BILL ANALYSIS H.B. 578 By: White, James Licensing & Administrative Procedures Committee Report (Unamended) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE It is unclear whether certain basic hair services, such as combing, curling, or pinning a person's hair for a special event, including a wedding, are within the scope of practice of cosmetology under the Occupations Code. Currently, it appears that such practices must be performed by a licensed cosmetologist at a licensed cosmetology facility. Interested parties assert that since these basic hair services do not include traditional cosmetology services, such as cutting, coloring, dyeing, or processing a person's hair, the services should not be considered in the scope of practice of cosmetology, allowing the services to be performed somewhere other than at a licensed cosmetology facility. H.B. 578 seeks to clarify this issue. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. ANALYSIS H.B. 578 amends the Occupations Code to exempt from statutory provisions governing cosmetologists a person who provides an incidental cosmetic service, including combing, curling, or pinning a person's hair, but not including cutting, coloring, dyeing, or processing a person's hair, at the location of a special event, including a wedding, if the person does not represent that the person is a cosmetologist. EFFECTIVE DATE September 1, 2015.
BILL ANALYSIS
# BILL ANALYSIS
H.B. 578
By: White, James
Licensing & Administrative Procedures
Committee Report (Unamended)
H.B. 578
By: White, James
Licensing & Administrative Procedures
Committee Report (Unamended)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE It is unclear whether certain basic hair services, such as combing, curling, or pinning a person's hair for a special event, including a wedding, are within the scope of practice of cosmetology under the Occupations Code. Currently, it appears that such practices must be performed by a licensed cosmetologist at a licensed cosmetology facility. Interested parties assert that since these basic hair services do not include traditional cosmetology services, such as cutting, coloring, dyeing, or processing a person's hair, the services should not be considered in the scope of practice of cosmetology, allowing the services to be performed somewhere other than at a licensed cosmetology facility. H.B. 578 seeks to clarify this issue.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS H.B. 578 amends the Occupations Code to exempt from statutory provisions governing cosmetologists a person who provides an incidental cosmetic service, including combing, curling, or pinning a person's hair, but not including cutting, coloring, dyeing, or processing a person's hair, at the location of a special event, including a wedding, if the person does not represent that the person is a cosmetologist.
EFFECTIVE DATE September 1, 2015.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
It is unclear whether certain basic hair services, such as combing, curling, or pinning a person's hair for a special event, including a wedding, are within the scope of practice of cosmetology under the Occupations Code. Currently, it appears that such practices must be performed by a licensed cosmetologist at a licensed cosmetology facility. Interested parties assert that since these basic hair services do not include traditional cosmetology services, such as cutting, coloring, dyeing, or processing a person's hair, the services should not be considered in the scope of practice of cosmetology, allowing the services to be performed somewhere other than at a licensed cosmetology facility. H.B. 578 seeks to clarify this issue.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
H.B. 578 amends the Occupations Code to exempt from statutory provisions governing cosmetologists a person who provides an incidental cosmetic service, including combing, curling, or pinning a person's hair, but not including cutting, coloring, dyeing, or processing a person's hair, at the location of a special event, including a wedding, if the person does not represent that the person is a cosmetologist.
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2015.