Kansas 2023 2023-2024 Regular Session

Kansas House Bill HB2453 Comm Sub / Analysis

                    SESSION OF 2024
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE BILL NO. 2453
As Recommended by House Committee on 
Health and Human Services
Brief*
HB 2453 would enact the Dentist and Dental Hygienist 
Compact (Compact) to provide interstate practice privileges 
for dentists and dental hygienists. The bill contains uniform 
language that would enact the Compact in Kansas.
Purpose (Section 1)
The bill would state the purposes of the Compact are to 
facilitate the interstate practice of dentistry and dental 
hygiene and improve public access to dentistry and dental 
hygiene services. The Compact would establish a pathway 
for dentists and dental hygienists licensed in a participating 
state to obtain privilege to practice in other participating 
states where they are not licensed, while states would be 
able to protect public health and safety through the State’s 
authority to regulate the practice of dentistry and dental 
hygiene. The Compact would:
●Enable dentists and dental hygienists who qualify 
for Compact privilege to practice in other 
participating states without satisfying burdensome 
and duplicative requirements associated with 
securing a license to practice in those states;
●Promote mobility and address workforce shortages 
through each participating state’s acceptance of a 
Compact privilege to practice in that state;
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research 
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental 
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at 
http://www.kslegislature.org ●Increase public access to qualified, licensed 
dentists and dental hygienists by creating a 
responsible, streamlined pathway for licensees to 
practice in participating states;
●Enhance the ability of participating states to protect 
the public’s health and safety;
●Not interfere with licensure requirements 
established by a participating state;
●Facilitate the sharing of licensure and disciplinary 
information among participating states;
●Require dentists and dental hygienists who 
practice in a participating state pursuant to a 
Compact privilege to practice within the scope of 
practice authorized in that state;
●Extend the authority of a participating state to 
regulate the practice of dentistry and dental 
hygiene within its borders to dentists and dental 
hygienists who practice in the state through a 
Compact privilege;
●Promote the cooperation of a participating state in 
regulating the practice of dentistry and dental 
hygiene within those states; and
●Facilitate the relocation of military members and 
their spouses who are licensed to practice dentistry 
or dental hygiene.
Definitions (Section 2)
The Compact would define various terms used 
throughout the Compact. Key terms would include the 
following:
2- 2453 ●“Compact privilege,” defined as the authorization 
granted by a remote state to allow a licensee from 
a participating state to practice as a dentist or 
dental hygienist in a remote state; and
●“Dentist and Dental Hygienist Compact 
Commission,” (Commission) defined as a joint 
government agency established by the Compact 
comprised of each state that has enacted the 
Compact and a national administrative body 
comprised of a Commissioner from each state that 
has enacted the Compact.
State Participation in the Compact (Section 3)
In order to join the Compact and continue as a 
participating state, states would be required to:
●Enact a Compact that is not materially different 
from the model compact as determined in 
accordance with Commission rules;
●Participate fully in the Commission’s data system;
●Have a mechanism in place for receiving and 
investigating complaints about its licensees and 
license applicants;
●Notify the Commission, in compliance with the 
terms of the Compact and Commission rules, of 
any adverse action or the availability of significant 
investigative information regarding a licensee and 
license applicant;
●Fully implement a criminal background check 
requirement, within a time frame established by 
Commission rule, by receiving the results of a 
qualifying criminal background check;
3- 2453 ●Comply with the Commission rules applicable to a 
participating state;
●Accept the National Board Examinations of the 
Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations 
or another examination accepted by Commission 
rule as a licensure examination;
●Accept for licensure that applicants for a dental 
license graduate from a predoctoral dental 
education program accredited by the Commission 
on Dental Accreditation, or another accrediting 
agency recognized by the U.S. Department of 
Education for the accreditation of dentistry and 
dental hygiene education programs, leading to a 
doctor of dental surgery (DDS) or doctor of dental 
medicine (DMD) degree;
●Accept for licensure that applicants for a dental 
hygienist license graduate from a dental hygiene 
education program accredited by the Commission 
on Dental Accreditation or another accrediting 
agency recognized by the U.S. Department of 
Education for the accreditation of dentistry and 
dental hygiene education programs;
●Require for licensure that applicants successfully 
complete a clinical assessment;
●Have continuing professional development 
requirements as a condition for license renewal; 
and
●Pay a participation fee to the Commission as 
established by Commission rule.
The Compact would state that providing alternative 
pathways for an individual to receive an unrestricted license 
would not disqualify a state from participating in the Compact.
4- 2453 Criminal Background Check
When conducting a criminal background check, the 
Compact would require the state licensing authority to:
●Consider that information in making a licensure 
decision;
●Maintain documentation of completion of the 
criminal background check and background check 
information to the extent allowed by state and 
federal law; and
●Report to the Commission whether it has 
completed the criminal background check and 
whether the individual was granted or denied a 
license.
Compact Licensure
The Compact would state a licensee of a participating 
state who has a qualifying license in that state and does not 
hold an encumbered license in any other participating state 
would be issued a Compact privilege in a remote state in 
accordance with the terms of the Compact and Commission 
rules. If a remote state has a jurisprudence requirement, a 
Compact privilege would not be issued to the licensee unless 
the licensee has satisfied the jurisprudence requirement.
Compact Privilege (Section 4)
The Compact would require a licensee to do the 
following in order to obtain and exercise the Compact 
privilege:
●Have a qualifying license as a dentist or dental 
hygienist in a participating state;
5- 2453 ●Be eligible for Compact privilege in any remote 
state in accordance with the Compact;
●Submit to an application process whenever the 
licensee is seeking a Compact privilege;
●Pay any applicable Commission and remote state 
fees for a Compact privilege in the remote state;
●Meet any jurisprudence requirement established by 
a remote state in which the licensee is seeking a 
Compact privilege;
●Have passed a national board examination of the 
Joint Commission on National Dental Examinations 
or another examination accepted by Commission 
rule;
●For a dentist, have graduated from a predoctoral 
dental education program accredited by the 
Commission on Dental Accreditation, or another 
accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. 
Department of Education for the accreditation of 
dentistry and dental hygiene education programs, 
leading to the DDS or DMD degree;
●For a dental hygienist, have graduated from a 
dental hygiene education program accredited by 
the Commission on Dental Accreditation or another 
accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. 
Department of Education for the accreditation of 
dentistry and dental hygiene education programs;
●Have successfully completed a clinical assessment 
for licensure;
●Report to the Commission any adverse action 
taken by any non-participating state when applying 
for a Compact privilege and, otherwise, within 30 
days after the date the adverse action is taken;
6- 2453 ●Report to the Commission, when applying for a 
Compact privilege, the address of the licensee’s 
primary residence and thereafter immediately 
report to the Commission any change in address of 
the licensee’s primary residence; and
●Consent to accept service of process by mail at the 
licensee’s primary residence on record with the 
Commission with respect to any action brought 
against the licensee by the Commission or a 
participating state and consent to accept service of 
a subpoena by mail at the licensee’s primary 
residence on record with the Commission with 
respect to any action brought on investigation 
conducted by the Commission or a participating 
state.
Compact Privilege
Licensees would be required to comply with the 
requirements of the Compact to maintain Compact privilege 
in the remote state. If those requirements are met, the 
Compact privilege would continue if the licensee maintains a 
qualifying license in the state through which the licensee 
applied for the Compact privilege and pays any applicable 
Compact privilege renewal fees.
A licensee providing dentistry or dental hygiene in a 
remote state under the Compact privilege would be required 
to function within the scope of practice authorized by the 
remote state for a dentist or dental hygienist licensed in that 
state.
A licensee providing dentistry or dental hygiene pursuant 
to a Compact privilege in a remote state would be subject to 
that state’s regulatory authority. A remote state would be able 
to, in accordance with due process and that state’s laws, by 
adverse action revoke or remove a licensee’s Compact 
privilege in the remote state for a specific period of time and 
7- 2453 impose fines or take any other necessary actions to protect 
the health and safety of its citizens. If a remote state imposes 
an adverse action against a Compact privilege that limits the 
Compact privilege, that adverse action would apply to all 
Compact privileges in all remote states. A licensee whose 
Compact privilege in a remote state is removed for a 
specified period of time would not be eligible for a Compact 
privilege in any other remote state until the specific time for 
removal of the Compact privilege has passed, and all 
encumbrance requirements are satisfied.
If a license in a participating state is an encumbered 
license, the licensee would lose the Compact privilege in a 
remote state and would not be eligible for a Compact 
privilege in any remote state until the license is 
unencumbered.
Once an encumbered license in a participating state is 
restored to good standing, the licensee would need to meet 
the requirements for licensees under the Compact to obtain 
privilege in a remote state.
If a licensee’s Compact privilege in a remote state is 
removed by the remote state, the individual would lose or be 
ineligible for the Compact privilege in any remote state until:
●The specific period for which the Compact privilege 
was removed has ended; and
●All conditions for removal of the Compact privilege 
have been satisfied.
Once these requirements have been met, the licensee 
would also need to meet the requirements for licensees under 
the Compact to obtain privilege in a remote state.
8- 2453 Active Military Member or Their Spouses (Section 5)
An active military member and their spouse would not 
be required to pay the fee charged by the Commission for a 
Compact privilege. If a remote state chooses to charge a fee 
for a Compact privilege, it would be able to charge a reduced 
fee or no fee to an active military member and their spouse 
for a Compact privilege.
Adverse Actions (Section 6)
A participating state in which a licensee is licensed 
would have exclusive authority to impose adverse action 
against the qualifying license issued by that participating 
state.
A participating state would be able to take adverse 
action based on the significant investigative information of a 
remote state, if the participating state follows its own 
procedures for imposing adverse action.
Nothing in the Compact would override a participating 
state’s decision that participation in an alternative program 
may be used in lieu of adverse action and that participation 
would remain non-public if required by the participating 
state’s laws. Participating states would be required to require 
licensees who enter any alternative program in lieu of 
discipline to agree not to practice pursuant to a Compact 
privilege in any other participating state during the term of the 
alternative program without prior authorization from the other 
participating state.
Any participating state in which a licensee is applying to 
practice or is practicing pursuant to a Compact privilege 
would be able to investigate actual or alleged violations of the 
statutes and regulations authorizing the practice of dentistry 
or dental hygiene in any other participating state in which the 
dentist or dental hygienist holds a license or Compact 
privilege.
9- 2453 A remote state would have the authority to:
●Take adverse actions as set forth in the Compact 
against a licensee’s compact privilege in the state;
●In furtherance of its rights and responsibilities 
under the Compact and the Commission’s rules, 
issue subpoenas for both hearings and 
investigations that require the attendance and 
testimony of witnesses and the production of 
evidence. Subpoenas issued by a state licensing 
authority in a participating state for the attendance 
and testimony of witnesses, or the production of 
evidence from another participating state, would be 
enforced in the latter state by any court of 
competent jurisdiction, according to the practice 
and procedure of that court applicable to 
subpoenas issued in proceedings pending before 
it. The issuing authority would be required to pay 
any witness fees, travel expenses, mileage, and 
other fees required by the service statutes of the 
state where the witnesses or evidence is located; 
and
●If otherwise permitted by state law, recover from 
the licensee the costs of investigations and 
disposition of cases resulting from any adverse 
action taken against that licensee.
In addition to the authority granted to a participating 
state by its dentist or dental hygienist licensure act or other 
applicable state law, a participating state would be able to 
jointly investigate licensees with other participating states.
Participating states would be required to share any 
significant investigative information, litigation, or compliance 
materials in furtherance of any joint or individual investigation 
initiated under the Compact.
10- 2453 After a licensee’s Compact privilege in a remote state is 
terminated, the remote state could continue an investigation 
of the licensee that began when the licensee had a Compact 
privilege in that remote state.
If the investigation yields what would be a significant 
investigative information had the licensee continued to have a 
Compact privilege in that remote state, the remote state 
would report the presence of the information to the data 
system as required by the Compact as if it was significant 
investigative information.
Establishment and Operation of the Commission 
(Section 7)
The Compact would provide for participating states to 
create and establish a joint government agency whose 
membership would consist of all participating states that have 
enacted the Compact. The Commission would be an 
instrumentality of the participating states acting jointly and not 
an instrumentality of any one state. The Commission would 
come into existence on or after the effective date of Compact.
Each participating state would have and be limited to 
one Commissioner selected by that state’s licensing authority 
or, if the state has more one state licensing authority, selected 
collectively by the state licensing authorities.
The Commissioner would be a member or designee of 
such authority or authorities.
The Commission would, by rule or bylaw, establish a 
term of office for commissioners and could establish term 
limits.
The Commission could recommend to a state licensing 
authority or authorities, as applicable, removal or suspension 
of an individual as the state’s commissioner.
11- 2453 A participating state’s state licensing authority or 
authorities, as applicable, would fill any vacancy of its 
commissioner or the Commission within 60 days after the 
vacancy.
Each commissioner would be entitled to one vote on all 
matters voted upon by the Commission.
The Commission would meet at least once during each 
calendar year. Additional meetings could be held as set forth 
in the bylaws. The Commission would be able to meet by 
telecommunication, video conference, or other similar 
electronic means.
Commission Powers
The Commission would have the following powers:
●Establish the fiscal year of the Commission;
●Establish a code of conduct and conflict of interest 
policies;
●Adopt rules and bylaws;
●Maintain its financial records in accordance with 
the bylaws;
●Meet and take actions as are consistent with the 
provisions of the Compact and the Commission’s 
rules and bylaws;
●Initiate and conclude legal proceedings or actions 
in the name of the Commission, provided the 
standing of any state licensing authority to sue or 
be sued under applicable law would not be 
affected;
●Maintain and certify records and information 
provided to a participating state as the 
12- 2453 authenticated business records of the Commission 
and designate a person to do so on the 
Commission’s behalf;
●Purchase and maintain insurance and bonds;
●Borrow, accept, or contract for services of 
personnel, including, but not limited to, employees 
of a participating state;
●Conduct an annual financial review;
●Hire employees, elect or appoint officers, fix 
compensation, define duties, grant individuals 
appropriate authority to carry out the purposes of 
the Compact and establish the Commission’s 
personnel policies and programs relating to 
conflicts of interest, qualifications of personnel, and 
other related personnel matters;
●As set forth in Commission rules, charge a fee to a 
licensee for the grant of a Compact privilege in a 
remote state and charge the licensee a Compact 
privilege renewal fee for each renewal period in 
which that licensee exercises or intends to exercise 
the Compact privilege in that remote state. A 
remote state would not be prevented from charging 
a licensee a fee for a Compact privilege or 
renewals of a Compact privilege, or a fee for the 
jurisprudence requirement, if the remote state 
imposes a requirement for the grant of a Compact 
privilege;
●Accept any and all appropriate gifts, donations, 
grants of money, other sources of revenue, 
equipment, supplies, materials, and services and 
receive, utilize, and dispose of the same, and at all 
times the Commission would avoid any 
appearance of impropriety or conflict of interest;
13- 2453 ●Lease, purchase, retain, own, hold, improve, or use 
any property, real, personal, or mixed, or any 
undivided interest in property;
●Sell, convey, mortgage, pledge, lease, exchange, 
abandon, or otherwise dispose of any property 
real, personal, or mixed;
●Establish a budget and make expenditures;
●Borrow money;
●Appoint committees, including standing 
committees, which may be composed of members, 
state regulators, state legislators or their 
representatives, consumer representatives, and 
other interested persons as may be designated in 
this Compact and the bylaws;
●Provide and receive information from, and 
cooperate with, law enforcement agencies;
●Elect a chairperson, vice-chairperson, secretary, 
and treasurer and other officers of the Commission 
as provided in the Commission’s bylaws;
●Establish and elect an executive board;
●Adopt and provide to the participating states an 
annual report;
●Determine whether a state’s enacted Compact is 
materially different from the model Compact 
language such that the state would not qualify for 
participation in the Compact; and
●Perform other functions as may be necessary or 
appropriate to achieve the purposes of the 
Compact.
14- 2453 Meeting Notice
All meetings of the Commission not closed pursuant to 
the Compact would be open to the public. Notice of public 
meetings would be posted on the Commission’s website at 
least 30 days prior to the public meeting.
Notice of all Commission meetings would provide the 
time, date, and location of the meeting, and if the meeting is 
to be held or accessible via telecommunication, video 
conference, or other electronic means, the notice would 
include the mechanism for access to the meeting through 
those means.
Notwithstanding the above, the Commission could 
convene an emergency public meeting by providing at least 
24 hours’ prior notice on the Commission’s website and any 
other means as provided in the Commission’s rules. 
Emergency meetings would be permissible in order to:
●Meet an imminent threat to public health, safety, or 
welfare;
●Prevent a loss of Commission or participating state 
funds;
●Meet a deadline for the promulgation of a rule that 
is established by federal law or rule; or
●Protect public health and safety.
The Commission’s legal counsel would certify that one 
of the reasons justifying an emergency public meeting has 
been met.
15- 2453 Closed Meetings
The Commission could convene in a closed, non-public 
meeting for the Commission to receive legal advice to 
discuss:
●Non-compliance of a participating state with its 
obligations under the Compact;
●The employment, compensation, discipline, or 
other matters, practices, or procedures related to 
specific employees or other matters related to the 
Commission’s internal personnel practices and 
procedures;
●Current or threatened discipline of a licensee or 
Compact privilege holder by the Commission or by 
a participating state’s licensing authority;
●Current, threatened, or reasonably anticipated 
litigation;
●Negotiation of contracts for the purchase, lease, or 
sale of goods, services, or real estate;
●Accusing any person of a crime or formally 
censuring any person;
●Trade secrets or commercial or financial 
information that is privileged or confidential;
●Information of a personal nature where disclosure 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy;
●Investigative records compiled for law enforcement 
purposes;
●Information related to any investigative reports 
prepared by, on behalf of, or for use of the 
Commission or any other committee charged with 
16- 2453 responsibility of investigation or determination of 
compliance issues pursuant to the Compact;
●Legal advice;
●Matters specifically exempted from disclosure to 
the public by federal or participating state law; and
●Other matters as promulgated by the Commission 
by rule.
If a meeting, or portion of a meeting, is closed, the 
presiding officer would state the meeting will be closed and 
reference each relevant exempting provision, and this 
reference would be recorded in the minutes.
The Commission would keep minutes that fully and 
clearly describe all matters discussed in a meeting and would 
provide a full and accurate summary of actions taken, and the 
reasons therefor, including a description of the views 
expressed. All documents considered in connection with an 
action would be identified in the minutes. All minutes and 
documents of a closed meeting would remain under seal, 
subject to release only by a majority vote of the Commission 
or order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
Commission Finances
The Commission would pay, or provide for the payment 
of, the reasonable expenses of its establishment, 
organization, and ongoing activities.
The Commission could accept any and all appropriate 
sources of revenue, donations, and grants of money, 
equipment, supplies, materials, and services.
The Commission could levy on and collect an annual 
assessment from each participating state and impose fees on 
licensees of participating states when a Compact privilege is 
granted to cover the cost of the operations and activities of 
17- 2453 the Commission and its staff, which would be in a total 
amount sufficient to cover its annual budget as approved 
each fiscal year for which sufficient revenue is not provided 
by other sources. The aggregate annual assessment amount 
for participating states would be allocated based upon a 
formula that the Commission would promulgate by rule.
The Commission would not incur obligations of any kind 
prior to securing the funds adequate to meet the same nor 
would the Commission pledge the credit of any participating 
state except by and with the authority of the participating 
state.
The Commission would keep accurate accounts of all 
receipts and disbursements. The receipts and disbursements 
of the Commission would be subject to the financial review 
and accounting procedures established under its bylaws. All 
receipts and disbursements of funds handled by the 
Commission would be subject to an annual financial review 
by a certified or licensed public accountant, and the report of 
the financial review would be included in and become part of 
the annual report of the Commission.
Executive Board
The Executive Board would have the power to act on 
behalf of the Commission according to the terms of the 
Compact. The powers, duties, and responsibilities of the 
Executive Board would include:
●Overseeing the day-to-day activities of the 
administration of the Compact, including 
compliance with the provisions of the Compact, the 
Commission’s rules, and bylaws;
●Recommending the Commission changes to the 
rules or bylaws, changes to this Compact 
legislation, fees charged to Compact participating 
states, fees charged to licensees, and other fees;
18- 2453 ●Ensuring Compact administration services are 
appropriately provided, including by contract;
●Preparing and recommending the budget;
●Maintaining financial records on behalf of the 
Commission;
●Monitoring Compact compliance of participating 
states and providing compliance reports to the 
Commission;
●Establishing additional committees as necessary;
●Exercising powers and duties of the Commission 
during the interim between Commission meetings, 
except for adopting or amending rules, adopting or 
amending bylaws, and exercising any other powers 
and duties expressly reserved to the Commission 
by rule or bylaw; and
●Other duties as provided in the rules and bylaws of 
the Commission.
Executive Board Membership
The Executive Board would be composed of up to seven 
members. The chairperson, vice-chairperson, secretary, and 
treasurer of the Commission and any other members of the 
Commission who serve on the Executive Board would be 
voting members of the Executive Board. Other than the 
chairperson, vice chairperson, secretary, and treasurer, the 
Commission could elect up to three voting members from the 
current membership of the Commission. 
The Commission could remove any member of the 
Executive Board as provided in the Commission’s bylaws.
19- 2453 Executive Board Meetings
The Executive Board would meet at least annually.
An Executive Board meeting at which it takes or intends 
to take formal action on a matter would be open to the public, 
except the Executive Board could meet in a closed, non-
public session of a public meeting when dealing with:
●Non-compliance of a participating state with its 
obligations under the Compact;
●The employment, compensation, discipline, or 
other matters, practices, or procedures related to 
specific employees or other matters related to the 
Commission’s internal personnel practices and 
procedures;
●Current or threatened discipline of a licensee or 
Compact privilege holder by the Commission or by 
a participating state’s licensing authority;
●Current, threatened, or reasonably anticipated 
litigation;
●Negotiation of contracts for the purchase, lease, or 
sale of goods, services, or real estate;
●Accusing any person of a crime or formally 
censuring any person;
●Trade secrets or commercial or financial 
information that is privileged or confidential;
●Information of a personal nature where disclosure 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy;
●Investigative records compiled for law enforcement 
purposes;
20- 2453 ●Information related to any investigative reports 
prepared by, on behalf of, or for use of the 
Commission or any other committee charged with 
responsibility of investigation or determination of 
compliance issues pursuant to the Compact;
●Legal advice;
●Matters specifically exempted from disclosure to 
the public by federal or participating state law; and
●Other matters as promulgated by the Commission 
by rule.
The Executive Board would provide five business days’ 
notice of its public meetings, published on its website, and as 
it may otherwise determine, to provide notice to persons with 
an interest in the public matters the Executive Board intends 
to address at those meetings. 
The Executive Board could hold an emergency meeting 
when acting for the Commission to:
●Meet an imminent threat to public health, safety, or 
welfare;
●Prevent a loss of Commission or participating state 
funds; or
●Protect public health and safety.
Commission Liability and Protections
The members, officers, executive director, employees, 
and representatives of the Commission would be immune 
from suit and liability, both personally and in their official 
capacity, for any claim for damage to or loss of property or 
personal injury or other civil liability caused by or arising out 
of any actual or alleged act, error, or omission that occurred, 
or that the person against whom the claim is made had a 
21- 2453 reasonable basis for believing occurred within the scope of 
Commission employment, duties, or responsibilities. Nothing 
in this section would be construed to protect any such person 
from suit or liability for any damage, loss, injury, or liability 
caused by the intentional, willful, or wanton misconduct of 
that person. The procurement of insurance of any type by the 
Commission would not in any way compromise or limit this 
immunity.
The Commission would defend any member, officer, 
executive director, employee, and representative of the 
Commission in any civil action seeking to impose liability 
arising out of any actual or alleged act, error, or omission that 
occurred within the scope of Commission employment, 
duties, or responsibilities, or as determined by the 
Commission the person against whom the claim is made had 
a reasonable basis for believing occurred within the scope of 
Commission employment, duties, or responsibilities, provided 
that nothing in this paragraph would be construed to prohibit 
that person from retaining their own counsel at their own 
expense, and provided further, the actual or alleged act, error, 
or omission did not result in that person’s intentional, willful, 
or wanton misconduct.
Should any member, officer, executive director, 
employee, or representative of the Commission be held liable 
for the amount of any settlement or judgment arising out of 
any actual or alleged act, error, or omission that occurred 
within the scope of that individual’s employment, duties, or 
responsibilities for the Commission, the Commission would 
indemnify and hold harmless the individual, provided the 
actual or alleged act, error, or omission did not result from the 
intentional, willful, or wanton misconduct of the individual.
Nothing in this subsection would be construed as a 
limitation on the liability of any licensee for professional 
malpractice or misconduct, which would be governed solely 
by any other applicable state laws.
22- 2453 Nothing in the Compact would be interpreted to waive or 
otherwise abrogate a participating state’s state action 
immunity or state action affirmative defense with respect to 
antitrust claims under the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, or any 
other state or federal antitrust or anti-competitive law or 
regulation.
[Note: The Sherman Act and Clayton Act are federal 
antitrust laws.]
Nothing in the Compact would be construed to be a 
waiver of sovereign immunity by the participating states or by 
the Commission.
Data System (Section 8)
 The bill would require the Commission to provide for the 
development, maintenance, operation, and utilization of a 
coordinated database and reporting system containing 
licensure, adverse action, and the presence of significant 
investigative information on all licensees and applicants for a 
license in participating states.
The bill would require, notwithstanding any provision of 
state law to the contrary, a participating state to submit a 
uniform data set to the data system on all individuals to whom 
the Compact is applicable, as required by the rules of the 
Commission, including:
●Identifying information;
●Licensure data;
●Adverse actions against a licensee, license 
applicant, or Compact privilege;
●Non-confidential information related to alternative 
program participation, the beginning and ending 
23- 2453 dates of the participation, and other related 
information;
●Any denial of an application for licensure and the 
reasons for denial;
●The presence of significant investigative 
information; and
●Other information that may facilitate the 
administration of the Compact or the protection of 
the public, as determined by the rules of the 
Commission.
Records and information provided to a participating state 
pursuant to the Compact through the data system would 
constitute the authenticated business records of the 
Commission and would be entitled to any associated hearsay 
exception in any relevant judicial, quasi-judicial, or 
administrative proceedings in a participating state. Significant 
investigative information pertaining to a licensee in any 
participating state would be only available to other 
participating states.
Participating states would be responsible for monitoring 
the database to determine whether adverse action has been 
taken against a licensee or license applicant. Adverse action 
information pertaining to a license or license applicant in any 
participating state would be available to any other 
participating state. Participating states would be able to 
designate information that may not be shared with the public 
without the express permission of the contributing state. Any 
information submitted to the data system and subsequently 
expunged pursuant to federal law or the laws of the 
participating state would be removed from the data system.
Rulemaking (Section 9)
The bill would provide for the Commission to promulgate 
reasonable rules in order to effectively and efficiently 
24- 2453 implement and administer the Compact. A Commission rule 
would be invalid and have no force or effect only if a court of 
competent jurisdiction holds the rule is invalid because the 
Commission exercised its rulemaking authority in a manner 
beyond the scope and purposes of the Compact or based on 
another applicable standard of review. 
The rules of the Commission would have the force of 
law in each participating state unless the rules conflict with 
the laws of the participating state that establish the 
participating state’s scope of practice, as held by a court of 
competent jurisdiction; the rules of the Commission would be 
ineffective in that state to the extent of the conflict.
The bill would state the Commission could exercise its 
rulemaking powers pursuant to the Compact and the rules 
adopted thereunder. Rules would become binding as of the 
date specified by the Commission for each rule.
If a majority of legislatures of the participating states 
reject a Commission rule or portion of a Commission rule, by 
enactment of a statute or resolution in the same manner used 
to adopt the Compact, within four years of the date of 
adoption of the rule, then the rule would have no further force 
and effect in any participating state or to any state applying to 
participate in the Compact.
Rules would be adopted at regular or special meetings 
of the Commission. Prior to adoption of a proposed rule, the 
Commission would hold a public hearing and allow persons to 
provide oral and written comments, data, facts, opinions, and 
arguments. 
Notice of Public Hearing
At least 30 days in advance of the meeting at which the 
Commission would hold a public hearing on the proposed 
rule, the Commission would provide a notice of proposed 
rulemaking:
25- 2453 ●On the website of the Commission or other publicly 
available platform;
●To persons who have requested notice of the 
Commission’s notices of proposed rulemaking; and 
●In other ways as the Commission may specify by 
rule.
The notice of proposed rulemaking would include:
●The time, date, and location of the public hearing at 
which the Commission would hear public 
comments on the proposed rule and, if different, 
the time, date, and location of the meeting where 
the Commission would consider and vote on the 
proposed rule;
●If the hearing is held via telecommunication, video 
conference, or other electronic means, the 
Commission would include the mechanism for 
access to the hearing in the notice of proposed 
rulemaking;
●The text of the proposed rule and the reason 
therefor;
●A request for comments on the proposed rule from 
any interested person; and
●The manner in which interested persons may 
submit written comments.
Public Hearings
All hearings would be recorded. A copy of the recording 
and all written comments and documents received by the 
Commission in response to the proposed rule would be 
available to the public.
26- 2453 Nothing in the Compact would be construed as requiring 
a separate hearing on each Commission rule. Rules would be 
grouped for the convenience of the Commission at hearings 
required by this section.
The Commission would, by majority vote of all 
Commissioners, take final action on the proposed rule based 
on the rulemaking record.
The Commission could adopt changes to the proposed 
rule if the changes would not enlarge the original purpose of 
the proposed rule. 
The Commission would provide an explanation of the 
reasons for substantive changes made to the proposed rule 
as well as reasons for substantive changes not made that 
were recommended by commenters. 
The Commission would determine a reasonable 
effective date for the rule. Except for an emergency, the 
effective date of the rule would be no sooner than 30 days 
after the Commission issuing the notice that it adopted or 
amended the rule.
Emergency Rulemaking
Upon determination that an emergency exists, the 
Commission could consider and adopt an emergency rule 
with 24 hours’ notice, with opportunity to comment, and the 
usual rulemaking procedures provided in the Compact would 
be retroactively applied to the rule as soon as reasonably 
possible, in no event later than 90 days after the effective 
date of the rule. For the purposes of this subsection, an 
emergency rule would be one that must be adopted 
immediately in order to:
●Meet an imminent threat to public health, safety, or 
welfare;
27- 2453 ●Prevent a loss of Commission or participating state 
funds;
●Meet a deadline for the promulgation of a rule that 
is established by federal law or rule; or
●Protect public health and safety.
The Commission or an authorized committee of the 
Commission could direct revisions to a previously adopted 
rule for purposes of correcting typographical errors, errors in 
format, errors in consistency, or grammatical errors. Public 
notice of any revisions would be posted on the website of the 
Commission. The revision would be subject to challenge by 
any person for a period of 30 days after posting. The revision 
could be challenged only on grounds the revision results in a 
material change to a rule. A challenge would be made in 
writing and delivered to the Commission prior to the end of 
the notice period. If no challenge is made, the revision would 
take effect without further action. If the revision is challenged, 
the revision would not take effect without the approval or the 
Commission.
No participating state’s rulemaking requirements would 
apply under the Compact.
Oversight, Dispute Resolution, and Enforcement 
(Section 10)
The Compact would provide for the executive and 
judicial branches of state government in each participating 
state to enforce the Compact and take all actions necessary 
and appropriate to implement the Compact.
The Compact would establish proper venue for judicial 
proceedings by or against the Commission to be solely and 
exclusively a court of competent jurisdiction where the 
principal office of the Commission is located. The 
Commission could waive venue and jurisdictional defenses to 
28- 2453 the extent it would adopt or consent to participate in 
alternative dispute resolution proceedings. These provisions 
would not affect or limit the selection or propriety of venue in 
any action against a licensee for professional malpractice, 
misconduct, or any similar matter.
The Commission would be entitled to receive service of 
process in any proceeding regarding the enforcement or 
interpretation of the Compact or Commission rule and would 
have standing to intervene in such a proceeding for all 
purposes. Failure to provide the Commission service of 
process would render a judgment or order void as to the 
Commission, the Compact, or promulgated rules.
Defaulting States
If the Commission determines that a participating state 
has defaulted in the performance of its obligations or 
responsibilities under the Compact or the promulgated rules, 
the Commission would provide written notice to the defaulting 
state. The notice of default would describe the default, the 
proposed means of curing the default, and any other action 
the Commission could take and would offer training and 
specific technical assistance regarding the default.
The Commission would provide a copy of the notice of 
default to the other participating state.
If a state in default fails to cure the default, the 
defaulting state would be terminated from the Compact upon 
an affirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners, and all 
rights, privileges, and benefits conferred on that state by the 
Compact would be terminated on the effective date of 
termination. A cure of the default would not relieve the 
offending state of obligations or liabilities incurred during the 
period of default.
Termination of participation in the Compact would be 
imposed only after all other means of securing compliance 
29- 2453 were exhausted. Notice of intent to suspend or terminate 
would be given by the Commission to:
●The governor;
●The majority and minority leaders of the defaulting 
state’s legislature;
●The defaulting state’s state licensing authority or 
authorities, as applicable; and
●Each of the participating states’ state licensing 
authority or authorities, as applicable.
A state that has been terminated would be responsible 
for all assessments, obligations, and liabilities incurred 
through the effective date of termination, including obligations 
that extend beyond the effective date of termination.
Upon the termination of a state’s participation in the 
Compact, that state would immediately provide notice to all 
licensees of the state, including licensees of other 
participating states issued a Compact privilege to practice 
within that state of termination. The terminated state would 
continue to recognize all Compact privileges then in effect in 
that state for a minimum of 180 days after the date of said 
notice of termination.
The Commission would not bear any costs related to a 
state that is found to be in default or that has been terminated 
from the Compact, unless agreed upon in writing between the 
Commission and the defaulting state.
The defaulting state could appeal the action of the 
Commission by petitioning the U.S. District Court for the 
District of Columbia or the federal district where the 
Commission has its principal offices. The prevailing party 
would be awarded all costs of litigation, including reasonable 
attorney fees. 
30- 2453 Upon request by a participating state, the Commission 
would attempt to resolve disputes related to the Compact that 
arise among participating states and between participating 
states and non-participating states.
The Compact would require the Commission to 
promulgate a rule providing for both mediation and binding 
dispute resolution for disputes as appropriate.
The Commission, in the reasonable exercise of its 
discretion, would enforce the provisions of the Compact and 
the Commission’s rules.
By majority vote, the Commission could initiate legal 
action against a participating state in default in the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Columbia or the federal district 
where the Commission has its principal offices to enforce 
compliance with the provisions of the Compact and its 
promulgated rules. The relief sought could include both 
injunctive relief and damages. In the event judicial 
enforcement is necessary, the prevailing party would be 
awarded all costs of litigation, including reasonable attorney 
fees. The remedies included in this section would not be the 
exclusive remedies of the Commission, and the Commission 
could pursue any other remedies available under federal or 
the defaulting participating state’s law.
A participating state could initiate legal action against the 
Commission in the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia or the federal district where the Commission has its 
principal offices to enforce compliance with the provisions of 
the Compact and its promulgated rules. The relief sought 
could include both injunctive relief and damages. In the event 
judicial enforcement is necessary, the prevailing party would 
be awarded all costs of litigation, including reasonable 
attorney fees.
No individual or entity other than a participating state 
could enforce this Compact against the Commission.
31- 2453 Effective Date, Withdrawal, and Amendment (Section 11)
The Compact would come into effect on the date on 
which the Compact statute is enacted into law in the seventh 
participating state. [Note: As of February 6, 2024, four states 
have enacted the Compact: Iowa, Tennessee, Washington, 
and Wisconsin. Legislation is pending in 12 states, including 
Kansas.]
On or after the effective date of the Compact, the 
Commission would convene and review the enactment of 
each of the states that enacted the Compact prior to the 
Commission convening, the charter participating states, to 
determine if the statute enacted by each charter participating 
state is materially different than the model Compact.
A charter participating state whose enactment is found 
to be materially different from the model Compact would be 
entitled to the default process described in Section 10 of the 
bill.
If any participating state is later found to be in default, or 
is terminated or withdraws from the Compact, the 
Commission would remain in existence, and the Compact 
would remain in effect even if the number of participating 
states would be fewer than seven.
Participating states enacting the Compact after the 
charter participating states would be subject to evaluation by 
the Commission to determine if their enactments are 
materially different from the model Compact and whether they 
qualify for participation in the Compact.
All actions taken for the benefit of the Commission or in 
furtherance of the purposes of the administration of the 
Compact prior to the effective date of the Compact or the 
Commission coming into existence would be actions of the 
Commission unless specifically repudiated by the 
Commission.
32- 2453 Any state that joins the Compact after the Commission’s 
initial adoption of the rules and bylaws would be subject to 
the Commission’s rules and bylaws as they exist on the date 
on which the Compact becomes law in that state. Any rules 
previously adopted by the Commission would have the full 
force and effect of law on the day the Compact becomes law 
in that state.
State Withdrawal
Any participating state would be able to withdraw from 
the Compact by enacting a statute repealing that state’s 
enactment of the Compact. A participating state’s withdrawal 
would not take effect until 180 days after enactment of the 
repealing statute.
Withdrawal would not affect the continuing requirement 
of the withdrawing state’s licensing authority or authorities to 
comply with the investigative and adverse action reporting 
requirements of this Compact prior to the effective date of 
withdrawal.
Upon the enactment of a statute withdrawing from this 
Compact, the state would immediately provide notice of 
withdrawal to all licensees within that state. Notwithstanding 
any subsequent statutory enactment to the contrary, the 
withdrawing state would continue to recognize all Compact 
privileges to practice within that state granted pursuant to this 
Compact for a minimum of 180 days after the date of notice 
of withdrawal.
Nothing contained in the Compact would be construed 
to invalidate or prevent any licensure agreement or other 
cooperative arrangement between a participating state and a 
non-participating state that does not conflict with the 
provisions of this Compact.
This Compact would be amendable by the participating 
states. No amendment to the Compact would become 
33- 2453 effective and binding upon any participating state until it is 
enacted into the laws of all participating states.
Construction and Severability (Section 12)
The Compact and the Commission’s rulemaking 
authority would be liberally construed so as to effectuate the 
purposes and the implementation and administration of the 
Compact. Provisions of the Compact expressly authorizing or 
requiring the promulgation of rules would not be construed to 
limit the Commission’s rulemaking authority solely for those 
purposes.
The provisions of this Compact would be severable, and 
if any phrase, clause, sentence, or provision of this Compact 
is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to 
the constitution of any participating state, a state seeking 
participation in the Compact or of the United States, or the 
applicability thereof to any government, agency, person, or 
circumstance is held to be unconstitutional by a court of 
competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remainder of this 
Compact and the applicability thereof to any other 
government, agency, person, or circumstance would not be 
affected by such holding.
The Commission would be able to deny a state’s 
participation in the Compact or terminate a participating state 
if it determines a constitutional requirement of a participating 
state is a material departure from the Compact. If the 
Compact would be held to be contrary to the constitution of 
any participating state, the Compact would remain in full force 
and effect as to the remaining participating states and in full 
force and effect as to the participating state affected as to all 
severable matters.
34- 2453 Consistent Effect and Conflict with Other State Laws 
(Section 13)
The Compact would state that nothing within it would 
prevent or inhibit the enforcement of any other law of a 
participating state that is not consistent with the Compact. 
Laws, statutes, regulations, and other legal requirements in a 
participating state in conflict with the Compact would be 
superseded to the extent of the conflict. Permissible 
agreements between the Commission and participating states 
would be binding.
Background
The bill was introduced by the House Committee on 
Appropriations at the request of a representative of the 
Association of Dental Support Organizations.
House Committee on Health and Human Services
In the House Committee hearing, proponent testimony 
was provided by representatives of the Association of Dental 
Support Organizations, Council of State Governments, 
Kansas Dental Association, and Oral Health Kansas. The 
proponents generally stated dental licensing is complex, and 
the Compact can help bridge the patchwork of licensing 
requirements in various states. The conferees stated that 
areas of the state suffer from a lack of dental providers, and 
enacting the Compact could help ensure more Kansans have 
access to consistent, comprehensive oral health care.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by a 
practicing dentist and representatives of the U.S. Department 
of Defense and Kansas Dental Hygienists Association.
The Executive Director of the Kansas Dental Board 
(Board), when questioned, stated the Board had a neutral 
position and made themselves available for questions. 
35- 2453 No other testimony was provided.
Fiscal Information
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of 
the Budget on the bill, the Board states that enactment of the 
bill would increase fee fund expenditures by approximately 
$200,000 beginning in FY 2024. While exact costs are 
unknown, the estimate includes the Compact participation 
fee, participation in and use of the coordinated database, and 
compliance with other Compact requirements. The Board 
notes enactment of the Compact should be revenue neutral 
as the Compact allows the same fee structure for remote 
state applicants as what is established for originating state 
applicants. Any fiscal effect associated with the bill is not 
reflected in The FY 2025 Governor’s Budget Report.
Dentists; dental hygienists; Dentist and Dental Hygienist Compact; interstate practice 
privileges; licensure
36- 2453