Board Policies and Public Notices
Policies versus rules versus notices
The Board publishes three different kinds of documents, and the exam tests whether you know which is which:
- Rules (3 CCR 709-1) are formally adopted under the Administrative Procedure Act and have the force of law.
- Board policies (position statements) explain how the Board interprets and applies the Act and rules - for example on recordkeeping, teledentistry, advertising, patient dismissal/abandonment, and infection control. They are not independently enforceable rules, but they are strong evidence of the Board's expectations and of the standard of care, and conduct contrary to a published policy invites an unprofessional-conduct allegation.
- Public notices include meeting agendas and minutes, rulemaking notices, sunset-review information, board vacancy announcements, and newsletters. Board meetings are open to the public under the open-meetings law (C.R.S. 24-6-402), and the public may comment.
Using policies on exam questions
When a stem describes conduct that a published policy addresses, the answer usually tracks the policy language rather than a free-floating "reasonable dentist" test. If a licensee disputes the Board's reading, the formal route is a petition for a declaratory order under C.R.S. 24-4-105, not simply ignoring the policy.
Worked example
A dentist's website lists "Specialist in Implant Dentistry" and offers "painless, guaranteed" treatment; no specialty credential is held. Two threads converge: the Act restricts how a licensee may represent specialty status and bars misleading advertising, and Board policy describes acceptable advertising. "Guaranteed" outcomes are misleading because results cannot be guaranteed, and the specialty title is a misrepresentation absent the corresponding recognized specialty credential. Both can be treated as unprofessional conduct, and the policy gave the licensee advance notice of the Board's view.
Traps that cost marks
- Saying a policy "has the force of law" - it does not, but it still matters.
- Dismissing policies as irrelevant because they are not rules.
- Mixing up procedural public notices (a rulemaking hearing date) with substantive guidance.
- Forgetting that the public, not only licensees, may attend Board meetings and comment.