top of page

passed bills or rule actions

NV sB249

Key Points

Amended 2023 bill gives authority to the board to determine scope, antiquated language was left in statute and now administrative rules are essential to fix the problem with original bill.

Bill signed by govenor 6/7/23. Gives authority to NV Cosmetology Board to define medical esthetic devices and general scope of practice.

Medical opposition
letter

Our Position

UPDATE: Statute that was passed was not ideal but opened the process for correction in administrative rules. Our NV Coalition was very vocal with multiple documents submitted. We will be expanding this outreach to other partners. These changes were supported by industry leaders such as Lightstim, Artemis & Hydrafacial. We will continue to work together to get this fixed.

 

2022 POSITION: This bill was worked on by NIMA (National Institute of Medical aesthetics) without industry involvement or support. The scope of practice outlined as well as requirements for getting this license do not meet current national standards and are poorly written.The opposition is from the medical community which also is using a safety argument without providing data or understanding what a master esthetician scope is.

We would support this bill with amendments and cooperation with the sponsor. We do not support private entities pushing a bill that will directly affect estheticians' livelihood while enriching that entity.  Key changes requested: update the scope of practice to reflect a national standard. Clearly outline supervision guidelines and allow the state board to define educational requirements and specific modalities within the scope outline.Sponsors: Senator Lange Lobbyist: Carrara Nevada (working with NIMA)

NV COALITION RESPONSE SB249

Administrative rules process-it is essential you are involved!!

NV sB249

Key Points

This bill was worked on by NIMA (National Institute of Medical aesthetics) without industry involvement or support. 

The scope of practice outlined as well as requirements for getting this license do not meet current national standards and are poorly written.

The opposition is from the medical community which also is using a safety argument without providing data or understanding what a master esthetician scope is.

This bill is a poor attempt at a master esthetician license. Admendments needed.

Medical opposition
letter

Our Position

We would support this bill with amendments and cooperation with the sponsor. We do not support private entities pushing a bill that will directly affect estheticians' livelihood while enriching that entity.  

Key changes requested: update the scope of practice to reflect a national standard. Clearly outline supervision guidelines and allow the state board to define educational requirements and specific modalities within the scope outline.

Sponsors: Senator Lange

Lobbyist: Carrara Nevada (working with NIMA)

Amendment may be pending

ok hb2013

Key Points

This bill creates a separate certificate for Laser Hair Removal and cosmetic tattooing/permanent makeup. 

The burden for renewal and opening locations is excessive with requirements such as having to publicly advertise your intention to renew your license for 3 weeks prior and disallowing locations within 1000 ft of a school, church, or playground.

This bill is creating a certification for laser hair removal & cosmetic tatooing. 

Our Position

Support with amendments. This bill may be adequate to provide estheticians a pathway to perform laser hair removal and cosmetic tattooing if amended.

Key changes needed: Remove the burdensome requirement to renew and the 1000 ft requirement. These services are not considered "vice" oriented or influence the "moral" authority of the community.

Sponsors: Townley

No hearings set yet-respond to sponsor
bottom of page