AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4 and Title 63, Chapter 5, relative to dental professions.
Summary
HB1991 is a narrow administrative bill affecting the regulation of dental professions in Tennessee. It amends Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 63-5-106, to allow copies of the annual report to be provided in electronic format. The bill does not appear to change licensing standards, scope of practice, disciplinary procedures, or other substantive requirements for dentists or related dental professionals.
In practical terms, the measure modernizes a reporting requirement by permitting electronic delivery of annual reports, which may reduce paper handling and administrative burden for the affected board or agency. The bill also references Title 4 and Title 63, Chapter 5, but the operative change is limited to the dental professions reporting statute. It takes effect immediately upon becoming law because the public welfare is declared to require it.
Impact
The bill makes a targeted amendment to Tennessee’s dental-profession statutes by updating the annual report provision in Section 63-5-106 to expressly allow electronic copies. This affects the administrative practices of the relevant dental regulatory body and any entities required to receive or submit the annual report, but it does not alter substantive regulation of dental practice or professional standards. The change is likely to streamline compliance and recordkeeping while preserving the underlying reporting obligation.
Sentiment
The available committee votes suggest broad support and little controversy. The House Health Subcommittee recommended passage by a 7-0 vote, and the House Health Committee followed with an 18-0 recommendation for passage. No committee transcripts were provided, but the unanimous votes indicate the bill was viewed as a routine, noncontroversial administrative update.
Contention
There is no recorded substantive opposition in the available materials. Because the bill is limited to allowing annual reports to be provided electronically, any discussion would likely center on administrative efficiency rather than policy conflict. The unanimous committee votes suggest no notable contention among legislators or stakeholders in the records provided.