Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 679.250 (2026)

Powers and duties of board; rules

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      679.250 Powers and duties of board; rules. The powers and duties of the Oregon Board of Dentistry are as follows:

      (1) To, during the month of April of each year, organize and elect from its membership a president who shall hold office for one year, or until the election and qualification of a successor.

      (2) To authorize all necessary disbursements to carry out the provisions of this chapter, including but not limited to, payment for necessary supplies, office equipment, books and expenses for the conduct of examinations, payment for legal and investigative services rendered to the board, and such other expenditures as are provided for in this chapter.

      (3) To employ such inspectors, examiners, special agents, investigators, clerical assistants, assistants and accountants as are necessary for the investigation and prosecution of alleged violations and the enforcement of this chapter and for such other purposes as the board may require. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent assistance being rendered by an employee of the board in any hearing called by it. However, all obligations for salaries and expenses incurred under this chapter shall be paid from the fees accruing to the board under this chapter and not otherwise.

      (4)(a) To conduct examinations of applicants for license to practice dentistry, dental hygiene and dental therapy at least twice in each year.

      (b) In conducting examinations for licensure, the board may enter into a compact with other states for conducting regional examinations with other board of dental examiners concerned, or by a testing service recognized by such boards.

      (5) To meet for the transaction of other business at the call of the president. A majority of board members shall constitute a quorum. A majority vote of those present shall be a decision of the entire board. The board’s proceedings shall be open to public inspection in all matters affecting public interest.

      (6) To keep an accurate record of all proceedings of the board and of all its meetings, of all receipts and disbursements, of all prosecutions for violation of this chapter, of all examinations for license to practice dentistry, with the names and qualifications for examination of any person examined, together with the addresses of those licensed and the results of such examinations, a record of the names of all persons licensed to practice dentistry in Oregon together with the addresses of all such persons having paid the license fee prescribed in ORS 679.120 and the names of all persons whose license to practice has been revoked or suspended.

      (7) To make and enforce rules necessary for the procedure of the board, for the conduct of examinations, for regulating the practice of dentistry, and for regulating the services of dental hygienists and dental auxiliary personnel not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter. As part of such rules, the board may require the procurement of a permit or other certificate. Any permit issued may be subject to periodic renewal. In adopting rules, the board shall take into account all relevant factors germane to an orderly and fair administration of this chapter and of ORS 680.010 to 680.205, the practices and materials generally and currently used and accepted by persons licensed to practice dentistry in this state, dental techniques commonly in use, relevant technical reports published in recognized dental journals, the curriculum at accredited dental schools, the desirability of reasonable experimentation in the furtherance of the dental arts, and the desirability of providing the highest standard of dental care to the public consistent with the lowest economic cost.

      (8) Upon its own motion or upon any complaint, to initiate and conduct investigations of and hearings on all matters relating to the practice of dentistry, the discipline of licensees, or pertaining to the enforcement of any provision of this chapter. In the conduct of investigations or upon the hearing of any matter of which the board may have jurisdiction, the board may take evidence, administer oaths, take the depositions of witnesses, including the person charged, in the manner provided by law in civil cases, and compel their appearance before it in person the same as in civil cases, by subpoena issued over the signature of an employee of the board and in the name of the people of the State of Oregon, require answers to interrogatories, and compel the production of books, papers, accounts, documents and testimony pertaining to the matter under investigation or to the hearing. In all investigations and hearings, the board and any person affected thereby may have the benefit of counsel, and all hearings shall be held in compliance with ORS chapter 183. Notwithstanding ORS 676.165, 676.175 and 679.320, if a licensee who is the subject of an investigation or complaint is to appear before members of the board investigating the complaint, the board shall provide the licensee with a current summary of the complaint or the matter being investigated not less than five days prior to the date that the licensee is to appear. At the time the summary of the complaint or the matter being investigated is provided, the board shall provide to the licensee a current summary of documents or alleged facts that the board has acquired as a result of the investigation. The name of the complainant or other information that reasonably may be used to identify the complainant may be withheld from the licensee.

      (9) To require evidence as determined by rule of continuing education or to require satisfactory evidence of operative competency before reissuing or renewing licenses for the practice of dentistry, dental hygiene or dental therapy.

      (10) To adopt and enforce rules regulating administration of general anesthesia and conscious sedation by a dentist or under the supervision of a dentist in the office of the dentist. As part of such rules, the board may require the procurement of a permit which must be periodically renewed.

      (11) To order an applicant or licensee to submit to a physical examination, mental examination or a competency examination when the board has evidence indicating the incapacity of the applicant or licensee to practice safely. [Amended by 1953 c.8 §2; 1957 c.552 §8; 1963 c.284 §13; 1965 c.122 §7; 1973 c.390 §7; 1973 c.829 §64; 1977 c.192 §7; 1983 c.169 §17; 1985 c.323 §7; 1989 c.338 §10; 1999 c.578 §3; 1999 c.751 §6; 2009 c.756 §41; 2021 c.530 §16]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1965–1993 · leading case: Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980). · cites it 6× “" ORS 679.250(7). [16] The statute does not expressly state that the expanded grounds for disciplinary action under the rubric "unprofessional conduct" were to be created by board rules.”
Van Gordon v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 579 P.2d 306 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 4× “Incident to those powers, the Board is authorized to employ investigators for the investigation and prosecution of alleged violations and enforcement of the Act (ORS 679.250(3)), 3 to initiate and conduct investigations and hearings on all matters relating to the practice of…”
Campbell v. Henderson, 403 P.2d 902 (Or. 1965). · cites it 2× “It is certainly arguable that today unprofessional conduct by a dentist, within the meaning of the amended statute, includes not only the forms of advertising expressly mentioned, but others which the board may determine, not by way of interpretation of that statute, but under…”
Angelos v. State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 414 P.2d 335 (Or. 1966). · cites it 2× “*4 Under its authority to “make and enforce rules * # * for regulating the practice of dentistry * * ORS 679.250 (7), the Board by regulation prohibits Oregon dentists from holding themselves out as specialists unless they meet certain standards of training and experience beyond…”
Ortiz v. Adult & Fam. Servs. Div., 609 P.2d 1309 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “The board 'erroneously interpreted a provision of law,’ namely ORS 679.140(1)(c) and (2), *930 in believing that the standard could be applied ad hoc to facts not covered by a specification in subsection (2) or a rule adopted pursuant to ORS 679.”
Morgan v. Bd. of Dentistry, 848 P.2d 650 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “170(6) is broader than its subpoena power pursuant to ORS 679.250(8). The Board argues that a licensee subject to *634 its authority cannot seek interlocutory judicial review of a demand for information, but the licensee can seek such review of a subpoena.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 679.250(3) — 1 case
Van Gordon v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 579 P.2d 306 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “Incident to those powers, the Board is authorized to employ investigators for the investigation and prosecution of alleged violations and enforcement of the Act (ORS 679.250(3)), 3 to initiate and conduct investigations and hearings on all matters relating to the practice of…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 679.250(7) — 2 cases
Megdal v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 605 P.2d 273 (Or. 1980). “" ORS 679.250(7). [16] The statute does not expressly state that the expanded grounds for disciplinary action under the rubric "unprofessional conduct" were to be created by board rules.”
Ortiz v. Adult & Fam. Servs. Div., 609 P.2d 1309 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “The board 'erroneously interpreted a provision of law,’ namely ORS 679.140(1)(c) and (2), *930 in believing that the standard could be applied ad hoc to facts not covered by a specification in subsection (2) or a rule adopted pursuant to ORS 679.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 679.250(8) — 2 cases
Van Gordon v. Oregon State Bd. of Dental Examiners, 579 P.2d 306 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “Incident to those powers, the Board is authorized to employ investigators for the investigation and prosecution of alleged violations and enforcement of the Act (ORS 679.250(3)), 3 to initiate and conduct investigations and hearings on all matters relating to the practice of…”
Morgan v. Bd. of Dentistry, 848 P.2d 650 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “170(6) is broader than its subpoena power pursuant to ORS 679.250(8). The Board argues that a licensee subject to *634 its authority cannot seek interlocutory judicial review of a demand for information, but the licensee can seek such review of a subpoena.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.