I85PREP
⌘ K
ID Opto Juris study materials
ID Opto Juris study resources

ID Opto Juris: Idaho Optometry Practice Act, Statutes and Administrative Rules

ID Opto Juris · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Idaho Optometry Practice Act, Statutes and Administrative Rules

What this domain tests

This domain examines how Idaho organizes optometric regulation: which body does what, where the statute stops and the Board's rules begin, and how a rule challenge or disciplinary case travels through Idaho administrative law. Expect definitional questions, questions about the Board's authority, and questions that ask you to identify the correct source of law.

Statute and rule

  • Idaho Code Title 54, Chapter 15 is the Optometry Practice Act. It creates the Board, defines the practice of optometry, sets licensure categories, and lists grounds for discipline.
  • The Board adopts administrative rules to carry out the Act. Rulemaking follows the Idaho Administrative Procedure Act, Idaho Code Title 67, Chapter 52, including notice, public comment, and legislative review.
  • A rule can fill in detail - application forms, fees, continuing education mechanics, recordkeeping - but it cannot enlarge the scope of practice the statute defines. If a procedure is authorized by neither statute nor a rule adopted under it, it is outside practice.
  • Contested cases proceed under the APA, and a licensee may seek judicial review in district court under Idaho Code section 67-5279.
  • The Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses supplies staff, licensing systems, and investigators; the Board supplies professional judgment and decision-making.

Worked example

A licensee asks whether a new in-office device procedure is permitted. Step one: read the statutory definition of practice. Step two: check the Board's rules for any condition attached to that category of procedure. Step three: if the statute is silent and no rule addresses it, the answer is no - the correct route is a rule petition or a Board advisory opinion, not reliance on what neighboring states allow.

Traps

  • Treating the Board's rules as the source of scope; the statute is.
  • Citing another state's scope as authority in Idaho.
  • Confusing the Division's licensing action with the Board's adjudicative order.