness and completeness criteria. The representativeness criteria are set forth in Appendix B to the Initial Statement of Reasons and in the California Code of Regulations, title 17, Division 3,

Chapter 1, Subchapter 1.5,

Article 3, Appendix 1. The completeness criteria are also set forth in Appendix B to the Initial Statement of Reasons and in the California Code of Regulations, title 17, Division 3,

Chapter 1, Subchapter 1.5,

Article 3, Appendix 3. In addition, CARB has considered the criteria for designating areas as Nonattainment (California Code of Reg u lat ion s, t itle 17, se ct ion 70303), Nonat t ai n ment– transitional for pollutants other than ozone (California Code of Regulations, title 17,

section 70303.1), Nonattainment–transitional for ozone (California Code of Regulations, title 17,

section 70303.5), and 1 C alifornia Code of Regulations, title 17,

section 70301(

a) pro - vides: “Except as otherwise provided in this article, designations shall be based on ‘data for record.’

(1) Data for record are those data collected by or under the auspices of the state board or the districts for the purpose of measuring ambient air quality, and which the Executive Officer or his or her delegate has determined comply with the siting and quality assurance procedures estab - lished in

Part 58, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations or other equivalent procedures.

(2) Any other data which are provided by a district or by any other person will be data for record if the Ex - ecutive Officer or his or her delegate determines within 90 days of submittal of complete supporting documentation that the data comply with the siting and quality assurance procedures estab - lished in

Part 58, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations or other equivalent procedures . . . .”

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1782 Attainment (California Code of Regulations, title 17,

section 70304) in making these proposed designations. During the process of developing the proposed regulatory action, CARB conducted a search of any similar regulations on this topic and concluded these regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing State regulations. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED REGULATION FISCAL IMPACT/LOCAL MANDATE DETERMINATION REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION (Gov.

Code, § 11346.5, subdivisions (a)(5)&(6)) The determinations of the Board’s Executive Officer concerning the costs or savings incurred by public agencies and private persons and businesses in reasonable compliance with the proposed regulatory action are presented below.

Under Government Code sections 11346.5, subdivision (a)(5) and 11346.5, subdivision (a)(6), the Executive Officer has determined that the proposed regulatory action would not create costs or savings to any State agency, would not create costs or savings in federal funding to the State, would not create costs or mandate to any local agency or school district, whether or not reimbursable by the State under Government Code, title 2, division 4,

part 7 (commencing with

section 17500), or other nondiscretionary cost or savings to State or local agencies. HOUSING COSTS (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subdivision (a)(12)) The Executive Officer has also made the initial determination that the proposed regulatory action will not have a significant effect on housing costs. SIGNIFICANT STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT DIRECTLY AFFECTING BUSINESS, INCLUDING ABILITY TO COMPETE (Gov.

Code, §§ 11346.3, subdivision (a), 11346.5, subdivision (a)(7), 11346.5, subdivision (a)(8)) The Executive Officer has made an initial determination that the proposed regulatory action would not have a significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states, or on representative private persons. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS/ASSESSMENT (Gov.

Code, § 11346.5, subdivision (a)(10)) Non–Major Regulation: Statement of the Results of the Economic Impact Assessment (EIA): Effect on Jobs/Businesses: The Executive Officer has determined that the proposed regulatory action would not a ff e c t t h e c r e a t i o n or elimination of jobs within the State of California, the creation of new businesses or elimination of existing businesses within the State of California, or the expansion of businesses currently doing business within the State of California.

A detailed assessment of the economic impacts of the proposed regulatory action can be found in the Economic Impact Analysis in the Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR). The area designations are labels that describe the healthfulness of the air quality in each area. Because these regulations by themselves are labels of an area’s air quality, they do not contain any specific requirements for action, but may trigger or suspend the review, adoption, and submittal of a triennial plan by a local district. As a result, in most cases they have no specific, direct economic impact.

In general, this regional approach to categorizing air quality allows each district to identify the most cost–effective and efficient approach to achieve the ambient air quality standards. In addition, the annual review and update of the area designations gives the public an indication of whether the health–based standards are being met, thereby allowing the public to make more educated decisions regarding personal health and residency, as well as participation in outdoor activities.

These personal health and residency decisions may translate into cost savings from reduced medical expenses, hospitalizations, and time off from work, as well as improved psychological benefits. It also allows businesses and government the opportunity to make informed decisions about worker health and safety. These business and government decisions may also translate into cost savings from reduced workers’ expenses such as medical expenses, hospitalizations, time off from work, and worker’s compensation, as well as improved worker morale.

Benefits of the Proposed Regulation: The objective of the proposed regulatory action is to review and update the area designations which give the public, businesses, and government, an indication of whether the health–based standards are being met. A

summary of these benefits is provided, please refer to “Objectives and Benefits”, under the Informative Digest of Proposed Action and Policy Statement

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 53-Z 1783 Overview Pursuant to Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(3) discussion above. COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE PRIVATE PERSONS OR BUSINESSES (Gov. Code, § 11346.5, subdivision (a)(9)) In developing this regulatory proposal, CARB staff evaluated the potential economic impacts on representative private persons or businesses. CARB is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. CARB is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS (Cal. Code Regs., title 1, § 4, subdivisions (

a) and (b)) The Executive Officer has also determined under California Code of Regulations, title 1,

section 4, that the proposed regulatory action would not affect small businesses because the proposed regulatory actions are labels of an area’s air quality; they do not contain any specific requirements for action, other than triggering the review, adoption, and submittal of a triennial plan by the local district. As a result, they have no specific, direct impact on small businesses. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES (Gov.

Code, § 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13)) Before taking final action on the proposed regulatory action, the Board must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Board, or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Board, would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provisions of law.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CARB, as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has reviewed the proposed regulation and concluded that this is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that the