AN ACT to create and enact a new subsection to section 43-58-03.1 and section 43-60-06.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to obtaining criminal history record checks for naturopathic doctors and genetic counselors; and to amend and reenact subdivision d of subsection 2 of section 12-60-24 of the North Dakota Century Code, providing authority to complete the background checks with the bureau of criminal investigation to complete the criminal history record checks.
SB 2042 authorizes the North Dakota Board of Medicine to require statewide and nationwide criminal history record checks for applicants for licensure and for licensees who are the subject of disciplinary investigations in two professions: naturopathic doctors and genetic counselors. The bill also updates the state criminal-history-check statute to expressly include these Board of Medicine licensing and disciplinary matters and to allow the checks to be completed through the Bureau of Criminal Investigation in the manner provided by law.
Under the bill, the Board of Medicine may decide when a background check is necessary, rather than making it mandatory in every case. If a check is required, the applicant or licensee must pay all associated costs. The measure creates new statutory language for naturopathic doctors and genetic counselors and aligns those provisions with existing background-check procedures used for other Board of Medicine matters.
The bill amends North Dakota Century Code sections governing criminal history record checks and professional licensure oversight, expanding the Board of Medicine’s express authority to request background checks for naturopathic doctor and genetic counselor applicants and for disciplinary investigations. It also clarifies that nationwide checks are to be conducted under section 12-60-24 and that the Bureau of Criminal Investigation may be used to complete them. The practical effect is to add these two professions to the state’s licensing and disciplinary screening framework and shift the cost of checks to the regulated individual.
The bill appears to have been noncontroversial and broadly supported. It passed the Senate unanimously, 47-0, and the House overwhelmingly, 92-0 with 2 absent, indicating strong bipartisan agreement. The available record shows no committee debate or recorded opposition.
There is little evidence of substantive contention in the available materials. The main policy choice is whether the Board of Medicine should have discretion to require criminal history checks for licensure or disciplinary investigations, and whether applicants or licensees should bear the cost. Because the bill passed without any recorded dissent, any concerns about administrative burden, privacy, or added licensing costs were either minimal or not raised in the public record provided.