December 2024 Report

This report shares short summary highlights of tracked legislative bills and rules & regulations that have seen recent activity, as well as available board and state VMA updates.

The legislative activity map reflects all 2024 activity and is updated daily. The regulation activity map reflects activity within the last month and will be updated monthly.

Legislative Activity

Regulation Activity​

Board Watch

United States

Arizona State Board of Veterinary Medical Examining Board – October 16, 2024 Minutes

District of Columbia Board of Veterinary Medicine – October 17, 2024 Minutes

Legislative/Regulatory
Ms. Emily McAndrew provided the following update regarding the Pets in Housing Amendment Act of 2024. Pets in Housing Amendment Act of 2024: On May 22nd, Councilmember R. White along with Councilmembers Bonds, Pinto, T. White, and Lewis George introduced the Pets in Housing Amendment Act of 2024 (B25-0827). This legislation limits fees by housing providers (monthly rent and security deposits) for pets as well as banning breed restrictions. This legislation has been referred to the Committee on Housing, and a hearing was held on October 8th.

Mr. Ed Rich provided an update about the commercial animal facility regulations. So far, he has received one comment from a Board member to make sure that these facilities do not use choke and prong collars. “I have added that to the draft regulations,” Mr. Rich said. He further stated that there is a provision in the commercial pet care facility regulations that these facilities can perform emergency procedures that are reviewed and approved by the director of the department. Mr. Rich will propose these regulations after the Board’s review.

Indiana Board of Veterinary Medicine – October 31, 2024 Recorded Minutes

Iowa Board of Veterinary Medicine – October 31, 2024 Minutes

Rulemaking/House/Senate Files
Mr. Larson stated he prepared this language for the Board’s review. He also spoke with different departments regarding their civil penalties, and they ranged from $1,000 to $25,000. The Board could establish an internal policy of what the Board could do for veterinary technicians and a civil penalty for those individuals. The veterinary technicians are limited to revocation or suspension, HF670,169.34.

Ms. Hook spoke to Ms. Dorman and Dr. Wheeler regarding the penalty amount and there was no pushback from them regarding the civil penalty amount. Ms. Hook stated this could be included in the Department’s bill. The bill will be noticed to the public but the public does not have a comment period.

Dr. Sato moved to approve the amended language to 169.13. Motion seconded by Ms. Meyer. Motion approved unanimously.

Dr. Sato moved to go into the Closed Meeting Session pursuant to Iowa code section 21.5(1)(a) to review complaint files where investigative information required by section 272C.6(4) to be kept confidential and 21.5(1)(d) to discuss whether to initiate licensee disciplinary investigation or proceedings. The motion was seconded by Ms. Meyer. Motion approved unanimously.

Roll call vote by Board Members: Dr. Burkgren, aye; Ms. Hagedon (by phone); Ms. Meyer, aye; Dr. Sato, aye, Dr. Shuey, aye nay – 0. Motion passed at 10:42 a.m.

Kansas Board of Veterinary Examiners 

Questions Pending from the Board’s Office
Artificial Insemination (AI) and Breeding Cattle – Unlicensed practice?
Dr. Gardner stated that AI in cattle is not considered veterinary-only in any state that he is aware of. Dr. Prater indicated the drugs administered are for synchronizing cycles and it is considered animal husbandry — but only intracervical AI. If laparoscopy is used in the AI, this is veterinary medicine. When individuals cross the line into surgical procedures (e.g., sedation, scalpel, etc.), this is veterinary medicine. The Board directed Ms. Shane to respond with this information to the student inquirer.

Request for extension to hold LVT application to test for VTNE
Dr. Kennedy addressed the Board regarding an application for a veterinary technician license that was denied in August 2024 for lack of a successful VTNE score. As part of the denial notification, the applicant was informed that KBVE would hold their application open for 30 days to give them the opportunity to complete the VTNE. The applicant is in the process of moving to Kentucky and requested to extend the time period for which the KBVE would keep the application on file and open so that they could have enough time to register for and take the exam. Dr. Quammen shared recently announced expanded testing dates for the VTNE. Following discussion, Members of the Board directed staff to hold this application open until the end of March 2025 so long as the applicant registers and takes the test by that date. If the exam is passed, the application may be approved.

LVT euthanasia at an animal shelter
Members of the Board discussed this request from an Ohio LVT to work in an animal shelter in Kentucky under a veterinarian’s indirect supervision in order to euthanize animals. No veterinarian would be onsite during the practice. Members of the Board directed Ms. Shane to tell the Ohio LVT that to provide animal euthanasia at an animal shelter in Kentucky without a veterinarian providing direct supervision, they must apply for and be approved by the Board to hold a KBVE-certificate as an animal euthanasia specialist, which will include taking the Kentucky version of the Euthanasia-by-Injection course.

LVT Duties
Members of the Board discussed an inquiry from an LVT seeking clarification on 201 KAR 16:750, specifically the boundaries of scope for LVTs, which they stated are vague. The Board reviewed the specific duties listed in the inquiry email and concluded the following:

  • LVTs can do skin suturing under direct supervision (i.e., veterinarian on the premises)
  • Extractions that are not surgical, e.g., single root teeth (i.e., no splitting teeth, no cutting of gums, no canines)
  • Euthanasia – with supervision, direct or indirect depending on the discretion of the veterinarian
  • Local blocks. The Board discussed that this term is too broad and requested more clarification and specificity.
  • Taps of the thorax or abdomen are not allowable.
  • However, ultrasound cystocentesis is OK, with supervision, direct or indirect depending on the discretion of the veterinarian.

Kentucky Board of Veterinary Examiners
Regulations Filed with LRC (proceeding through administrative rule-making process) with upcoming comment deadline.

Filed in October:
Amendments to Current Regulations:

New Veterinary Facility Registration Regulations:

New Allied Animal Health Professional (AAHP) Permit Regulations:

New AAHP Facility Registration Regulations:

Written comments may be submitted through December 31, 2024, to Michelle.Shane@ky.gov or KBVE, 4047 Iron Works Pkwy, Suite 104, Lexington, KY 40511.

A public hearing will only be held upon request at least five (5) days in advance of the scheduled hearing on December 23, 2024, at 10:00 am EST. If no request is received to be heard at the scheduled public hearing, the hearing will be canceled.

Louisiana Board of Veterinary Medicine – October 3, 2024 Minutes

Consent Agenda Opinions – Answered

Is a DVM required to give the client a prescription for the indicated drug at their request for use at another pharmacy (online or brick-and-mortar)? A licensed veterinarian contacted the board inquiring as to the regulatory propriety of his employer’s directive to not honor a request by an online pharmacy for a prescription medically indicated due to concerns the online pharmacy had a history of filling prescriptions with “counterfeit” medications. The licensee was advised that under Rule 705 a veterinarian is not required to provide a prescription when it is not directly requested by the client. Further, even if directly requested by the client, in circumstances where there is a legitimate concern by the veterinarian that the prescription will not be safe for in-home administration, the veterinarian is not compelled to provide a prescription. In instances where the medication, if properly manufactured, is generally safe for in-home administration but there are legitimate concerns the pharmacy may provide unsafe or ineffective medication, the veterinarian should discuss those concerns with the client and if the client insists that the prescription be issued notwithstanding those concerns, a note in the chart should be made but the prescription should be provided. The primary factor in refusing to provide a client who directly requests a prescription be given for an appropriate medication must not be that the practice will be deprived of the profit from the transaction of filling the prescription.

Do you have to have a DVM on site to use a class 3B cold laser on horses? A non-licensee contacted the board to inquire about the permissibility from a regulatory standpoint of providing 3B cold laser treatment for horses without a licensed veterinarian being on the premises for supervision when the services are provided. In posing the question the business model of the non-licensee was described, which did not involve employment by a veterinarian. The person posing the query was advised that under the circumstances described she could well be practicing veterinary medicine unlawfully as a non-licensee providing alternative therapy to equines. In order for a person who is not employed by a veterinarian to provide such services, under Rule 712, the treatment must be by order of the veterinarian who has established a valid VCPR, who directly supervises (on-premises) the treatment after obtaining informed consent from the client, and who is responsible for the treatment provided.

What is needed for me to go to work under a vet until I pass the NAVLE? A graduate from a veterinary school of medicine asked the board about what is required to practice veterinary medicine under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian pending obtaining a passing score on the NAVLE. He was advised that under the Board’s Rules, he cannot do more than is permissible for a lay assistant. See Rule 700.

Is non-veterinarian ownership of a clinic permissible? This oft-asked question was again answered by the board: Rule 1015 does not require the ownership entity of facilities providing services that would constitute the practice of veterinary medicine to be licensed by the board. Rather the Rule requires the individual providing those services to be licensed and answerable to the board notwithstanding ownership directives.

Questions related to practice/possibilities after license suspension. A veterinarian whose license is under suspension asked the board about the requirements of keeping the suspended license from becoming an expired license so that after 5 years a retake of the NAVLE would be required. She was advised that her license is “active”, albeit under suspension, and not “expired” as long as ongoing CE and the payment of renewal fees are made on a timely basis. The retaking of the NAVLE would not come into play as long as the license did not become “expired” without renewal for the five-year period. Questions about eligibility for employment as an instructor were deferred as premature and the licensee was advised to contact potential employers to discuss eligibility as an instructor at a vet tech school with a suspended license.

Does a practice have to have specific wording in its name to house or hospitalize patients overnight? The board was asked by a licensed veterinarian whether certain words or phrases are required in the naming of a veterinarian facility that houses or hospitalizes patients overnight. He was referred to the board rules, Rules 711 and 1053. Rule 711 defines veterinary facilities and provides for mandatory equipment and requirements for various types of entities (e.g. hospital, clinic, etc.) and Rule 1053 requires that “hospitals” use either “veterinary” or “hospital” along with the term “hospital”. Other pertinent provisions were cited ancillary to the primary question.

What constitutes pet ownership if records are conflicting? A licensed veterinarian anticipating the need for consent to euthanasia of a patient asked the board what constitutes ownership of the patient where there are multiple, differing indicators — i.e. client/ownership status on intake of the patient, microchip data, and actual physical possession of the patient. He was advised that “ownership” of an animal is a civil law determination and not a regulatory determination, although the Rules may use “owner” and “client” interchangeably. He was advised that he is entitled to rely on the “client” status in his medical records first, but absent an emergency scenario, he should attempt to contact all parties possessing an indicia of ownership for confirmation of status. If ownership is in dispute thereafter, the veterinarian was advised that absent an emergency he is free to decline to provide euthanasia services.

____________________________________________

Louisiana Board of Veterinary Medicine – Current Rulemaking Activity

2024-10 ~ LAC 46LXXXV.301, 801, and 1201 – Licensing Procedures

  • 10-03-2024 The Board discussed and voted on amendments to sections 301, 801, and 1201. [Meeting Minutes – 10-03-24 — minutes must be ratified at the Dec. 5th meeting before being published.]
  • 10-21-2024 Notice of Intent and Fiscal & Economic Impact Statements submitted to Legislative Fiscal Office for review.
  • 12-05-2024 Legislative Fiscal Office approved Fiscal & Economic Impact Statements.
  • 12-05-2024 First Report submitted to Senate and House Legislative Oversight Committees on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development.
  • 12-05-2024 Notice of Intent submitted to the Governor’s Office for review.
  • 12-05-2024 Notice of Intent submitted for publication in 2024 Louisiana Register, Volume 50, December edition.
  • 12-20-2024 Notice of Intent to be published in 2024 Louisiana Register, Volume 50, December edition.
  • 12-21-2024 Submission of written comments related to this rule proposal will be accepted only from Dec. 21st, 2024 to Jan. 9th, 2025.
  • 01-09-2025 Deadline for submission of written comments to Board.* See instructions for submitting comments in Notice of Intent.

2024-07a ~ LAC 46LXXXV.700, 701, 702, 704, 705, 707, and 712 – Veterinary Practice

  • 02-01-2024 The Board discussed and voted on amendments to several sections of Chapter 7, specifically §700 and §705. Minor amendments were made to clean the language up in Sections §701, §702, §704, §707, and §712. [Meeting Minutes – 02-01-24]
  • 07-18-2024 Notice of Intent and Fiscal & Economic Impact Statements submitted to Legislative Fiscal Office for review.
  • 08-02-2024 Legislative Fiscal Office approved fiscal and economic impact statement.
  • 08-09-2024 First Report submitted to Senate and House Legislative Oversight Committees on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development.
  • 08-09-2024 Notice of Intent submitted for publication in 2024 Louisiana Register, Volume 50, August edition.
  • 08-20-2024 Notice of Intent to be published in 2024 Louisiana Register, Volume 50, August edition.
  • 08-21-2024 Submission of written comments related to this rule proposal will be accepted only from August 21st to September 9th.
  • 09-09-2024 Deadline for submission of written comments to Board.*See instructions for submitting comments in Notice of Intent.
  • XX-XX-XXX NO PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED — * As there were no requests within twenty days (by August 9th, 2024) for a public hearing in accordance with §953.A(2)(b)(i), the Board will NOT hold a public hearing and will move forward with the rulemaking process.
  • 10-22-2024 Notice of Intent submitted to Department of Justice’s Occupational Licensing Review Program (OLRP) for review.
  • 11-26-2024 Favorable DOJ Opinion received from the OLRP review along with approval to move forward in the rulemaking process.
  • 11-26-2024 Summary Report submitted to Senate and House Legislative Oversight Committees on Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development for final review.

Maine Board of Veterinary Medicine – August 14, 2024 Minutes

Maryland State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners – September 19, 2024 Minutes

Discussion
Inquiry from Political Capital:
The Board reviewed an inquiry and information submitted by Political Capital regarding the unapproved FDA-compounded drug GS-441524 for use in treating FIP. Political Capital represents select compounding pharmacies. FDA guidance states that in the absence of an FDA-approved drug, the FDA is not taking action against those who prescribe it, despite it still not being an FDA-approved drug. Multiple sources have submitted GS-441524 for review and consideration to be added as an approved substance. No formal decision was made, however, the Board acknowledged the need and demand for such compounded substances.

Laser Therapy (Staff Inquiry)
Is this appropriate without a Veterinarian? No, the veterinarian needs to prescribe it as a treatment and reevaluate the patient following the recommended treatment’s completion. Trained veterinary assistants/technicians may perform this under the supervision of a veterinarian. The level of appropriate supervision may depend on the class of the laser being used, the purpose of the treatment, and the credentialing of the individual providing the services.

Chapter 487 (HB 1097)
The Board reviewed some inquiries and discussed with Dr. Donati and Dr. Kozek further information regarding the Board’s implementation of HB1097. The Board discussed the interpretation of the bill to improve access to care and not prevent effective hospital operations. The Board also discussed the path forward for hospitals and veterinarians should encourage Veterinary Assistants to progress in their professional development by seeking education and licensure. The Veterinary Technician profession is advancing and they should prepare themselves for a future when tasks will likely be even more strictly delegated and forbidden from Veterinary Assistants. Some specific clarifications:

  • Veterinary Assistants should not be given access to Schedule II drugs. They may be allowed, with appropriate training to access lesser schedule drugs as long as all DEA guidelines are followed.
  • A Veterinary Assistant could administer a Schedule II drug under immediate supervision if it was dosed and drawn up by a Veterinary Technician or Veterinary Practitioner.
  • A Veterinary Assistant could monitor and perform the adjustment if the Veterinarian providing immediate supervision prescribed the adjustment.
  • In an emergency presentation, a Veterinarian may be required to utilize all of the resources available, including a Veterinary Assistant to initiate CPR to improve the outcome of a patient. ▪ In all cases a Veterinarian must utilize their professional judgment to determine the best course of action for a patient. If a complaint is received the Board will consider the Veterinarian’s justification for delegated tasks when determining the appropriate outcome of an investigation.

Health Department – PDMP Bill
The Board reviewed the PDMP bill planning to be pre-filed by the Maryland Department of Health. The Board will take a similar stance to the bill as it did in the past years with a fiscal note that acknowledges possible financial difficulties for Veterinary Hospitals.

Massachusetts Board of Registration Veterinary Medicine – September 12, 2024 Minutes

Discussion Items
A question from the public was posed as to whether it is cause for a complaint against a veterinarian if the veterinarian refers a patient out to emergency services if that veterinarian is unable to manage the level of care required for whatever reason, or if the clinic is closed. The Board members discussed that this is not a cause for complaint. In general, if a patient does present at the veterinarian’s practice, attempts should be made to stabilize the patient; however, if for whatever reason, the practice cannot manage the required care at that time, it would be acceptable to refer that patient to another facility who could manage the necessary care, after stabilizing the patient. No vote was taken.

A question from the public was posed about opening an Aquamation Facility in Massachusetts. This is a facility that would offer water euthanizing services to pets. Board members discussed and stated that this facility can be allowed to operate in Massachusetts so long as all the other facility requirements under the Board’s regulations are adhered to. No vote was taken.

A question from the public was posed as to whether a veterinarian can write a prescription for a controlled 2 medication for their pet. Board members discussed and stated that yes, veterinarians can write a controlled 2 prescription for their own pets. No vote was taken.

_______________________________________________

Massachusetts Board of Registration Veterinary Medicine – October 10, 2024 Minutes

Correspondence Items – Board Members reviewed the following questions that were submitted by the public.

A question came in from the public seeking guidance on how to order medications for outpatient clients who need in-hospital medication. Board members, with guidance from the Board Counsel, discussed that nothing in our regulations addresses this issue. This question is best directed to the Pharmacy Board, and the public should follow the rules of the Commonwealth in this regard. No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public asking about a non-veterinarian teaching pet CPR and First Aid, and does a person have to be certified to teach this? Board members discussed that we do not have regulations for CPR training. There are certification courses that a person can take to teach this, but our regulations do not require this. Board staff will follow up with members of the public who have experience in the field if staff has any questions. No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public asking whether there are laws about whether veterinarians are legally permitted or not permitted to see animals that are illegally owned pets either on the federal or Massachusetts State level. Board members discussed, with guidance from the Board Counsel, that the Board is not in a position to give legal advice on these broad subject matters. Veterinarians treat animals that come before them, regardless of the legal status, but this specific question on illegally owned pets is one that is best addressed by a private attorney for the Veterinarian practice or State Wildlife agencies. No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public asking whether veterinarians need a CSR for each location they prescribe from. Board members discussed that this is best directed to the MCSR (Massachusetts Controlled Substances Registry.) No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public asking whether a non-veterinarian could use EquiNew’s FES system, without working under a licensed veterinarian. Board members discussed that the use of this device does involve diagnosing and treating animals, and therefore, a non-licensed person would need to work under a licensed Veterinarian. No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public asking whether it is illegal to declaw cats in Massachusetts. Board members, with guidance from the Board Counsel, discussed that there is currently no law at this time in place making it illegal to declaw cats in Massachusetts, although there is a pending Bill addressing this issue. No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public with a specific question about whether it would be allowable for a veterinarian to declaw younger cats in order to protect older cats in the household. Board members discussed again that there is currently no law at this time in place making it illegal to declaw cats in Massachusetts. This matter is best discussed with a person’s individual Veterinarian. No vote was taken.

A question came in from the public asking whether a CVT is allowed to place microchips in animals without direct Veterinarian supervision. Board members discussed, and the Board has addressed this issue in the past. Such individuals can perform this task as long as the person is trained and experienced in the task at hand, and with supervision from the Veterinarian. No vote was taken.

Discussion Items
Discussion as to whether Board members want to specify a specific amount of time that Licensees would have to maintain their CE records. Currently, there is no specific retention time stated in the Regulations. Board members discussed that the Regulations should remain as is.

New Hampshire Board of Veterinary Medicine

Proposed Rules
Proposed Rule: Vet 300 various – Registration and Licensing Requirements
Public Hearing: Wednesday, January 22, 2025, at 8:30 a.m.in the OPLC offices at 7 Eagle Square, Concord NH
*You do not need to attend the hearing to submit written comments.*
Deadline for Submitting Written Comment: 4:00 PM on Monday, February 3, 2025
Please submit comments to OPLC-Rules@oplc.nh.gov.

_______________________________________________

New Hampshire Board of Veterinary Medicine – October 23, 2024 Minutes

New Jersey State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners – October 30, 2024 Minutes

REGULATORY AFFAIRS:
Bill Comment A4505 (Nicole Parelli, Regulatory Analyst) This Bill codifies certain requirements and stipulations for licensed veterinarians to engage in telemedicine and telehealth. The Bill takes the subchapter 4A of the Regulations and makes it into a Statute. The Board discussed the downside of taking subchapter 4A of the Regulations and making it into a Statute which is that as technology evolves, it will be difficult for the Board to revise regulations to keep up with technology which may be needed to protect the consumer. The Board recommends the NJVMA take the lead on contacting the legislature. Motion by Dr. Beeber, seconded by Dr. Bruno, to oppose Bill A4505. Motion passed unanimously.

CORRESPONDENCE:
Vineet Parikh Pharmacist Vineet Parikh asks this Board if pharmacists can provide vaccination services, specifically to dogs. Board members discussed how providing vaccines and the required exam to do so is the practice of veterinary medicine which is restricted to veterinarians. Additional concerns were raised about the health consequences of allowing animals into a pharmacy setting. Motion by Dr. Beeber, seconded by Dr. Bruno to respond that vaccination of anything other than personally owned pets is considered the practice of veterinary medicine in violation of N.J.S.A. 45:16-8.1 Motion approved unanimously.

North Carolina Veterinary Medical Board – September 12, 2024 Minutes

Legislative Committee Update
Executive Director Keith West announced that the Boarding Kennel rules were approved and will become effective January 1, 2025. NCVMB inspectors are scheduled to ride along with boarding kennel inspectors for training on inspecting boarding kennels. Executive Director Keith West will be a part of the trainings as well. Inspection forms will be updated to show Boarding Kennels. The facility permits and continuing education rules have been approved by Rules Review Commission attorneys and include the Board approved edits. These rules are scheduled to be heard and approved on September 25 at the scheduled Rules Review Commission meeting. Continuing education changes will be effective January 1, 2025.

_______________________________________________

North Carolina Veterinary Medical Board – October 8, 2024 Minutes

Discussion
President Azure Holland explained the reason for the emergency meeting and asked Micheal Martin, DVM to explain the Declaratory Ruling Request. Michael Martin, DVM provided an explanation for the Declaratory Ruling Request. Dr. Martin stated that there are still areas of poor communication and service, some facilities were severely affected or destroyed, and there are rescue operations in place. He also explained the responsibilities of certified vaccinators and how to build an infrastructure to address the diseases identified in the Declaratory Ruling Request. Dr. Martin thanked the NCVMB and the NCVMA for their help and assistance during this time. Board attorney, Matthew Skidmore, further defined the Declaratory Ruling Request and what happens if accepted. He explained that it allows the Board to make a determination of a rule within 60 days. Matthew Skidmore explained that the North Carolina Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services Animal Welfare Section has requested that certified vaccinators be allowed to provide Bordetella, parvovirus, distemper, and FVRCP vaccines within shelters as a result of the storm. Matthew Skidmore explained that the Declaratory Ruling Request will limit: geography to only the storm-affected counties, who may perform the vaccines, and what vaccines can be done. He also discussed legal responsibilities. Dr. Holland asked for a motion to accept the Declaratory Ruling Request. A motion was made by Edward Faulkner, DVM, and was seconded by Robin Lazaro, RVT. The motion passed unanimously.

Oregon Veterinary Medical Examining Board – October 17-18, 2024 Public Board Meeting Minutes

Wisconsin Veterinary Examining Board – August 26, 2024 Minutes

Canada

11 Associations Support CVMA’s Urgent Request for a National Testing Centre for Internationally Trained Veterinarians

CVMA Back on Parliament Hill to Advocate for Federal Support

CVMA Establishes Pharmaceutical Access Advisory Committee

Canadian Association of Professional Dog Trainers Code of Ethics Update

College of Veterinarians of Ontario –