(h) (I) Issue anesthesia permits to licensed dentists and set and collect a fee for such issuance.

(II) Anesthesia permits shall be valid for a period of five years and shall allow permit-holding licensees to administer deep conscious sedation or both general anesthesia and deep conscious sedation.

(i) Develop criteria and procedures for an office inspection program including, but not limited to:

(I) Designating qualified inspectors who are experts in dental outpatient general anesthesia and deep conscious sedation;

(II) Requiring each licensee inspected to bear the cost of inspection by allowing designated inspectors to charge a reasonable fee as established by the board;

(III) Requiring an inspector to notify the board in writing of the results of an inspection.

(2) The board may recognize those dental specialties defined by the American dental association.

(3) To facilitate the licensure of qualified applicants, the board may, in its discretion, establish a subcommittee of at least six board members to perform licensing functions in accordance with this article. Four subcommittee members shall constitute a quorum of the subcommittee. The chairperson of the board may serve on a subcommittee as deemed necessary by the chairperson. Any action taken by a quorum of the subcommittee shall constitute action by the board.

Source: L. 2004: Entire article RC&RE, p. 826, § 1, effective July 1.

Am. Jur.2d. See 61 Am. Jur.2d, Physicians, Surgeons, and Other Healers, §§ 22, 55.

C.J.S. See 70 C.J.S., Physicians, Surgeons, and Other Health-Care Providers, §§ 32-35.

Law reviews. For note, "The Right to Cross-Examine Adverse Witnesses as a Part of Due Process in Hearings Before Colorado Agencies", see 31 Dicta 383 (1954).

Annotator's note. Since § 12-35-107 is similar to § 12-35-107 as it existed prior to the 2003 repeal of article 35 of title 12, relevant cases construing that provision have been included in the annotations to this section.

The board of dental examiners, being a statutory board, is not vested with arbitrary power. State Bd. of Dental Colo. v. Savelle, 90 Colo. 177, 8 P.2d 693, appeal dismissed, 287 U.S. 562, 53 S. Ct. 5, 77 L. Ed. 496 (1932) (decided under repealed laws antecedent to CSA, C. 52, § 14).

The dental practice law does not mention surrender of a license. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

The dental board may accept or reject the tendered surrender of a license; such authority must be implied from the authority to grant the license. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

Surrender does not extinguish license. The surrender of the license certificate, until accepted, does not extinguish the license. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

So long as plaintiff's name is entered on the record book of the board, he remains licensed to practice dentistry. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

Board can conduct disciplinary proceedings. Until the board accepts the surrender of a license, it is acting within the scope of its statutory power to conduct disciplinary proceedings, and the district court has no jurisdiction to restrain the board from performing its statutory function. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

Disciplinary proceedings are in furtherance of purpose of law. The purpose of the dental practice law is to protect the public interest, and when the board exercises its statutory function of conducting disciplinary proceedings, it is pursuing that purpose. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

Plaintiff may not surrender license as of right during pendency. To effectuate the purpose of the dental practice law, plaintiff is not entitled to resign or surrender his license as of right, during the pendency of disciplinary proceedings, and thereby divest the board of its jurisdiction. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

Although a license to practice dentistry may be considered "property" to the extent that due process must be satisfied before there can be any governmental "taking" of it, a dentistry license is not property that may be abandoned so as to divest the board of jurisdiction after disciplinary proceedings have been instituted. Cross v. Colo. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 37 Colo. App. 504, 552 P.2d 38 (1976).

Board may not participate with hearing officer in conducting proceedings. Where the board participated jointly with the hearing officer in conducting the proceedings involving a practitioner, in using the hearing officer as its legal advisor during its deliberations, and in entering the initial fact-finding decision, the board violates the statutory provisions of this article, and the practitioner is not required to demonstrate any prejudice to him as result of these statutory violations. In re Maul v. State Bd. of Dental Colo., 668 P.2d 933 (Colo. 1983).