Foreign Trained Dentist-READ THIS-Important Info on deadline ext. CAL bench Exam

[gsmm]

CONGRATULATIONS FOR EVERYONE WHO WAITED SOOO LONG FOR THE BILL EXTENSION...
THE RT EXAM BILL WAS SIGNED TODAY BY THE GOVERNER
NOW I RECIEVED AN EMAIL SAYING THAT THE DBC WILL POST NEXT WEEK ON ITS WEBSITE ALL WE HAVE TO DO REGARDING THE APPLICATIONS
GOOD LUCK FOR EVERYONE

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[venus]

guys!! i was told that governor signed for the bill. what a great thing!!
then i have a question. how can i get an application form for the RT exam?
i'm in South korea now. As a matter of fact, I passed my part 1&2 exams through the agency. I didn't do it on my own.
so if anyone has a good idea, please let me know.

 

[Chuchuca]

Does anyone knows what SB 1865 means?
I received this e-mail, but I am kind of confused. Sorry!!!

 

[gsmm]

hi chuchu...this 1865 is a bill that supports that california can accept the wreb exam as it accepts the dbc exam which is harder, and this is not for our benefit we as foreign trained dentists will not be eligeble to take the wreb but the dbc exam ...so we are opposing the 1865 bill.

 

[Sanjiv]

<< correspondence from [email protected] >>

Hello everyone: It is official, the Governor signed the RT extension bill today!!!
Here is what to do now:

Wait for the Dental Board to post on their WEB SITE the exact details of how and when to send the application.

By next week they will post on the Web all the necessary information you will need to know prior to sending your application.

Do not call the Dental Board!!!!

Do not send your application until then, for you will waste more time if they return it to you.

The information I received today from the Dental Board is that they will decide next week exactly what you need to do, but their strong suggestion was to have all the information you will need at hand but not to mail them anything yet.

The Board will only accept applications by mail only, use registered or certified mail to make sure you have proof that you send your application.

I was inform that it does not matter if your application gets there first or not, as long as you send it in the allowed time, which should be no less than 90 days counting today, you will have completed the first requirement, which is letting the Board know that you intend to take the RT Exam.

The Board will choose at random, not on a first come first served basis, who will sit for the next exam. Most of those chosen will be first timers.

If you have a prior application filled out, hang on to it, by next week the Board will say if you can use your prior application. Again, do not mail anything yet.

As far as changes on the exam itself, i was told today it will take at least a year for the changes to be implemented, that means the next exam will be the same as last years exam. One of the regulatory hearings will take place in San Francisco on May 14th, if you are interested in attending such Board meeting, please let me know so that we can meet there prior to the hearings.

You have every right to be anxious and wary but the worse if over, just be calm and patient a little longer, but at the same time don't forget to gather all the information that you will need to send the Board, do not wait until the last minute to get it or might be too late. There is enough time before the deadline for everyone to get all they need to send.

The next mail that you all get from me will also be very important, that is the mail or fax that you will need to send by 4p.m April 14th to Sacramento. All the necessary information will be in the next mail.

God Bless you all, Luis.

 

[Sanjiv]

<< corresnpndence from [email protected] >>

Fax against SB1865, please read

Hello Everyone: It is extremely important that you and everyone you know, sends the attached letter to Senator Liz Figueroa's office by 4p.m April 14th. You can either fax it or send it to the following individual, who is the Senior Analyst for Senator Figueroa. The e-mail address is [email protected]

Please get as many people involved as you can to defeat or at least to amend the proposed bill, otherwise, those who pass the RT Exam might not have a Professional Licensure Examination available and you won't be able to get a license in California, at best you will have a harder examination than those from ADA approved schools or you might not have any place where you can be tested.


Sample Letter:-

FROM:
Your Name
Complete Address
Phone Number

TO: Senator Liz Figueroa
Chairperson of Senate Business and Professions Committee
State Capitol
Sacramento, California
FAX : (916) 324-0917

RE: Senate Bill 1865 (Aanestad)

Dear Senator Figueroa:
I am writing you this letter to express my opposition to the SB1865 as proposed by Senator Sam Aanestad.
I am opposing this proposed legislation for the following reasons:

1. The proposed legislation will weaken the present standard of dentistry in California because it will allow licensing people who cannot pass the standard California dental licensing examination that only requires minimum competency.

This legislation was introduced at the insistence of a private dental school in the State whose graduates are having great difficulty passing the Dental Board Examination in California. Your office has the statistics from the Dental Board that proves such assertion. To create legislation to try to correct what is basically an educational or training problem will not make them better dentists.

2. The proposed legislation as presently written or as it is intended to be approved, does not specifically state that all qualified candidates that can take the Dental Licensure examinations of California, will be certified by the Dental Board of California as eligible to take the examinations conducted by those contracted by the State to administer the examination.

If the proposed legislation is passed as intended, hundreds of eligible candidates who earned their degrees from schools outside the United States and Canada will not be eligible to take the examinations. This, in effect will disenfranchise these people whose only fault is that they earned a dental degree somewhere else other than the USA or Canada. This will create a two-tier examination on the premises that is OK to have separate but equal dental examinations.

3. The State should not allow a private entity whose motives maybe different, to have a say on who gets to be a licensed dentist in California because such private entities are not duty bound to protect the people of California.

4. There is no need to rush this proposal; the California patients are in no danger. Let?s get all the facts and work out all the details before you are asked to vote and decide on this very important and complex issue.

 

[organic]

<< corresnpndence from [email protected] >>

Fax against SB1865, please read

Hello Everyone: It is extremely important that you and everyone you know, sends the attached letter to Senator Liz Figueroa's office by 4p.m April 14th. You can either fax it or send it to the following individual, who is the Senior Analyst for Senator Figueroa. The e-mail address is [email protected]

Please get as many people involved as you can to defeat or at least to amend the proposed bill, otherwise, those who pass the RT Exam might not have a Professional Licensure Examination available and you won't be able to get a license in California, at best you will have a harder examination than those from ADA approved schools or you might not have any place where you can be tested.


Sample Letter:-

FROM:
Your Name
Complete Address
Phone Number

TO: Senator Liz Figueroa
Chairperson of Senate Business and Professions Committee
State Capitol
Sacramento, California
FAX : (916) 324-0917

RE: Senate Bill 1865 (Aanestad)

Dear Senator Figueroa:
I am writing you this letter to express my opposition to the SB1865 as proposed by Senator Sam Aanestad.
I am opposing this proposed legislation for the following reasons:

1. The proposed legislation will weaken the present standard of dentistry in California because it will allow licensing people who cannot pass the standard California dental licensing examination that only requires minimum competency.

This legislation was introduced at the insistence of a private dental school in the State whose graduates are having great difficulty passing the Dental Board Examination in California. Your office has the statistics from the Dental Board that proves such assertion. To create legislation to try to correct what is basically an educational or training problem will not make them better dentists.

2. The proposed legislation as presently written or as it is intended to be approved, does not specifically state that all qualified candidates that can take the Dental Licensure examinations of California, will be certified by the Dental Board of California as eligible to take the examinations conducted by those contracted by the State to administer the examination.

If the proposed legislation is passed as intended, hundreds of eligible candidates who earned their degrees from schools outside the United States and Canada will not be eligible to take the examinations. This, in effect will disenfranchise these people whose only fault is that they earned a dental degree somewhere else other than the USA or Canada. This will create a two-tier examination on the premises that is OK to have separate but equal dental examinations.

3. The State should not allow a private entity whose motives maybe different, to have a say on who gets to be a licensed dentist in California because such private entities are not duty bound to protect the people of California.

4. There is no need to rush this proposal; the California patients are in no danger. Let?s get all the facts and work out all the details before you are asked to vote and decide on this very important and complex issue.

Sanjiv
did you read the bill content yourself, it has nothing about foreign dentists? what are you talking about?

 

[Sanjiv]

This bill(SB1865) will give DBC a legal authority to outsource conducting dental license exams to outside agency like WREB(western regional examining board). Right now there are close to 12 states who accepts WREB license exam and do not have their own state dental license exam.

CA have it's own state license exam. State law requires all dental universities to open up their facilities for conducting state dental license exam. So the Deans of all the five CA dental universities got together and proposed an alternative to state license exam.

Once the Bill is passed, dental students will have an option to either take state license exam or WREB exam.

Foreign trained dentist do not want WREB because WREB does not recognize "Foreign Trained Dentists". This will force foreign trained dentists to take CA state license exam where there is a possibility of gross partiality in evaluation like the once happens for RT exam. (passing rate of RT exam is just 30%. Foreign trained dentists do no have any voice against the unfair evaluation being done at the RT exam.) There is a chance that same thing might happen for the state license exam as well, since the only applicants for state license exams will be Foreign Trained Dentists.

(All this information was given at the meeting held at Downey last week. Those who were present at the meeting have greater idea of what's happening with the future of foreign trained dentists.)

Sanjiv

 

[ivshah]

hey!
Anyone has idea about re-examination form of part-3. Will it be the same form as before or it will be diffrent.
Do re-examination people have to sign from from there dean again or ......

if anyone have idea please reply ......

thanks,

 

[ivorinedust]

Here is another question, a hypothetical one... AB 1467 allows candidates who passed the NDBE by December 2003 to sit in future rt exams, but never mentioned about older candidates. Suppose a candidate passed the NDBE in 1990 or earlier and went to live out of state for all these years, will s/he be allowed to take the California rt exam using his/her old scores(having passed the NDBE before December 2003)? The bill never mentioned an expiration date for the NDBE scores and the dental practice act says that a foreign candidate who passed the exam is permanently exempted from retaking it(well maybe unless s/he wants to). However, many changes on the NDBE were implemented and the old scores may not be "current". Any ideas?

Ivorinedust.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Apolonia, relieve me of my toothache!

 

[organic]

This bill(SB1865) will give DBC a legal authority to outsource conducting dental license exams to outside agency like WREB(western regional examining board). Right now there are close to 12 states who accepts WREB license exam and do not have their own state dental license exam.

CA have it's own state license exam. State law requires all dental universities to open up their facilities for conducting state dental license exam. So the Deans of all the five CA dental universities got together and proposed an alternative to state license exam.

Once the Bill is passed, dental students will have an option to either take state license exam or WREB exam.

Foreign trained dentist do not want WREB because WREB does not recognize "Foreign Trained Dentists". This will force foreign trained dentists to take CA state license exam where there is a possibility of gross partiality in evaluation like the once happens for RT exam. (passing rate of RT exam is just 30%. Foreign trained dentists do no have any voice against the unfair evaluation being done at the RT exam.) There is a chance that same thing might happen for the state license exam as well, since the only applicants for state license exams will be Foreign Trained Dentists.

(All this information was given at the meeting held at Downey last week. Those who were present at the meeting have greater idea of what's happening with the future of foreign trained dentists.)

Sanjiv

I got this private message from Sanjive,

Sanjiv : mind your language
did you read the bill content yourself,
** Yes I have.

it has nothing about foreign dentists?
** That's exactly the point. The Bill does not care about foreign dentists. We want to force them to change the language of the bill to make foreign dentists eligible to take WREB exam or any other outside exam which Dental Board of California decides to outsource.

what are you talking about?
** I guess now you know what I am talking about.

Hi Sanjiv
E-mail doesn't show the tone of words, that's the bad part of it, please do understand that when I post these words, I have no intention of derision. I was just surprised and bewildered and you truely should post a message explaining to everyone your intention. Otherwise, most of us have not got a glue what your mind has set out for

But Sanjiv, on the other hand, your request seems slightly avaricious to me. Please do not let the legislators feel that we are a bunch of pushy voracious foreign dentists. Even if DBC opens door to WREB, it is up to those states to determine if they want foreign trained dentists.

thanks, sincerely,
and I apologize for what you have perceived from my previous message

 

[organic]

I have cleared my part 1 and 2 before 2003.so I am eligible for the bench exam but I want to write my part 1 again this year and my current score of part1 will be in 2004.I am not very sure whether I will be eligible for this exam then.
Practically I have finished my part 2 in 2003 so I am eligible that way.
Called ca dental board but they r not telling anything sure.
I desperately need to know about my eligibility so that I can make further decisions
Can anybody help me to come out of this?

Ddsfight,
though I don't know what the DBC will say, I am pretty sure they don't know either. But the reality is that you have finished the part 1 and 2 exams before their set dates, you should be eligible for the RT exam. I do not see any reason you should be rejected. this reality is, if you hadn't taken part1 before part2, you wouldn't have had a chance to take part2, and since your part 2 score dated before Dec. 03, your part 1 must have been finished before that.

When you submit your application, set a copy of old part 1 exam results, type a paper of explanation, and exlpain to you that you were trying to improve your score so that you could further pursuit a better dental career, possible doing a PhD or specialization. I am sure it will be self evident and very understandable

 

[toothmail]

Here is another question, a hypothetical one... AB 1467 allows candidates who passed the NDBE by December 2003 to sit in future rt exams, but never mentioned about older candidates. Suppose a candidate passed the NDBE in 1990 or earlier and went to live out of state for all these years, will s/he be allowed to take the California rt exam using his/her old scores(having passed the NDBE before December 2003)? The bill never mentioned an expiration date for the NDBE scores and the dental practice act says that a foreign candidate who passed the exam is permanently exempted from retaking it(well maybe unless s/he wants to).

the ADA website says that the ndbe scores are generally valid for 10years from the date taken. i dont know if its the same with these bench tests.

i wish i was done with parts 1 and 2 before 2003 dec!!

 

[ivorinedust]

<the ADA website says that the ndbe scores are generally valid for 10years from the date taken. i dont know if its the same with these bench tests.>

Correction, toothmail

The ADA website says that some states have a ten or fifteen year validity for the score reports, but that is not the general rule. Remember the word "some" was used. However, individual states have the final say regarding the validity of the scores. So far, I only found Florida to have a ten year expiration. I will look some more into the websites of the other licensing agencies and see what they got.

The California Dental Practice Act makes no mention of an expiration date for the NDBE scores. Actually, in the old version it says that a foreign applicant who has passed the NDBE is permanently exempt from retaking it(Sec 1636).

Furthermore, AB 1467 would allow bench testing for foreign candidates who have passed the NDBE on or before Dec. 31, 2003. It did not explicitly say: "after(date) and before Dec. 31, 2003." So, is my premise correct?

Calling all lawyer-dentists!!!

Ivorinedust.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Apolonia, relieve my toothache!

 

[Meggs]

.....So, is my premise correct?

Calling all lawyer-dentists!!!

That's Scott, right?

 

[mommyr]

ok i think i just started page 20! what's the update on the exam?

 

[mommyr]

ok it's still on page 19 i'm wrong

 

[organic]

check the DBC website, they have updates on the RT exam.

 

[gsmm]

hi organic where is that update, i couldnt find it on there website, can you post the link that shows the update

 

[organic]

hi organic where is that update, i couldnt find it on there website, can you post the link that shows the update

http://www.dbc.ca.gov/

Click here for Restorative Technique Update, April 13, 2004.

 

[organic]

could someone confirm my understanding of the document that only new applicants need to submit board scores to DBC?

people who retake the exams, or applied the exam before don't have to do it again?

thanks

 

[shreyas]

Hi organic

Thats what I thought too. That people who are applying afresh need to send in their scores.

 

[gsmm]

hey guys.. i still cant find the document on there website..can someone help me..i searched the whole site for updates but didnt find! isnt that strange..

 

[Nash so]

You need to refresh the page or the site (F5) button on the keyboard worked for me.

 

[Nash so]

This is the update on the Dental Board web site .


On April 13, 2004, Governor Schwarzenegger, signed AB 1467, reinstating the
Restorative Technique (R.T.) examination through the year 2008. Below are some
highlights of the bill:
? In order to qualify for the R.T. examination, you must have passed Part I and Part II
of the National Board of Dental Examiners? examination by December 31, 2003.
? You must provide the Dental Board your National Boards Part I and Part II scores no
later than July 12, 2004.
(Note: if you have taken a previous R.T. examination or have already supplied
your National Board scores, you do not have to resubmit them.)
? Applications, when filed, will require a United States mailing address and will have
to be filed by mail.
? Please check our website for additional information regarding the R.T. examination
schedule and application deadlines.
The new requirements are now contained in Bus. & Prof. Code ? 1628.2.
You are responsible for knowing and adhering to any and all requirements to
qualify for the R.T. examination.

 

[gsmm]

You need to refresh the page or the site (F5) button on the keyboard worked for me.

THANKS NASHSO..I FOUND IT BY CHANGING FROM AOL TO EXPLORER..I DONT KNOW WHY..ANYWAY..I WONDER WHEN SHALL THEY POST THE EXAM SCQUEDULE

 

[mommyr]

so assuming we applied before but have never taken the exam and are among those whose applications were returned pending the outcome of the extension of the bench, can we take that to mean they have us on file despite the returned application forms and need not forward them proof of our eligibility?

 

[smile123]

Does this mean that we should be sending our part1 and partII scores now, without application form or wait and send the scores along with the application form, Please clarity

 

[sadanand]

hi ,
just called the dental board of california , & the recorded message says that people waiting for Rt exam can now send the copies of part 1 & 2 scores , & do not send u r application now .
so i guess we only need to send the score report copies now .
u can confirm it by calling dbc at 916 263 2300 ext 3 .

 

[sadanand]

hi ,
did anyone go through the bus & prof code 1628 ?? if so through which web site & what does it say ???

 

[kosha]

hi everyone
yes just now u have to send in yr scores to prove eligiblilty then u have to send the application when they ask again .

hi sadanad ;
pl give me a call have lost yr number ...so could not call you back .

 

[shelly78]

sadanand,
The dbc website has a description of Sec.1628.2 of the Business& Profession's code under Laws and Regulations.

 

[annie5058]

is there anyone know the california dental borad telephone number?
annie

 

[nupur]

hi everyone,

i just looked at the dental board of ca website, and they mention that you must provide the scores for part i and ii exams by july 12, 2004 to be eligible for bench test.

does anyone know how to send these scores to the dental board?

thanks!
nupur

 

[shreyas]

The no is 916 263 2300.

 

[mommyr]

i just called DBC to ask if I needed to submit proof of clearing Parts 1 and 2 since my application form was returned to me pending the outcome of the extension and the operator said i didn't need to bec. they have it on file

 

[yasi]

mommyr
i just want to know did you participate in duggan course or something like that?
how do you practice for bench?

 

[mommyr]

i enrolled in dr. duggan's course

 

[ddsfight]

hi All,
To send the NBDE I and II scores to the Ca dental board, can we send them the photocopy of the score or do they need the official score from ADA?
thanx,

 

[mommyr]

the best thing to do is to call them and ask and if you've previously submitted an application even though it was returned they have a database of all the names, there's a live operator you can talk to anyway just so you can verify with them directly what they require

 

[nupur]

thanks mommyr

 

[newdentist]

Hi
I passed part I in 2003 and took Part II in Dec 2003 but results were declared in Jan 2004, I am little confused about eligibility.
Does anybody know, am I eligible or not. Should I send application. If I send application but they reject it, would they return exam fee back?
please respond to [email protected]

 

[stefanels]

the best thing to do is to call them and ask and if you've previously submitted an application even though it was returned they have a database of all the names, there's a live operator you can talk to anyway just so you can verify with them directly what they require

hey,
I have been calling up the board to ask them if i need to resubmit my scores since i already sent in my applictaion last yr... but the system is screwd up.
the moment i hit a key ...the system exits itself and i cannot even leave a message let alone get to speak to an operator.

How did you manage to get through to them?

 

[organic]

hey,
I have been calling up the board to ask them if i need to resubmit my scores since i already sent in my applictaion last yr... but the system is screwd up.
the moment i hit a key ...the system exits itself and i cannot even leave a message let alone get to speak to an operator.

How did you manage to get through to them?

I wonder, how would they know those who have applied before will take the exam for sure? don't they want use to send in some sort of confirmation to say that we will take the exam for sure?

 

[Chuchuca]

I called the Board today and talked with someone on extension #2326 She told me that WE MUST SEND the original report. She asked me to make a copie for myself and send the original report to them.
So I took a copie of my report and also will ask for a new (original)report from ADA ( $10 cost)just in case.
And Newdentist, about the report date been January it is ok. I am in the same situation and the board secretary told me that it does not matter, as long as I took the exam in December.

 

[tengu3]

what else do we need to send in besides the official score? Will just a cover letter suffice?

Anyone knows when will they starting sending out application forms? Can I use the one from last year? I don't expect them to change anything except the governor's name on the top.

tengu

 

[kosha]

hi there ;
u r eligible .....the bill says " any one who has appeared and passed the part2 before 2003 dec" since u gave the exam in dec of 2003 and paased it ur eligible...it dsoe not matter when u got the score

Hi
I passed part I in 2003 and took Part II in Dec 2003 but results were declared in Jan 2004, I am little confused about eligibility.
Does anybody know, am I eligible or not. Should I send application. If I send application but they reject it, would they return exam fee back?
please respond to [email protected]

 

[theone]

hey guys,,


I should send my original scores of NBDE to the following address

Dental Board of California
1432 Howe Ave., Ste. 85-B
Sacramento, CA 95825
(916) 263-2300

before July 12, just my scores in an empty envelope, right? correct me please, and thanks in advance,

 

[Nash so]

This is a bomb

Are you guye aware of the changes that the Dental Board of California is preparing to do as far as the Restorative Technique Test!?
here is the details.

DENTAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA​

Proposed Regulatory Language
Article 4. Graduates of Foreign Dental Schools​

?1041. Examination Requirements
(a) Written Examination. The written examination required by Section 1636(b)(1) of the Code shall be that given by the National Board of Dental Examiners. An applicant shall submit to the board evidence of successful completion of said examination. Such evidence must be received at the board?s principal office not less than 30 days prior to the Restorative Technique examination date requested.

(b) Restorative Techniques. Each foreign-trained examinee shall demonstrate his or her skill in restorative techniques in the presence of the board members or examiners appointed for that purpose. Each examinee shall complete to the satisfaction of the board all assigned restorations.

(1) Assignments. The applicant shall be given an assignment to complete in each of the following categories, as described below.

(A) Amalgam. Each applicant shall prepare and restore a Class II amalgam on a tooth and surface assigned at the time of examination.

(B) Cast Restorations. Each applicant shall prepare two Ivorine and/or natural teeth for single unit cast restorations, as specified by the Board at the start of the examination. In the alternative, each applicant shall prepare two Ivorine or natural teeth for a fixed bridge, such preparations and pontic spaces to be specified on the date of the examination. The preparation assignments for all teeth to be prepared will be selected from the following: MOD onlay, 3/4 crown, 7/8 crown, full metal crown, full all porcelain
crown, or full porcelain-fused-to-metal crown.


(C) Composite. Each applicant shall prepare and/or restore one or more Class II, III, or IV composite restoration(s) on an Ivorine and/or a natural tooth and surface assigned at the time of the examination, with the Ivorine or natural tooth mounted in a typodont approved by the Board. If a natural tooth is specified, the natural tooth or teeth to be mounted by the candidate into the typodont shall be specified by the Board in the materials provided to the candidate prior to the examination.

(2) Equipment. The applicant shall provide a crown and bridge typodont which shall be used for the examination in restorative techniques, as well as the Ivorine or natural teeth to be mounted in the specified typodont. Unless otherwise specified in the materials provided to the candidates prior to the examination, the typodont shall have a complement of 32 removable Ivorine teeth, Ivorine jaws with removable soft rubber facings simulating the gums. Upper and lower members shall be sealed with plaster.There shall be 8 screws on the outside of the jaws to which can be attached rubber bands
to simulate a mouth opening; also for attaching of a rubber dam. The typodont shall be equilibrated in centric relation jaw position prior to the examination, with at least four points of centric occlusal stops on each side of the typodont. The typodont shall be equivalent in all respects to the Articulated Dentiform No. SMR 860 available from Columbia Dentiform Corporation or such other typodont that is selected by the Board and
specified in the materials provided to the candidate prior to the examination. The candidate shall also provide addressed mailing materials, with postage prepaid, for the return of the typodont to the candidate after the examination, as is appropriate for the typodont(s) selected by the Board.

(3) Time Period Allowed.
The examination shall be a total of eight hours in length or such other time that is specified in the materials provided to the candidate prior to the examination. This time period includes approval time for the typodont and equilibration time for disapproved typodonts.

(c) Further Examination. An examinee who successfully completes the restorative technique examination is eligible to take the remaining examinations required by Section 1636(c) of the Code. All rules applicable to such examinations and the grading thereof contained in Article 3 of this subchapter shall apply to examinees who are foreign dental school graduates.

(d) Passing Grades. A foreign dental school graduate shall be deemed to have passed the examination if he or she achieves a score of at least 75% on at least two of the three sections of the examination, and an overall score of at least 75% average for all three sections of the examination scored as a whole.

NOTE: Authority cited: Section 1614, Business and Professions Code. Reference: Section 1636, Business and Professions Code.

 

[Nash so]

These information are posted on the web site of The Dental Board Of california under
Laws And regulation: Proposed text for Section 1041, Title 16, CCR

The Question now is do we want these DRAMATIC CHANGES after we spend thousands of dollars on courses cover the old requirments ( Amalgam,Cast1 and cast 2),we can not afford all that ***t.

If any body has any update please post it, and for those who involved in or have connection with any organization ( like phillipino or latino or .....) please spread the word and let us know what can we do and how.

Please act fast because on the next meeting of the DBC ( May 12th ) they will decide on that matter.