NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.



Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.





F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T





SPONSOR: Miera DATE TYPED: 02/13/01 HB 393
SHORT TITLE: Massage Therapy Practice Act SB
ANALYST: Valdes


APPROPRIATION



Appropriation Contained
Estimated Additional Impact
Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY01 FY02 FY01 FY02
NFI



(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)



SOURCES OF INFORMATION



Massage Therapy Board, Regulation and Licensing Department

Health Policy Commission



SUMMARY



Synopsis of Bill



The purpose of House Bill 393 is to add exemptions to the Massage Therapy Practice Act which were inadvertently deleted in legislation adopted last year.



Significant Issues



The bill provides an exemption from the Massage Therapy Act for the following:



TECHNICAL ISSUES



In the opinion of the Health Policy Commission, language in bill is unclear. It seems to prevent some professionals from rendering massage therapy and allows others that do not meet the licensure requirements.



OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES



According to the Massage Therapy Board, if this bill is not enacted, it is possible massage therapy students could not legally provide massage therapy within the course of study. It is vital to the practice of massage therapy that hands-on massage therapy training be allowed within the course of study by students at registered massage therapy schools.



The Health Policy Commission provided the following comments on the bill:



MFV/njw:ar