SB 1311 requires unlicensed dental assistants in California who are not enrolled in a board‑approved registered dental assisting or alternative program to complete an approved infection control credential before performing tasks that implicate infection control. The bill lists acceptable pathways — the Dental Assisting National Board (DANB) Infection Control exam or specified board‑approved courses — and prescribes minimum instructional content, evaluation methods, and a certificate of completion.
This matters for employers, training providers, and regulatory compliance officers because the measure standardizes what counts as infection control training, allows several online and video-based delivery methods, and ties course content to Cal/OSHA and the Dental Board’s Minimum Standards. It narrows ambiguity over acceptable credentials for unlicensed assistants while giving regulators authority to adopt implementing rules.
At a Glance
What It Does
Makes infection control training mandatory for unlicensed dental assistants not enrolled in a board‑approved program and permits completion via the DANB Infection Control exam or specified board‑approved courses with defined didactic and laboratory components. It requires objective evaluation, specific instructional objectives, and issuance of a certificate on successful completion.
Who It Affects
Unlicensed dental assistants working outside board‑approved training programs, dental offices that employ them, registered dental assisting education programs and third‑party continuing education providers, and the Dental Board of California which oversees approvals and implementation.
Why It Matters
By specifying course hours, acceptable delivery formats (including online/video lab simulation), and a minimum curriculum tied to Cal/OSHA and board standards, the bill reduces credential uncertainty, affects hiring and onboarding practices, and shifts some training responsibility onto employers and external providers.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 1311 narrows what counts as acceptable infection control preparation for a subset of dental assistants: those who are unlicensed and not currently enrolled in a board‑approved registered dental assisting or alternative program. Instead of leaving employers to decide what training is adequate, the bill lays out discrete options: pass the DANB Infection Control exam or complete certain board‑approved courses that meet specified hour and content requirements.
The statute defines an infection control course by its public‑protection purpose and then prescribes instructional structure. Standard courses must deliver a combination of didactic and laboratory instruction, with a typical model being eight total hours (six didactic, two laboratory).
The bill explicitly allows the laboratory portion to be delivered via simulation (mannequins, study models) and permits asynchronous, synchronous, or fully online formats for both didactic and lab content. It also creates an alternative pathway: shorter didactic time (four hours) combined with at least two hours of simulated lab, if the course is offered by or approved through specified professional organizations (California Dental Association, ADA CERP, or AGD PACE).Beyond hours and delivery, SB 1311 requires courses to set specific instructional objectives and to use objective evaluation criteria for measuring student performance.
The bill enumerates minimum didactic topics — from microbiology and Cal/OSHA‑aligned protocols to sterilizer monitoring, waterline maintenance, sharps management, and waste handling — tying course content explicitly to Title 8 Cal/OSHA sections and the board’s Minimum Standards for Infection Control. Successful students must receive the certificate of completion as defined under existing law, and the Dental Board retains authority to adopt implementing regulations.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Unlicensed dental assistants not enrolled in board‑approved programs must complete either the DANB Infection Control exam or an approved infection control course to meet the bill’s requirement.
Standard board‑approved courses are eight hours long with at least six hours of didactic instruction and two hours of laboratory instruction; laboratory work may use simulation or video tools and can be delivered online.
SB 1311 creates a narrow alternative allowing courses with four hours of didactic instruction plus two hours of simulated lab when provided or approved by the California Dental Association, ADA CERP, or AGD PACE.
Courses must use objective evaluation criteria, establish specific performance objectives, and cover a prescribed list of didactic topics tied to Cal/OSHA Title 8 and the Dental Board’s Section 1005 Minimum Standards.
The Dental Board may adopt regulations to implement the section, and successful completion triggers issuance of the certificate defined in Section 1741(e).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definition of 'infection control course' and public‑protection focus
This provision frames any qualifying course by its primary purpose: delivering theory and clinical application in infection control with protection of the public as the central focus. Practically, that sets a policy lens for approval decisions — courses that are primarily skills‑training for employers without a clear public‑protection framing risk falling outside the statute’s intent.
Acceptable pathways and course hour requirements
Lists the acceptable ways to comply: pass the DANB Infection Control exam or complete specified board‑approved infection control courses. The text spells out the typical eight‑hour model (six didactic, two lab) and explicitly authorizes delivery via video and online mechanisms. It also contains the alternative reduced didactic option for courses offered or approved by certain professional providers. For employers and providers, this section clarifies entry‑level credentialing choices and establishes the hour thresholds that approvals must meet.
Laboratory instruction defined and simulation allowed
Defines 'laboratory instruction' as hands‑on simulation using models, mannequins, or other methods. By accepting video‑based lab instruction and simulation, the bill creates flexibility for remote delivery while anchoring the term to observable procedural practice — a key point for approvals and audits, since regulators will need to decide what counts as acceptable simulation fidelity.
Instructional objectives and objective evaluation
Requires each course to set specific instructional objectives and to use objective criteria to measure student progress, with students informed in advance about performance expectations and testing methods. That imposes curriculum design and assessment standards on providers and gives employers a clearer metric to verify competence.
Minimum didactic curriculum tied to Cal/OSHA and board standards
Enumerates required didactic topics — including basic dental science, legal/ethical aspects, modes of disease transmission, sterilization and disinfection, sharps management, waterline maintenance, waste handling, and workplace safety systems — and explicitly links these to Title 8 Cal/OSHA sections and the board’s Section 1005. This alignment means approved courses must integrate regulatory compliance material, not just clinical technique.
Certificate of completion
Mandates that successful students receive the certificate of completion as defined in Section 1741(e). That references an existing statutory credentialing construct and creates a tangible artifact employers and inspectors can request to verify compliance.
Regulatory authority for implementation
Gives the Dental Board of California express authority to adopt regulations to implement the section. This creates a post‑enactment rulemaking phase where the board can clarify approval processes, recordkeeping, provider qualifications, and enforcement mechanisms.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Unlicensed dental assistants who complete approved training — they gain a clear, portable credential (certificate of completion) that documents infection control competence and supports employability.
- Patients and the public — standardized infection control training aligned with Cal/OSHA and board standards should reduce variability in baseline infection‑prevention practices across dental offices.
- Continuing education providers and approved training programs — the bill creates demand for approved courses and allows reputable organizations (CDA, ADA CERP, AGD PACE) to offer approved shorter pathways, expanding market opportunities.
Who Bears the Cost
- Dental employers who hire unlicensed assistants — they may need to pay for employee training, adjust onboarding timelines, or restrict certain tasks until certification is complete.
- Small training providers lacking online simulation technology — complying with defined lab‑simulation standards and objective assessment requirements could require investment in mannequins, software, or validated video tools.
- The Dental Board of California and regulatory staff — implementing the law will require rulemaking, approval workflows, oversight protocols, and potentially enforcement resources not funded in the statute.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between raising public‑safety standards by mandating consistent infection control credentials and avoiding new workforce bottlenecks: stronger, standardized requirements improve patient protection but increase training costs and onboarding friction for employers and entry‑level assistants, especially if regulators later impose stringent simulation fidelity or audit rules.
The bill trades a uniform baseline of infection control training for flexibility in how that training is delivered, but that flexibility creates practical enforcement and quality‑assurance questions. Allowing video and asynchronous delivery for laboratory instruction and accepting simulation lowers logistical barriers, yet it raises fidelity concerns: regulators will need criteria to judge whether a simulated exercise meaningfully replicates hand‑son instrument handling and sterilization procedures.
Without clear fidelity standards, training quality could vary, undermining the statute’s public‑protection rationale.
Another implementation challenge is oversight. The statute delegates approval and rulemaking to the Dental Board, but it does not specify audit, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements for providers or employers.
That leaves open how the board or local enforcement will verify certificates, inspect course content, or sanction noncompliance. Employers may also face timing friction if new hires must complete hours before performing tasks — a cost the bill shifts onto practices without funding or transition guidance.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.