MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY - index / Minnesota.gov Minutes_tcm21-29974.pdf · MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY JANUARY 18, 2002 2 2. Administrative Matters. a. Rules Committee Update

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY

Minutes of the 335th Meeting

January 18, 2002 Members Present: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J.

Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and J. Schneeweis.

Members Absent: J. Peterson Others Present: K. McKay, J. Otteson, and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney

General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On January 18, 2002, the Minnesota Board of Psychology adopted the following actions: 1. Denied the request of Michael A. Appleman, MA to stay enforcement and/or

reconsider the Board’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Final Order, dated December 26, 2001, which revoked his license to practice psychology in Minnesota.

2. Denied the request of Richard J. Anderson, MS for a two month extension to

present oral argument to the Board regarding the status of his license, and adopted the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Final Order, which revoked his license to practice psychology in Minnesota.

3. On the recommendation of the Complaint Resolution Committee, the Board

adopted an Order of Unconditional License in the matter of Nancy Hengeveld, MS, LP.

PUBLIC SESSION The public session was called to order at 11:40 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of December 14, 2001.

S. Albert moved, seconded by S. Hayes, that the minutes of the meeting of December 14, 2001 be approved. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and J. Schneeweis. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY JANUARY 18, 2002

2

2. Administrative Matters.

a. Rules Committee Update. S. Albert updated the Board on the progress of the Rules Committee. He reported that the Committee has been working on the definition of Dual, now Multiple Relationships, has tentative language for a records retention policy, and has expanded the grounds for impaired objectivity and effectiveness. b. Legislative Committee Update. N. Ruiz reported that the proposed bill would be presented to the Legislature as two separate bills at the suggestion of Katie Cavanor, Senate Counsel. Ms. Cavanor recommended that the Crimes against Providers bill be presented as a separate bill. The LPP proposal will not be introduced this session.

3. Waivers/Variances

a. Judy L. Antonello, PhD, LP, Robert T. Butler, PhD, LP, Marlene D. Feldman, MA, LP, James L. Jacobson, PhD, LP, Kristin A. Kunzman, PsyD, LP, Lester Martisko, MS, LP, Todd A. Masteller, MA, LP, Michael E. Maus, PhD, LP, Joanne Nahem, MA, LP, Karl A. Ostrom, PhD, LP, Geovanna Perrino, MA, LP, Janet L. Waterman, PsyD, LP (Renewal deadlines are December 31, 2001, except for Geovanna Perrino, whose renewal deadline is January 31, 2002.) requested six month time-limited variances (MN Rule part 7200.3400, Subp. 2) to complete the required continuing education hours. Each Licensee has submitted a plan, as required by rule, to complete the continuing education credits. J. Romano moved, seconded by N. Ruiz, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Kevin O’Neal, MS, LPP submitted evidence that he has complied with the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.925, Subd. 7(c), and is requesting a variance which would reduce his supervision for the following years. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance of supervision requirements. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J Schneeweis. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

c. Applicant 95A-133 is requesting a variance from the educational requirement of Minnesota Rule 7200.1300, Subpart 4 B (g), which requires the equivalent of three quarter credits in the core area of Ethics. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Minnesota on March 31, 1994. At that time Applicant’s university only offered a two-


3

quarter credit course in ethics. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation in the form of continuing education credits to indicate that Applicant has had the equivalent of three-quarter credits in ethics. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J Schneeweis. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. At the December 14, 2001, Board meeting Applicant 92A-329 submitted a Variance Request to the Board requesting that the Board accept an EPPP score of 136 (68%) as satisfactory performance on the examination. The Board denied the variance request. Applicant has submitted an appeal to the Board’s decision. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis to deny the appeal. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

e. Paul R. Endres, MA, LP requested a waiver of the 2001 special fee late fee (MN Rule 7200.6175). Licensee stated that he received the second invoice for the special fee and the late fee postmarked July 10, 2001, but he never received the first notice. He claims to have made attempts to contact the Board with no response, until Dec 7, 2001 when he was denied renewal of license. Notices were sent to the licensee’s only address of record. Licensee had not informed the Board of his new mailing address. N. Ruiz moved, seconded by M. Farinacci that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

f. George L. Horvat, PhD, LP requested a waiver of the 2001 special fee late fee (MN Rule 7200.6175). Licensee stated that he was out of town when the special fee notice was sent. He did not receive the notice until after it was due. S. Albert moved, seconded by R. Maves that the waiver request be approved on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, and J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: J. Romano. Abstaining: M. Seibold. There being seven ayes and one nay, motion carried.

g. Mary E. West, MA, LP requested a waiver of the 2001 special fee late fee (MN Rule 7200.6175). Notices of the special fee were mailed to Licensee at her designated mailing address, which was her business address. Licensee states that she did not receive notices sent until August 27, 2001, the date she returned to her


4

work site for the new school year. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by N. Ruiz that the waiver request be approved on the basis that Licensee met the burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. After lengthy discussing the motion, the Board voted as follows. Voting “aye”: none. Voting “nay”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and J. Schneeweis. There being no ayes and nine nays, motion failed.

N. Ruiz moved, seconded by S. Hayes that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet the burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

h. Nancie C. Ziemke, PhD, LP requested a waiver of the 2001 special fee late fee (MN Rule 7200.6175). Licensee states that she received the second notice and set it aside until mid December. J. Romano moved, seconded by M. Farinacci that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

i. Mary S. Kesler requested a waiver of the 2001 special fee late fee (MN Rule 7200.6175). Licensee stated that the notice arrived at her house on June 11, 2001, which is the same day they had a major fire in their home. Their belongings were not returned to them until December 2001. J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the waiver request be approved on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

4. Admit to the EPPP

Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that applicants’ doctoral degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-040 02C041 02C-039 02C-035 05A02-08SD


5

02C-029 02C-021 02C-020

5. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degrees of the following PRE applicants be approved on the basis that Applicants’ doctoral degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

01A-006 00B-073 02C-008

6. Approval of Doctoral Degree of Licensee Licensed as a Licensed Psychologist with a Master’s Degree.

Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degree of Jane Marie Rauenhorst (LP0403) be approved on the basis that the degree meets the educational requirements for licensure. Motion carried unanimously.

7. Licensure as Licensed Psychologist Practitioner

Application Review Committee recommends the following applicant be licensed as Licensed Psychologist Practitioner based upon a master’s degree, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all requirements of MN. Stat. 148.908. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

Marci Marie Mueller Theisen, MA

8. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists

Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Jill Raquel LeBlond, PsyD Ella G. Marks, PsyD Jennifer Lynne Miller, PhD Sharon Faye Swanson Haapala, PsyD Karen Michele W. Mellum, PhD Todd R. Poch, PsyD Gale Rene Valtinson, PhD Marie Welborn, PhD


6

9. Re-Licensure

Application Review Committee moved that the following applicant be granted re-licensure as a Licensed Psychologist based upon having fulfilled all the requirements of MN Rule 7200.3610, Subd. 1. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. Abstaining: J. Romano. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

OSA02-03AR Lysle Lee Casey, MA

10. Other Business

P. Walker-Singleton announced that L. Sherry (formerly the receptionist on staff) has qualified for the position of State Programs Administrator. M. Elliott, (formerly support staff in the Complaint Resolution Unit) will assume receptionist duties.

11. Adjournment J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:16 PM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Secretary



March 8, 2002 Members Present: S. Albert, S. Hayes, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Romano, N.

Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and J. Schneeweis. Members Absent: M. Farinacci, J. Peterson Others Present: D. Ollendick, J. Otteson, K. Peterson, Deputy Attorney

General, and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On March 8, 2002, the Minnesota Board of Psychology adopted a Stipulation and Consent Order reprimanding Karol Jensen, Ph.D., LP and placing her license to practice psychology in Minnesota in a conditional status. PUBLIC SESSION The public session was called to order at 9:14 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of January 18, 2002.

M. Seibold moved, seconded by S. Hayes, that the minutes of the meeting of January 18, 2002 be approved, as amended. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and J. Schneeweis. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


a. Rules Committee Update. S. Albert updated the Board on the progress of the Rules Committee. He reported that the Committee is working on language that would add a 3-year inactivity period on licensure applications, after which the Board would deny the application. The Committee has revised the definition of “applicant”. The Committee expanded impaired objectivity and effectiveness to include any time a provider is doing therapy with a client and at the same time teaching, supervising, or conducting a forensic evaluation with the same client. They discussed excluding supervisees from the rule having to do with reporting requirements, so that supervisors will have to report to the

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY MARCH 8, 2002

2

Board supervisees who engage in sexual misconduct and failure to report abuse/neglect of vulnerable adults or children.

b. Legislative Committee Update. N. Ruiz reported that the proposed bills for the 2002 legislative session are dead. The Committee will meet in the April/May timeframe to begin working out language for submission to the 2003 legislative session. c. Communications Committee.

J. Hovland appointed S. Hayes to chair the newly formed Communications Committee with N. Ruiz as the other member of the Committee. L. Sherry will staff the program, which will create a Board website, newsletter, and brochures. d. Update on Computerized Version of Examination for the Professional

Practice in Psychology (EPPP).

G. Schiff reported on the progress of the computerized version of the EPPP. The test has been offered computerized since the fall of 2001. She explained that she has been working with applicants who have reported to her delays they have experienced in receiving their applications to test from the examination service, during the month of November 2001. Ms. Schiff provided the Board with statistics about the applicants and examination activities. She reported that since September 28, 2001, the Board has received 60 EPPP applications for the computerized examination and 24 of those applicants were approved to sit for the examination; 17 are pending Board approval; the remainder are pending review by the Application Review Committee. Of the approved candidates, 37% sat for the examination, 25% set a range of dates to take the examination, and 37% have yet to respond to the examination service to set a date. 77% of the candidates who sat for the EPPP received a scaled score of 500 or higher. 33% of the EPPP eligible candidates hold master’s degrees; 66% hold doctoral degrees. e. Report on the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards’

(ASPPB) Midwinter Meeting. M. Seibold attended the 2002 MidWinter Meeting of ASPPB in Orlando. Florida and provided the Board with a report on the conference. Dr. Seibold reported that:

More states are accepting reciprocity than are offering it. There was a session discussing whether the APA Ethical Guidelines are

enforceable or aspirational. There was a discussion of how the jurisdictions determine disciplinary remedies,

i.e., what is considered incompetence. Jurisdictions are debating who has the right to do psychological testing, i. e. social

workers.


3

The most common violations disciplined for are: sexual misconduct, dual relationships, competency issues.

New Mexico is the first state to pass a state law allowing prescribing by psychologists.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is looming as we get closer to the first deadlines for implementation of its provisions as they relate to psychologists’ practices.

ASPPB is working on common nomenclature among jurisdictions, such as what we call the disciplinary actions Boards issue. This issue will be discussed further at ASPPB’s October Annual meeting.

There was discussion of should Board meetings be held electronically. This becomes a large issue for jurisdictions that are spread out geographically and whose populations are widely dispersed. Idaho is currently allowing electronic Board meetings.

Teletherapy and web counseling were discussed. Some jurisdictions are allowing therapy by videoconference. If the therapist and the client are in different jurisdictions, the jurisdictions have been deciding whose regulations apply.

f. Attendance at Board Meeting by ASPPB Representative.

Barb Van Horne, MBA, PhD, ASPPB Mobility Committee Member addressed the Board regarding their Certificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ) and mobility. Dr. Van Horne began by stating that ASPPB currently has 62 member jurisdictions. The association was originally bonded together in 1961 for the purpose of facilitating mobility. Reciprocity began in the 1980’s. Some of the issues discussed are:

The CPQ requires only 1500 hours of post degree supervised employment, while Minnesota law requires one full year of post degree supervised employment. This works out to 300-500 more hours required by Minnesota law. In response to a question, Dr. Van Horne stated that ASPPB would not advertise that Minnesota accepts the CPQ if Minnesota were to agree to accept the CPQ plus 300 additional hours of post-degree supervised employment.

A Board member asked how could the Minnesota Board be sure that applications for the CPQ have been sufficiently scrutinized in regards to education, training, and experience. Dr. Van Horne said that Steve DeMers, EdD, ASPPB’s Director of Certification Program, reviews every application for the CPQ. Then two more members of their committee review the application. If there is a dispute, the full committee reviews the application. Dr. Van Horne states that the Board would have to trust that the reviews were thorough.

On the issue of cost to the applicant, the Board was referred to the policy and procedures manual (p. 12).

A Board member asked, if someone who holds a CPQ gets disciplined, do they lose their CPQ? The answer is “yes”.

The Board will continue its discussion of this presentation and ASPPB’s mobility programs at the April 12, 2002 Board meeting.


4


a. Gerald B. Nord, MS, LP requested a waiver of the late fee for license renewal (MN Rule 7200.3500). Licensee stated that he had moved and his mail was to be forwarded to him by someone. This did not happen and he did not receive his license renewal application until after it was due. S. Hayes moved, seconded by J. Schaffer that the waiver request be approved on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Schaffer, and M. Seibold. Voting “nay”: None. Abstaining: J. Romano. There being four ayes and no nay, motion carried. (The presence of Board chair, J. Hovland, created a quorum; the chair does not routinely vote unless the vote is needed.)

b. Applicant 02C-030 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Psychology from New York University on September 24, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the required three (3) quarter credits or their equivalent for Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

c. Applicant 02C-053 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Psychology from Kent State University on December 14, 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was complete. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. Applicant 02C-030 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Psychology from New York University on September 24, 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was complete. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


5

e. Applicant 02C-037 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Child Clinical Psychology from West Virginia University on December 29, 1994. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to indicate that the pre-degree internship was complete. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. During discussion, it was established that although Applicant had provided some documentation of completion of an internship, no independent verification had been received. Voting “aye”: None. Voting “nay”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being no ayes and seven nays, motion fails unanimously.

f. Applicant 02C-049 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee on August 18, 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was complete. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

g. Applicant 01A-050 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Psychology from the University of Virginia on May 20, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation of at least one (1) quarter credit in Theories of Measurement. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

h. Applicant 02C-032 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD from the University of Rhode Island on August 25, 2000. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that she completed 1 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


6

i. Applicant OSA02-03KS is applying for Licensure as a Licensed Psychologist. Applicant passed the PRE on November 28, 2001. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Psychology from the University of Tennessee on August 14, 1998. Applicant completed 1800 hours of post degree supervised employment (approximately 10-11 months) as a requirement for licensure for the State of Kansas and still maintains a current active license in Kansas. The applicant is requesting that the Board accept the 1800 hours of post degree supervised employment completed for licensure in the State of Kansas as meeting Minnesota’s requirement of one (1) year of post degree supervised employment. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by S. Hayes to table the request. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold. Voting “nay”: S. Albert, J. Romano, J. Hovland, R. Maves. Motion to table fails.

J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schaffer, that the variance request be approved on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. After discussion, the following vote was taken: Voting “aye: none. Voting “nay”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold. Abstaining: J. Romano and J. Schaffer. There being no ayes and five nays, motion failed.

S. Albert moved, seconded by R. Maves, that the variance request be denied on the basis that Applicant did not meet the rationale for the rule, that adherence to the rule would not impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance may adversely affect the public welfare. Voting aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Schneeweis, and M. Seibold. Voting “nay”: none. Abstaining: J. Romano and J. Schaffer. There being five ayes and no nays, motion failed.

j. The following licensees are requesting approval of a six-month time-limited variance (MN Rule part 7200.3400, Subp. 2) to complete the required continuing education hours. Each Licensee has submitted a plan, as required by rule, to complete the continuing education credits.

Name License # Renewal Date Cashen, Colleen P., MA, LP LP2797 1/31/02 Christensen, Kathy J., PhD, LP LP0711 1/31/02 Dittrich, Connie, MA, LP LP3987 3/31/02 Fisher, David C., PhD, LP LP0807 2/28/02 Gronneberg, Paul K., MA, LP LP0728 1/31/02 Haakana, Richard D., MA, LP LP0776 2/28/02 Klees, Philip S., PhD, LP LP0548 12/31/01 Krovitz, Debbie B., MA, LP LP0552 12/31/01 Hedberg, Catherine M., MA, LP LP3955 2/28/02 Landgren, Michael J., MSE, LP LP3917 1/31/02


7

Marsh, Cynthia E., PhD, LP LP0828 2/28/02 Peters, Judith M., MS, LP LP3425 2/28/02 Schake, Michael R., MA, LP LP0847 2/28/02 Schumacher, Dora K., MA, LP LP0852 2/28/02 Senneseth, Barbara J., MA, LP LP0758 1/31/02 Skogstrom, Janice G., MA, LP LP0652 12/31/01 Thielen, Marie A., MA, LP LP3041 1/31/02 Wilson, Denise C., MS, LP LP0790 2/28/02

J. Schneeweis moved, seconded by S. Hayes, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that applicants’ master’s degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

01A-005 02C-054 02C-052 02C-038 02C-045

Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that applicants’ doctoral degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-044 02C-051 02C-031 02C-060 02C-024 02C-032

02C-055 02C-028

5. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degrees of the following PRE applicants be approved on the basis that Applicants’ doctoral degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

97A-281 02C-002 02C-026 02C-019 OSA01-10WI

02C-001 01A-017 02C-032


8

6. Granting of Guest Licensure

The application Review Committee granted Guest Licensure (MN Statue 148.916) to two applicants. Judith R. Gant, PhD, GL0202-01 and Ann M. Steffen, PhD, GL0202-02. Both licensees are employed with the University of Missouri – St Louis, Department of Psychology, Dementia Care Giving Skills Program. They will be using the Guest Licensure in the event their research identifies caregivers of dementia patients that reside in the State of Minnesota.


Application Review Committee recommends the following applicant be licensed as Licensed Psychologist Practitioners based upon a master’s degree, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all requirements of MN. Stat. 148.908. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

Kelli Jo Kolasa, MA Edward Nolan Tipton, MA


Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: S. Albert, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: None. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Lynda Gail Brzezinski, PhD Karen E. Much, PsyD Jay Francis Tracy, PsyD 9. Other Business

P. Walker-Singleton informed the Board that Holly Miller (who works with the Institute on Criminal Justice at the U of M Law School) and Abigail Gewirtz, PhD, LP have requested time on the Board agenda to discuss the Children’s Mental Health Task Force. They have been placed on the April 12, 2002 Board meeting agenda at 11:00 am for approximately 1 hour.

P. Walker-Singleton reported that staff applied for and the Board was granted $500 from the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) to reimburse the Board for a part of the expenses incurred by our delegate (M. Seibold) to ASPPB’s 2002 MidWinter Meeting.


9

10. Adjournment J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schaffer that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 12:02 PM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary



April 12th, 2002 Members Present: S. Hayes, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M.

Seibold, J. Schneeweis, M. Farinacci, J. Peterson, and S. Terhune

Members Absent: N. Ruiz Others Present: J. Otteson and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On April 12, 2002, the Minnesota Board of Psychology adopted a Stipulation and Consent Order that Reprimanded Michael Stapleton, MA, LP and placed his license to practice psychology in Minnesota in a Stayed Suspension and Conditional Status. PUBLIC SESSION The public session was called to order at 9:50 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of January 18, 2002.

J. Romano moved, seconded by M. Farinacci, that the minutes of the meeting of March 8, 2002 be approved. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. M. Farinacci and J. Peterson abstained. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried.

2. Correction to September 28, 2001 minutes.

Correction: under heading 9. Termination of License for Non-Renewal, the name of licensee Pederson, Jane K. (LP2722) (Jun 31, 2001) was inadvertently omitted. J. Romano moved, seconded by S. Hayes, that the minutes of the meeting of September 28, 2001 be corrected to include the name. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY APRIL 12, 2002

2


a. New Board Member. J. Peterson and M. Seibold were reappointed to service on the Board. S. Terhune was appointed to replace S. Albert. Dr. Albert completed two four terms on the Board. Mr. Peterson, Dr. Seibold, and Dr. Terhune’s terms expire January 2, 2006. b. Rules Committee Update. J. Schaffer updated the Board on the following activities of the Rules Committee: The Committee has been writing and revising language on impaired objectivity, taking into account situations that cause impaired objectivity, situations in which impaired objectivity can be remediable so that the professional relationship need not end, the roles providers play in impaired objectivity, termination because of impaired objectivity. Board members requested that the latest draft of the Rules of Conduct be distributed at the May meeting of the Board. Board members will then give feedback on the proposed rules to the Committee in writing.

c. Communications Committee.

S. Hayes updated the board on the Committee’s decision to first construct a Board website. She presented a draft layout to the Board. The Board’s newsletter will be implemented at a future date. J. Hovland appointed J. Peterson as an additional member to the Committee. d. Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board’s (ASPPB) Mobility

Programs. J. Hovland lead a discussion about the Board’s next step in response to ASPPB representative, Barbara Van Horne’s, MBA, PhD, presentation at the March 8, 2002 Board meeting regarding ASPPB’s mobility programs: Reciprocity Agreements and the Certification of Professional Qualification (CPQ). J. Hovland asked the Application Review Committee (ARC) to further discuss this issue and make a recommendation to the Board about whether it should accept the CPQ. J. Romano asked that the ARC be given the minutes of past Board meetings where the CPQ was discussed.

e. ASPPB’s Call for Nominations.

ASPPB has issued its annual call for nominations for the Association’s Board president-elect and member-at-large, for ASPPB fellow, for the Roger C. Smith


3

Award, the Norma P. Simon Award, and the Ming Fisher Award. J. Schneeweis moved, seconded by M. Farinacci that J. Schaffer be nominated for Board member-at-large. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. S. Hayes moved, seconded by M. Farinacci, that S. Albert be nominated for the Roger C. Smith Award based on his contributions to the Board, specifically, for his work to revise the agency’s rules. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. f. Infectious Disease Reporting Requirements.

This item was held over until the Board’s May 17, 2002 meeting. g. MPA Linkages Committee’s Consultation and Support Services for

Psychologists. J. Otteson, a representative of the Minnesota Psychological Association’s (MPA) Linkages Committee summarized a program the committee is expecting to commence on July 1, 2002. He requested feedback from the Board on the proposal, which would form a group to provide support and consultation to psychologists who have had complaints filed against them with the Board. Dr. Otteson stated the following: their legal counsel will work with committee members to make sure they do not attempt to function as legal counsel; the group would like to have a Board of Psychology member participate in the training of their consultants; MPA’s board has approved the formation of the “Consultation and Support Services for Psychologists” program.


a. The following licensees are requesting approval of a six-month time-limited variance (MN Rule part 7200.3400, Subp. 2) to complete the required continuing education hours. Each Licensee has submitted a plan, as required by rule, to complete the continuing education credits.

Name License # Renewal Date Carlson, Susan C., MA, LP LP3984 3/31/02 Colburn, John R., PhD, LP LP0875 3/31/02 Kaplan, Pauline M., MS, LP LP3051 2/28/02 Vickberg, Joseph H., MA, LP LP0972 3/31/02 Wagner, Robert M., MA, LP LP4010 3/31/02 Wilson, Nancy E., MS, LP LP3454 3/31/02 J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is


4

unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Diane Dunn, MA, LP requested a waiver of the Special Assessment late fee (MN

Rule 7200.3500). Licensee stated that the clinic in which she practiced closed and she did not submit a change of address to the Board before the 2002 Special Fee was invoiced. The invoice was mailed to the Board’s address of record for her. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Peterson that the waiver request be approved on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: J. Peterson, J. Schaffer, and J. Schneeweis. Voting “nay”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, J. Romano, and S. Terhune. Abstaining: R. Maves and M. Seibold. There being three ayes and four nays, motion fails.

c. Applicant 02C-056 is applying for the EPPP and is requesting a variance. Applicant

met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Missouri – Columbia on December 19, 1999. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. Applicant 02C-024 is applying for the EPPP and is requesting a variance. Applicant

met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Minnesota on January 31, 2000. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

e. Applicant 02C-066 is applying for the EPPP and is requesting a variance. Applicant

met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Montana on December 22, 2000. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that the equivalent of three quarter credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of a


5

variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

f. Applicant 02C-036 is applying for the EPPP and is requesting a variance. Applicant

met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from Pacific Graduate School of Psychology on August 28, 2000. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that at least 1 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ doctoral degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-067 O2C-056 02C-024 02C-066 02C-036 02C-034

6. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degrees of the following PRE applicants be approved on the basis that Applicants’ doctoral degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-010 02C-032


Application Review Committee recommends the following applicant be licensed as a Licensed Psychologist Practitioner based upon a master’s degree, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all requirements of MN. Stat. 148.908. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

Phyllis Jarvinen, MA


6


Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Kerry Brown, PsyD Lisa Marie Froehling, PsyD Jayne Maureen Lokken, PhD Mary Young Sa, PsyD Jonathan Earle Whalen, PhD 9. Other Business S. Hayes presented an article, which first appeared in The New York Times on March

26, 2002. The subject of the article is prescribing by psychologists. It reported the passage of the New Mexico state law that allows psychologists to prescribe. Also included for the Board’s information was a copy of ASPPB’s draft Guidelines for Prescriptive Authority.

Presented for the Board’s information was a memorandum from ASPPB stating that

since going to Computer-Based Testing (CBT) for the Examination for the Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP), despite the “60 day window” of protection built into the system, candidates approved for the EPPP are procrastinating. They forecasted that 375 candidates would test each month; however, they have yet to reach 300 candidates in any month. ASPPB asked that member Boards encourage candidates to test on a more timely basis following Board approval to take the examination.

10. Adjournment J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:24 PM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary



May 17th, 2002 Members Present: N. Ruiz, S. Hayes, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J.

Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, M. Farinacci, and S. Terhune

Members Absent: None Others Present: D. Ollendick and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On the recommendation of the Complaint Resolution Committee the Minnesota Board of Psychology adopted the following actions: 1. A Stipulation and Consent Order Revoking the license of Robert Schauerhamer,

M.A., LP. 2. A Stipulation and Consent Order Revoking the license of Helen Doane, Ph.D., LP

pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 270.72, subd. 1 (delinquent tax liability). A motion was made by Jack Schaffer and seconded by Nick Ruiz to have the Board’s attorney confirm with the MN Dept. of Revenue that the licensee’s tax liability is still delinquent before the Order takes effect at the end of the day.

3. An Order of Unconditional License in the matter of Lawrence Green, Ph.D., LP PUBLIC SESSION The public session was called to order by the Chair, J. Hovland, at 9:30 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of April 12, 2002. S. Terhune moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, that the minutes of the meeting of April 12, 2002 be approved. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. N.Ruiz abstained. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY MAY 17, 2002

2

2. Correction to December 14, 2001 Minutes.

Correction #1: under the heading of 8. Termination of License for Non-Renewal the name of licensee, Christina D. Donnell (LP0074) (September 30, 2001) was inadvertently included in the licenses to be terminated for non-renewal. Licensee had voluntarily terminated her license in November 2001. Correction #2: under the heading of 8. Termination of License for Non-Renewal the name of licensee, Bruce E. Roselle (LP0253) (September 30, 2001) was inadvertently included in the licenses to be terminated for non-renewal. Licensee paid the renewal fee and the late fee on November 29, 2001. Correction #3: under the heading of 8. Termination of License for Non-Renewal the license number of licensee Julie A. Sharpe was listed as LP0058. The correct license number is LPP0058. M. Seibold moved, seconded by N. Ruiz, that the minutes of the meeting of December 14, 2001 be corrected. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.


a. Rules Committee Update. J. Schaffer reported that the Rules Committee is progressing on the Rules of Conduct and is revisiting connected rules, as necessary.

b. Communications Committee.

S. Hayes updated the Board on the Communications Committee’s progress on the Board’s website. She presented an updated draft website layout to the Board. Ms. Hayes commended L. Sherry and staff on the progress made on the website preparation, stating that staff is ahead of her expectations. Ms. Sherry, project administrator, reported that staff is scheduled to have their narratives for inclusion on the website to her by June 1, 2002. The Committee will review all submissions and will seek final approval from the Board. The projected date for the website to be operational is Labor Day 2002. After the website is running, the Committee plans to conduct usability studies and, perhaps give a link on the website for feedback to staff. c. Applicant Review Committee.

R. Maves reported that the Application Review Committee (ARC) is finding it necessary to meet more than one time during a month, primarily because of the applications for examination, which require documentation by the applicants that they met the educational requirements for licensure. The applications are requiring a large amount of the Committee’s attention at each meeting.


3

On June 15, 2001, the Board approved a proposed rule change to accept APA-accredited doctoral programs as meeting the educational requirements for LP licensure. For applicants not graduating from APA-accredited doctoral programs and for LPP applicants, the Board voted to use the contemporaneous educational requirements. Mr. Maves presented information to demonstrate the types of difficulties that continually occur as graduates of APA-accredited programs submit applications for approval of their education. The ARC proposed as the solution that the Board grant it the authority to accept APA-approval now as meeting the educational requirements for licensure in anticipation of passage of the proposed rule. On advice from Assistant Attorney General N. Hart, the Board declined to grant such authority, because according to legal advice, to do so would be tantamount to using an unpromulgated rule, which is illegal. Instead, the Board agreed by consensus that a second Application Review Committee should be formed to relieve the workload on the existing Committee.

d. Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

J. Welsch presented information on HIPAA to the Board. Ms. Welsch reported that HIPAA is a federal statute passed to give some uniformity and structure to the way that health information is transferred and handled. HIPAA sets guidelines for how providers can use, transfer, and store protected health information. The law does not make the state boards responsible for enforcing HIPAA regulations or for informing licensees about it. The US Office of Civil Rights is in charge of enforcing the law. Ms. Welsch distributed HIPAA resources in the form of the websites for the US Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of Civil Rights, and the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), and also a phone number (651.296.4769) for provider help from DHS.

e. Request from Sam Albert, PhD, LP. At its meeting on April 12, 2002, the Board nominated S. Albert for the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board’s Roger C. Smith Award for Dr. Albert’s outstanding work on revising this agency’s rules. Dr. Albert wrote a letter to the Board thanking the Board for the nomination, which he describes as an honor. However, Dr. Albert is declining the nomination at this time, until he is satisfied that the project has been brought to completion. He asks that the Board consider the nomination again when the rules have been adopted, so that if he were to win the honor, it would be given for a completed body of work. The Board concurred and stated that it would defer the nomination for one year.


4

f. Infectious Disease Reporting Requirements.

N. Hart presented the Board with the results of his research on psychologists’ infectious disease reporting requirements under the law. Mr. Hart reported that under Minnesota Rule 4605.7030, psychologists are required, unless previously reported, to report a client who has or is suspected of having any of the diseases listed in part 4605.7040, within one working day, to the Commissioner of Health. They are to report as much of the information outlined in part 4605.7090 as is known. g. Licensee Tax or other Delinquent Payments.

Minnesota Statute 270.72 requires that the Board revoke the license of a licensee if the licensee owes delinquent state taxes, penalties, or interest. The action must occur within 30 days of the Board receiving notification from the Commissioner of Revenue that the taxes are owed. In addition, under Minnesota chapter 214, the Board must suspend the license of any licensee owing delinquent child support or maintenance payments within 30 days of notification from the county. N. Hart recommended adopting a Board resolution delegating authority to the Executive Director to revoke or suspend the licenses of licensees in these categories. It has become the practice of other health licensing Boards to delegate this authority to the Executive Director in order to avoid delays and the need to assemble a quorum of Board members, considering the fact that the laws place 30-day time limitations, which may run between Board meetings. When the Board receives official notification that the licensee has resolved the delinquency, the revocation or suspension could be lifted by a document signed by the Director, again without the need to assemble the full Board.

J. Peterson moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, that the Board delegate authority to the Executive Director to take the appropriate actions in the above-described cases. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried. h. Evaluation and Procedures for Evaluating the Executive Director. J. Hovland discussed the current procedures for evaluation of the Executive Director and requested that Board members and staff obtain and complete a Performance Evaluation form.




5

Name License # Renewal Date Breitenbucher, Mary C., PhD, LP LP0394 12/31/01 Graham, Gary R., MEq, LP LP3048 2/28/02 Moorman, John W., MS, LP LP0742 1/31/02 J. Schneeweis moved, seconded by M. Farinacci, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Richard J. Fuller, MA, LP (LP0350) submitted a request for two consecutive six

month time-limited variances to complete continuing education requirement (MN Rule 7200.3400, subpart 2). Mr. Fuller was due to renewal his license on 11/30/01. Due to health reasons, he was unable to obtain the required continuing education hours and allowed the deadline to pass. In April 2002, he was mailed notification that the Board would be terminating his license. He is requesting an additional 6 months to complete his 40 hours of CE and has submitted the required plan for completion. J. Romano moved, seconded by N. Ruiz, to approve the variance request on the basis that Licensee has met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously

c. Charlotte A. Dokken, PsyD, LP requested a waiver of the late renewal fee (MN Rule

7200.3500). Licensee stated that the materials were sent to the wrong address. The board’s records show that the street, city, state and zip code were correct, but the business name was incorrect. J. Schneeweis moved, seconded by J. Romano, to approve the waiver request on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously

d. Leeann S. Jorgensen, PhD, LP requested a waiver of the late renewal fee (MN Rule

7200.3500). Licensee states that she did not received the renewal notice. The Renewal Application was mailed to the Board’s address of record for her. J. Romano moved, seconded by M. Farinacci that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet the burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting


6

“nay”: none. J. Peterson abstained. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried.

e. Jeffrey B. Ballou, MSEd, LP requested a waiver of the late renewal fee (MN Rule

7200.3500). Licensee states that the NSF check we received back from his bank causing the renewal to be late was due to a bank error. J. Romano moved, seconded by S. Terhune that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. R. Maves abstained. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried.

f. Edmund E. Nadolny, PhD, LP requested a waiver of the Special Assessment late fee

(MN Rule 7200.3500). Licensee states that he did not receive the invoice for payment of the Special Assessment fee. J. Romano moved, seconded by M. Farinacci that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: J. Peterson and J. Schneeweis. There being eight ayes and two nays, motion carried.

g. Harold J. Honebrink, EdD, LP requested a waiver of the Special Assessment late fee

(MN Rule 7200.3500). Licensee states that he did not receive the invoice for payment of the Special Assessment fee. The address in the Board’s record is his current home address, however, he had designated that mailings be sent to his business address. R. Maves moved, seconded by S. Hayes that the waiver request be approved on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: None. J. Peterson and J. Romano abstained. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

h. Applicant 02C-047 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PsyD from California School of Professional Psychology - Fresno on December 18, 2000. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that at least 1 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


7

i. Applicant 02C-033 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Minnesota on May 31, 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

j. Applicant 02C-053 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from Kent State University on December 14, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that at least 1.5 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

k. Applicant 02C-058 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from University of North Dakota on August 4, 2000. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that at least 1 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

l. Applicant 02C-030 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from New York University on September 24, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to indicate that she met the three graduate quarter credits or their equivalent in the area of cognitive-affective bases of behavior. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


8

m. Applicant 02C-053 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from Kent State University on December 14, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that the three quarter credits or their equivalent for Professional Ethics was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

n. Applicant 02C-030 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from New York University on September 24, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that the three quarter credits or their equivalent for Professional Ethics was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

o. Applicant 02C-075 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from Oklahoma State University on December 14, 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was completed. The Application Review Committee recommends approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

p. Jennifer Lynn Westrum, MS, LPP submitted evidence that she has complied with the

requirements of MN. Stat. 148.925, Subd. 7(b), and is requesting a variance which would reduce her supervision as a Licensed Psychological Practitioner to one hour of regularly scheduled individual in-person consultations per week for full-time employment. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance of supervision requirements. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the


9

educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-073 02C-006 02C-047 02C-033 02C-077 02C-053

02C-075 02C-062 02C-070 02C-043 01A-017 02C-030

02C-058 02C-069 02C-067 02C-018 02C-064

6. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicants are approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-040 OSA02-11IN 96A-023 02C-035 OSA02-09MA

02C-007 85B-104 02C-027 02C-020 02C-011

01A-005 09A-201 7. Approval of Doctoral Degree of Licensee Licensed as a Licensed Psychologist with a Master’s Degree.

Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degree of Michael Francis Sullivan (LP2038) be approved on the basis that the degree meets the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, S. Terhune. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Regina Marie Burkhart, PhD Doris M Herr, PsyD John Theophile Lindquist, PhD


10

9. Other Business S. Hayes presented an editorial, which first appeared in AMNews (American Medical

Association) on April 22, 2002. The subject of the article is Mental Health Parity: Cover All Conditions The Same Ways; Mental Illness Is No Less Real Than Any Other Medical Conditional, But Health Plans Typically Don’t Give It Equal Coverage. Congress Could Change That.

10. Adjournment J. Peterson moved, seconded by S. Terhune that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:27 AM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary



June 28th, 2002 Members Present: N. Ruiz, S. Hayes, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Peterson, M.

Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune Members Absent: M. Farinacci, J. Romano, and J. Schaffer Others Present: K. Fuchs, J. Jensen, D. Ollendick and N. Hart, Assistant

Attorney General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On June 28, 2002, the Minnesota Board of Psychology adopted a Stipulation and Consent Order that placed the license of S. Margretta Dwyer, MA, LP to practice psychology in Minnesota in a Restricted and Conditional status. PUBLIC SESSION Board Chair J. Hovland called the public session to order at 9:21 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of May 17, 2002.

S. Hayes moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, that the minutes of the meeting of May 17, 2002 be approved. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried.

2. Rescind Board action of May 17, 2002 meeting granting license to applicant

OSA01-08SD. Applicant OSA01-08SD was inadvertently added to the list of applicants licensed at May 17, 2002 Board meeting. The applicant was not license eligible until the board voted on a pending variance. The applicant’s variance was on the agenda for the June 28, 2002, Board meeting with a recommendation for approval from the ARC. When the variance passed, the applicant’s name would be added to the list of applicants to be licensed at the June 28, 2002 meeting. The applicant was never notified of the Board's May 17, 2002, action and was never assigned a license number. N. Ruiz moved, seconded by S. Hayes to rescind Board May 17, 2002, Board action. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY JUNE 28, 2002

2

Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


a. Rules Committee Update. J. Schneeweis updated the Board on the progress of the Rules Committee. She reported that since the May Board meeting, the Rules Committee met twice alone and twice with the Public Advisory Committee and did the following: Revised language regarding “Limitations to scope of practice” to make referral

requirements of clients needing non-psychological services more in keeping with a licensee’s expertise; i.e., the new language would read “assisting with identifying resources” rather than “making a referral”.

Revised language regarding “Release of private information” to make it clear that one is not violating the Psychology Practice Act when one properly discloses private information due to a court order or for any other legally required reason.

Discussed extensively the rule on Impaired Objectivity or Effectiveness and made several revisions in the content and the format of this rule. The Committee continues to preserve the idea that some impairment is resolvable and should not always have to result in automatic termination of the client.

Discussed whether sexual contact with a current client’s family member should be explicitly prohibited. The Committee has no recommendation yet.

Added language requiring assistance with a referral to a medical professional if the provider “becomes aware that a client’s psychological condition or diagnosis may have a medical etiology”.

The Committee had previously written language prohibiting the provision of forensic assessment services to a current therapy client due to the inherent risk of bias or lack of objectivity. The Committee views a forensic opinion as different from a forensic assessment, however, and added language permitting the offering of a forensic opinion about a therapy client and clarifying how such an opinion should be provided.

b. Speaking Engagements by Board Members. Board Chair J. Hovland asked that during speaking engagements, Board members clarify to their audiences the perspective from which information or advice is being given. That is, she asked members to make it clear whether the information being delivered is from the perspective of the Board as a whole or whether it is from the perspective of the individual member. Dr. Hovland also requested that if a member is asked to represent the Board, that the Board is notified, in advance, so that the full Board is aware of the presentation and the nature of the topics being presented.

c. Continuing Education Consultant Special Request. Continuing Education Consultant N. Ruiz presented for review by the full Board four requests for approval of workshops featuring Spring Forest Qigong .


3

The Board reviewed a Sponsor Request from Patrick Dougherty, MA, LP for a workshop entitled, “Spring Forest Qigong for Psychotherapists” which he is presenting. He has requested 9 continuing education hours. N. Ruiz moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, to approve the request on the basis that Mr. Dougherty submitted documentation of the workshop’s relevance to the practice of psychology and its relationship to the body of psychological knowledge. Voting “aye”: N. Ruiz, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, and M. Seibold. There being three ayes and four nays, motion failed. The Board reviewed documentation from Winifred Lilly-Taylor, PhD, LP and Julie Sellergren, MA, LP, who have submitted individual requests for a one-day seminar on “Spring Forest Qigong” presented by Master Chunyi Lin on May 4, 2002. The Board also reviewed a request from Karen E. Sunna, PhD, LP for 12 CE hours for the “Spring Forest Qigong Level II” seminar presented by Master Chunyi Lin on September 25, 2001 through October 16, 2001. N. Ruiz moved, seconded by M. Seibold, not to approve the seminars because they did not meet the continuing education criteria. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. The Board formed an Ad Hoc Committee to study the proposed new continuing education rules in relation to the Board’s role in changing the face of Continuing Education credits. The Committee should study the relevance of complimentary approaches to the practice of psychology and advise the Board on what the Committee sees as its role. N. Ruiz, S. Hayes, and J. Peterson volunteered as members of the committee.

d. LPP Seat on the Board.

New licensure provisions in the Minnesota Psychology Practice Act became effective in 1991, allowing for the licensure of Licensed Psychological Practitioners (LPP). Rules for licensure of LPP’s went into effect on November 2, 1992. The first LPP was licensed on September 17, 1993.

Assistant Attorney General N. Hart pointed out to staff that within the 1991 licensing law change, under Minnesota Statute 148.90, Subdivision 1 (a) (4), the membership of the Board should include one person licensed or qualified to be licensed as a psychological practitioner. Since Mr. Hart’s advice, a licensed psychological practitioner inquired about why there is no LPP on the Board and whether he may address the Board on this issue. The licensee, J. Jensen, attended the Board meeting and addressed the Board.

While it is true that there is no LPP on the Board, the statute does not require that the person be actually licensed as an LPP, only that s/he be qualified to be licensed as an LPP. Because all of the psychologists members of the Board qualify for licensure at the LPP level, the Board is technically not out of compliance with the law. To staff’s knowledge, no applications have been received for the LPP seat on the Board. The


4

Board directed staff to remind the Office of the Governor about this provision in time for the 2003 Board appointments. The Governor would then be free to make whatever appointment he deems appropriate.

e. Appointment of Application Review Committee (ARC). At its May 17, 2002, meeting, the Board decided that it needs a second Application Review Committee to reduce the workload of the current Committee. The Board chair, J. Hovland asked for one psychologist member of the Board to consider volunteering to fill this seat. There were no volunteers. The Board wishes to consider former Board members for the position.



Name License # Renewal Date Anderson, Fiona S., PhD LP4228 6/30/02 Adkins, Jones M., PsyD LP1010 5/31/02 Britton, Emilie G., MA LP1019 5/31/02 Cimbura, Cris R., MS LP3434 3/31/02 Emerson, Nadine M., MEq LP1041 5/31/02 Fenrick, Nancy J., PhD LP1043 5/31/02 Fleck, Earl A., MA LP1045 5/31/02 Gassman, Darcy L., MA LP4017 5/31/02 Hjemboe, Stephen M., PhD LP3086 5/31/02 Jensen, Karol L., PhD LP1586 5/31/02 Mullenbach, Andrea W., MA LP1270 6/30/02 Theis, Roberta J., MSEd LP1134 5/31/02 Tieffenbacher, Thomas J., MA LP1176 6/30/02 Viken, James P., PhD LP1304 6/30/02 J. Schneeweis moved, seconded by S. Terhune, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being five ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Marie A. Thielen, MA, LP requested a waiver of the Special Assessment late fee

(MN Rule 7200.3500). Licensee states that at the time the Special Assessment Fee was invoiced, she did not intend to renew her license and, as a result, she did not pay the fee. Due to circumstances that later developed, the licensee now finds it necessary to renew her license and is, therefore, required to pay the Special


5

Assessment and late fee. S. Terhune moved, seconded by R. Maves that the waiver request be denied on the basis that Licensee failed to meet her burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

c. Applicant 02C-074 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD from University of Notre Dame on January 9, 2000. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that 1 to 2 quarter credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. Applicant 02C-037 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Child Clinical Psychology from the West Virginia University on December 29, 1994. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that 1 to 2 quarter credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

e. Applicant 02C-068 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Counseling Psychology from University of Kansas on August 1, 2001. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that at least 1 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

f. Applicant 02C-059 applied for the PRE and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from Alliant International University on December 20, 1999. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation that at least 1 to 2 credits in Theories of Measurement was completed. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose


6

an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

g. Applicant 02C-046 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant met the

requirements for a PhD with a major in Educational Psychology from the University of Minnesota on May 31, 2000. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant has provided sufficient documentation to prove that the pre-degree internship was completed. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

h. Jennifer Lynn Westrum, MS, LPP submitted evidence that she has complied with the

requirements of MN. Stat. 148.925, Subd. 7(c), and is requesting a variance which would reduce her supervision to one hour of regularly scheduled individual in-person consultations per month (for full-time employment). The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance of supervision requirements. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

i. Applicant OSA01-08SD is applying for Licensure as a Licensed Psychologist.

Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Counseling Psychology from University of North Dakota on December 20, 1995. Applicant completed 18 months of post-doctoral supervised employment, working 40 hr/wk with supervision of 1 hour twice a month on a formal in-person individual basis by a licensed psychologist and one 1 hr/wk supervision from a secondary supervisor. This was the requirement for licensure for the State of North Dakota. Applicant still maintains a current active license in North Dakota. The applicant is asking that the Board accept the post-degree supervised employment hours completed for licensure in the State of North Dakota in combination with the applicant’s current employment, as meeting Minnesota’s requirement for licensure. To date, the applicant has completed in Minnesota, 6 months of supervised employment at 40 hrs/wk with 1hr/wk of formal in-person, individual supervision with a primary supervisor and 1 hr/wk of formal supervision with a secondary supervisor. Applicant passed the PRE on February 19, 2002. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


7

j. Applicant 02C-072 is applying for the EPPP. Applicant earned a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from the University of Minnesota on July 31, 2000. Applicant completed a graduate level course Psychology of Learning: PSYC 5012 in her senior year as part of the Psychology Honors Undergraduate curriculum. The course instructor submitted documentation that the Applicant fulfilled all the graduate level requirements of the course and received an “A” for the final grade. Applicant is asking that the Board accept this course work in conjunction with her PhD degree and the two years of post-doctoral training in this core area, as meeting the core course requirement for Cognitive-Affective Bases of Behavior. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

02C-071 02C-080 02C-074 02C-037 02C-085 02C-072

02C-068 02C-049

6. Admit to the PRE Application Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicants be approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 02C-076 02C-028 02C-054 02C-003 02C-045 OSA02-30IA 0SA99-14CA 02C-030 99A-077 02C-031 7. Approval of Doctorate Degrees for Master’s Level Applicants.

Application Review Committee moved to approve the conversion from master’s to doctoral education for the applicants for licensure as Licensed Psychologist (LP) listed below. These applicants passed the EPPP and the PRE based on their master’s level education. Voting “aye”: R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and


8

S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 00B-034 96B-202 8. Approval of Doctoral Degree of Licensee Licensed as a Licensed Psychological Practitioner (LPP) with a Master’s Degree. Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degree (PsyD) of Joseph I. Shagalow, MA, LPP (LPP0068) be approved on the basis that the degree meets the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 9. Approval of Doctoral Degree of Licensee Licensed as a Licensed Psychologist (LP) with a Master’s Degree. Application Review Committee moved that the doctoral degree (PhD) of Richard W. Auger, MA, LP (LP2315) be approved on the basis that the degree meets the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 10. Licensure as Licensed Psychological Practitioners. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychological Practitioners based on master’s degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.908. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Carrie Jean Chomicz, MA Katherine Hegre Fuller, MA Guy Francis Strauss, MA 11. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


9

Jean Helen Choe, PhD Daniel Louis Legerski, PsyD John Theophile Lindquist, PhD Robert Alan Mantell, PhD Janet Jean Rice, PsyD Alyssa Kaying Vang, PsyD Edwin Charles Yerka, PhD 12. Re-Licensure. Application Review Committee moved approval for Re-Licensure of the applicants listed below. They provided the necessary documentation, passed the Professional Responsibility Exam (PRE), and fulfilled all the requirements of MN Rule 7200.3610. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Bradley Lee Kinder, MA Kevin Francis Munstenteiger, MS 13. Termination of License for Non-Renewal. The following licensees have failed to renew their license within 60 days of being overdue, and notification has been sent as provided in MN Rule part 7200.3510. S. Terhune moved, seconded by R. Maves that the licenses be terminated for non-renewal. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. NAME RENEWAL LICENSE # DEADLINE ATLEE, JUDITH D. December 31, 2001 LP0447 BRAATEN, LAUREEN M. December 31, 2001 LP0465 BREMER, JOANNE K. November 30, 2001 LP0409 BRODSKY, PATRICIA A. December 31, 2000 LP4099 BREU, EVELYN A. January 31, 2002 LP3902 DELUGACH, FRANCES J. September 30, 2001 LP3773 EARLY-ZALD, MARY B. November 30, 2001 LP3365 FOSTER, RUTH L. December 31, 2001 LP2998 FREVERT, RITA K. December 31, 1998 LP1939 GALLEHER, KATHLEEN M. May 31, 2000 LP4016 GLASENAPP, NANCY J. January 31, 1999 LP2499 HOLLINBECK, ROBERT F. December 31, 2001 LP0530 HUNT, CHERYL E. September 30, 2000 LP1513 JOHNSON, LUCIE R. December 31, 2001 LP0540


10

KNOLL, LUCY A. December 31, 2001 LP3877 MCKENZIE, DARRELL W. August 31, 2001 LP2705 MIRO, BARBARA C. December 31, 2000 LP4111 OBERDORFER, CARL H. December 31, 2001 LP0600 O’CONNER, VINCENT P. November 30, 2001 LP0246 QUAAL, DOROTHY A. December 31, 2001 LP0656 SIDTIS, JOHN J. January 31, 2002 LP0760 TURNURE, JAMES E. December 31, 2001 LP0677 WAGSTAFF, ALICE K. December 31, 2001 LP0682 WETZEL, ROBIN L. November 30, 2001 LP3860 ZIMMERMAN, ALLAN D. December 31, 2001 LP0698 14. Other Business a. ASPPB Nominations. P. Walker-Singleton presented a letter from the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards acknowledging receipt of the Board’s nomination of J. Schaffer as member-at-large of their Board of Directors. b. Order for Reinstatement. P. Walker-Singleton informed the Board that the license of Helen M. Doane, PhD, LP has been reinstated following receipt of a tax clearance certificate for the licensee. 15. Adjournment J. Schneeweis moved, seconded by S. Hayes that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:57 AM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary



August 2nd, 2002 Members Present: M. Farinacci, N. Ruiz, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J.

Romano, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune Members Absent: S. Hayes, and M. Seibold Others Present: J. Otteson, D. Ollendick and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney

General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On the recommendation of the Complaint Resolution Committee, the Board adopted an Order of Unconditional License in the matter of Bill Duke, M.A., LP. PUBLIC SESSION Board Chair J. Hovland called the public session to order at 9:14 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of June 28, 2002.

N. Ruiz moved, seconded by S. Terhune, that the minutes of the meeting of June 28, 2002 be approved as amended. Voting “aye”: R. Maves, J. Peterson, N. Ruiz, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. J. Romano and J. Schaffer abstained. There being five ayes and no nays, motion carried.

2. Correction to December 8, 2000 Minutes.

In the December 8, 2000 Board minutes, under the heading number 8, Termination of License for Non-Renewal, the name of licensee, Nancy L. Leonard (LPP0051) (Renewal Deadline September 2000) was included in the list of licenses to be terminated. In a routine self-audit of the Board minutes and files, it was discovered that Ms. Leonard’s name was included in the December 8, 2000 minutes, even though she had paid the renewal fee on time. She had changed her name and the name change was not recorded in time to stop the termination process. R. Maves moved, seconded by S. Terhune, to approve the correction to December 8, 2002 Minutes. Voting “aye”: R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY AUGUST 2, 2002

2


a. Rules Committee Update. J. Schaffer updated the Board on the progress of the Rules Committee. He stated that the Committee has struggled with language that would clarify what an “appropriate” termination with a client should encompass and when is it appropriate to terminate with a client. The Committee changed the rule regarding impaired objectivity to remove reference to being dysfunctional by a “severe” physical or mental problem to instead refer to being unable to practice “with reasonable skill and safety to clients”. The Committee is trying to avoid the implication in the rules that if a provider has a mental or physical condition, s/he is impaired and therefore, has to terminate clients. The Committee is also discussing medical recommendations by providers, what kinds of discussions providers can have with clients about medications, and how detailed can the discussions be.

b. Executive Director’s Compensation.

J. Hovland reported that the Executive Director’s bargaining unit, the Manager’s Plan, has just settled with the state. The Directors had worked without a new contract from July 1, 2001 to the present. As a result, the Executive Directors of all health licensing Boards are receiving the plan negotiated hourly increase and back pay from only December 2001 to July 2002. The budget plan (completed in 2000) for the 2002-2003 biennium, includes revenue to cover all possible salary increases for the biennium.

c. Special Board Meeting.

S. Albert, Chair of the Rules Committee, in response to Board requests, asked that a Special Board meeting be held so that the Board can consider for approval, the proposed new rules. The Board voted to hold the special meeting on Friday, October 18, 2002, and requested that a draft of the rules to be considered be sent to the members two weeks in advance of the meeting date.



Name License # Renewal Date Damgaard-Hansen, Peter, PhD, LP LP1351 7/31/02 Eubank, Jr., Dillard M., MA, LP LP1230 6/30/02 Glickman, Francie S., MA, LP LP3042 8/31/02 Lee-Borden, Nancy L., PhD, LP LP1258 6/30/02


3

Maidman, Janice, PsyD, LP LP1361 7/31/02 Moran, Debra A., MA, LP LP4040 6/30/02 O’Laughlin, Michael S., PhD, LP LP3493 6/30/02 Risse, Joy M., MA, LP LP1371 7/31/02 Rockers, Dolore M., PhD, LP LP1283 6/30/02 Stockinger, Beth A., MS, LP LP1299 6/30/02 Sunna, Karen E., PhD, LP LP1133 5/31/02 J. Romano moved, seconded by N. Ruiz, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. John W. Moorman, MS, LP (LP0742) requests an additional six month time-limited variance to complete his continuing education requirement. He was due to renewal his Psychologist License on 1/31/02 and was granted a 6 month time-limited variance at the May 17, 2002 Board Meeting. Mr. Moorman has had to move to Texas to care for a family member, and has not been able to obtain the required Continuing Education units to by the end of the first variance period. He is requesting an additional 6 months to complete his 40 hours of CE. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensee has met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

c. Applicant 02C-087 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance. Applicant earned

a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from University of Illinois-Chicago in July 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant provided sufficient documentation of completion of the pre-degree internship. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. Applicant OSA02-30IA is applying for licensure and requesting a variance. The

applicant has an active license in the State of Iowa. Because the primary supervisor of the applicant is deceased, the applicant requested that the Board accept a supervisor documentation form completed by a second primary supervisor, along with supervisory documentation, which the deceased supervisor had previously completed for her licensure in the State of Iowa. The additional documentation is the State of


4

Iowa Department of Public Health Board of Psychology Examiners Supervisory Form and the Postdoctoral Supervisor Confirmation Form, which demonstrate that she received from the deceased supervisor two hours of face-to-face consultation per week for more than a one year period of time. The applicant is asking the Minnesota Board to accept this document in place of the Board’s supervision Verification Form. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. J. Schaffer abstained. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried.

3. Admit to the EPPP Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

03C-008 02C-076 02C-087 03C-009 02C-062 03C-004 02C-079 02C-078 03C-003 02C-082

4. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicants be approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 02C-073 01A-052 03C-002 02C-056 02C-004 02C-051 02C-061 02C-053 02C-013 02C-072 02C-055 5. Granting Guest Licensure. The Application Review Committee, with its delegated authority, granted a Guest License (MN Statute 148.916) to Ronald Leon Lybarger, PhD GL 0208-03. The licensee holds a license in the states of Kansas and Missouri. His work in Minnesota will be with Regions Hospital-HWP Assessment Service. The nature of the work will be assessment of deaf children in main stream school settings. 6. Licensure as a Licensed Psychological Practitioner. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicant listed below be granted licensure as a Licensed Psychological Practitioner based on a master’s degree, having


5

performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.908. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Jennifer Miller Houtz, MA 7. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Miranda D. Amaris, PsyD Mary A. Church, PhD Robyn M. Johnson, PsyD Danielle A. Jordan, PhD Amy M. Timm, PsyD 8. Termination of License for Non-Renewal. The following licensees have failed to renew their license within 60 days of being overdue, and notification has been sent as provided in MN Rule part 7200.3510. M. Farinacci moved, seconded by J. Schaffer that the licenses be terminated for non-renewal. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Flynn, Jane LP0905 Gordon, Sally LP4172 Harding, Joseph LP2666 Joslin, Francis LP0819 Naylor, William LP1690 Peterson, David LP0750 9. Other Business a. Health Professionals Service Program (HPSP). J. Peterson, the Board’s representative to HPSP’s Program Committee, reported that HPSP in looking for ways to raise additional revenue. Their caseload is up and they have been increasing staff little by little. They project a need for even more staff. Mr. Peterson was asking the Board for its sense of how HPSP could obtain additional


6

funding. He has suggested that they consider general fund money, but he feels that HPSP does not see this as an option. HPSP favors a surcharge to all health licensing Board licensees of approximately $2-3 per licensee. Board members expressed concern for such an assessment, because they do not wish to ask licensees for another fee increase. Some members suggested charging the licensees who use the Program. HPSP is concerned that participants will not be able to afford to use the Program if they have to pay. The Board asked that staff send them financial information about HPSP and their recent operational budget. b. Appeal of the Appleman Decision.

N. Hart reported that the Board’s decision to revoke Michael A. Appleman’s psychology license was appealed to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. The Board has received the Court’s decision affirming the Board’s action. He reported that the Court gave the Board a nod for including in its revocation order, a provision allowing the former licensee to re-apply for licensure after having complied with a list of conditions. 10. Adjournment J. Schaffer moved, seconded by N. Ruiz that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 AM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary


Minutes of the 341st Meeting

September 6, 2002 Members Present: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, N. Ruiz, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J.

Peterson, J. Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S. Terhune

Members Absent: None Others Present: D. Ollendick and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney General. PUBLIC SESSION Board Chair J. Hovland called the public session to order at 9:03 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of August 2, 2002.

M. Farinacci moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis, that the minutes of the meeting of August 2, 2002 be approved as amended. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


a. Rules Committee Update. J. Schaffer updated the Board on the progress of the Rules Committee. Informed Consent: The Committee created a separate section for forensic

psychology and employment-related psychology, because these areas of practice have the potential for creating more harm than others create.

Industrial/Organizational (I/O) Psychology: Judith Pendergrass, PhD, LP, an I/O psychologist, attended the last meeting of the Rules Committee and provided consultation. Dr. Pendergrass, in her professional opinion, felt that the requirement under informed consent, in which the provider must disclose that there is a possible impact on the employment and life of an evaluatee is too restrictive. She also explained the profession’s view of “coaching” as it relates to the practice of psychology.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY SEPTEMBER 6, 2002

2

b. Legislative Committee Update. N. Ruiz update the Board on the progress of the Legislative Committee. The Committee will meet on September 11, 2002, and decide what parts, if any, of the 2001 legislative agenda to revive during the upcoming session. Dr. Ruiz stated that there is still time to contact the Committee with proposals for legislative changes.

c. Communication Committee Update. S. Hayes updated the Board on the progress of the website. Ms. Hayes stated that the original deadline date, Labor Day 2002, for implementation of the website would have to be revised. Ms. Hayes suggested that we begin the website with as much information as we can complete, continue to work on other pieces, and add to it as other sections are completed. The Board requested a timetable at the next Board meeting indicating the plan for complying with Ms. Hayes’ suggestion. L. Sherry handed out an updated website layout, highlighting the parts left to be done.

d. Special Board Meeting. The special Board meeting that had previously been scheduled for October 18, 2002, had to be rescheduled because the date conflicted with the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards’ Annual Meeting of Delegates. J. Romano moved, seconded by R. Maves that the Board devote 90 minutes of the November 8, 2002 Board meeting to review of the proposed rules on the educational requirements for licensure and the continuing education rules. The rules of conduct would then be reviewed early in 2003. The rules discussion on November 8, 2002 will be placed last on the agenda. S. Albert will be asked to attend the meeting. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: J. Peterson. Abstaining: J. Hovland. There being nine “ayes” and one “nay”, motion carried. Board chair, J. Hovland, set meeting dates of Friday and Saturday, January 10 and 11, 2003, to review the proposed rules of conduct.

e. MN’s Nomination to the Association of State and Provincial Psychology

Board’s (ASPPB) Board of Directors. J. Schaffer reported that he received a letter from ASPPB declining to consider his application for a seat on the Board of Directors. The letter stated that Dr. Schaffer had to participate in the organization more before he could be considered. ASPPB suggested that he attend more meetings, serve on committees, and do poster sessions at the national meetings. The Board expressed its displeasure that Dr. Schaffer was not even considered for a seat on the ASPPB Board.


3

J. Peterson moved, seconded by J. Romano that the Board respond by letter to ASPPB communicating its opinion on the letter Dr. Schaffer received.

f. ASPPB Annual Meeting. ASPPB’s Annual Meeting of Delegates will be held in Point Clear, Alabama on October 16-20, 2002. The Board, by consensus, decided to send J. Schaffer and J. Romano to the meeting as this Board’s delegate and alternate.



Name License # Renewal Date Kroupin, Georgi V., MA, LP LP4068 8/31/02 Ludeke, Russell J., PhD, LP LP1409 8/31/02 McKowen, Creighton J., EdD, LP LP1413 8/31/02 Rousseau III, Rudolph J., MEq, LP LP1420 8/31/02

J. Peterson moved, seconded by S. Hayes, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Richard D. Haakana, MA, LP (LP0776) requests an additional six month time-limited

variance to complete his continuing education requirement. He was due to renew his psychologist license on 2/28/02 and was granted a six month time-limited variance at the March 8, 2002, Board Meeting. Mr. Haakana has been suffering from a health condition, making it impossible to attend workshops. He has completed Home-Study courses, but has not been able to obtain the required Continuing Education units by the end of the first variance period. He is requesting an additional six months to complete his 40 hours of CE. M. Seibold moved, seconded by R. Maves, to approve the variance request on the basis that Licensee has met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

c. Applicant 02C-053 is applying for licensure and requesting a variance for MN Rule

7200.2400 Completion of Degree Requirements. Maria S. Zaragoza, PhD, Professor and Chair of the Department of Psychology at Kent State University verified, in


4

writing, to the Board that applicant 02C-053 completed all degree requirements on August 17,2001, several months before the official date of graduation (December 14, 2001). Applicant’s post-doctoral hours for licensure began August 20, 2001. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. A psychology student in a master’s program at a local college requested that the

Board grant her a variance, in advance, so that she does not have to meet the requirement of MN Rule 7200.1300, subp. 4 B (c) and (d), requiring that a pre-degree internship be completed at a rate of at least 20 hours per week. Her variance request is based on the following facts: 1. She works the night shift at a job, which is not flexible and will not allow her to change her hours to accommodate the internship she has found; 2. She is pregnant and needs the health insurance her job provides. She does claim, however, even if she were not pregnant, she would not work a 20-hour per week internship; and 3. It would be easier for her to work fewer than 20 hours at her internship, and cost less for daycare. M. Farinacci moved, seconded by J. Schaffer, to deny the variance request on the basis that student has not met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would not impose an undue burden on student, and that granting the variance is likely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, and S. Terhune. Abstaining J. Schneeweis, and M. Seibold, Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.


Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 02C-083 03C-001 03C-006

5. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicants are approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


5

01A-052 02C-041 02C-075 02C-066 6. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Nancy Jurisk Arikian, PhD Cynthia Ann Barsness, PsyD Jodi Rae Boerger, PsyD Amanda Hyatt Fields, PhD Kristine Karol Mavis, PhD Amy Beth Silverman, PhD Andrea Szporn, PhD

7. Approval of Doctorate Degrees of Master’s Level Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the conversion from master’s to doctoral education be granted for the licensed psychologists below who are currently licensed at the master’s level. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Marcia Lou Guertin, MA, LP (PsyD) Katherine Kainz, MS, LP (PhD) 8. Termination of Licenses for Non-Renewal. The following licensees have failed to renew their licenses within 60 days of being overdue. Notification has been sent as provided in MN Rule part 7200.3510. N. Ruiz moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the licenses be terminated for non-renewal. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being ten ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Maureen Franz LP1047 May 31, 2002 Judy Wing LP1184 May 31, 2002


6

9. Other Business Performance Review for Executive Director. The Administrative Committee gave the Executive Director a performance review on August 29, 2002, based on input from the Board. The Committee requested that the Director use the services of a licensee to serve as a facilitator of staff meetings to make sure that staff issues are appropriately addressed. Article Related to the Practice of Psychology. S. Hayes submitted an article for the Board’s information regarding changes in the delivery of psychological services, which are influenced by managed care and other factors. 10. Adjournment J. Schaffer moved, seconded by S. Terhune that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 AM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary


Minutes of the 342nd Meeting

October 11, 2002 Members Present: S. Hayes, N. Ruiz, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Romano, J.

Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune Members Absent: M. Farinacci, J. Peterson, and J. Scheeweis Others Present: D. Ollendick and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney General. EXECUTIVE SESSION On the recommendation of the Complaint Resolution Committee, the Minnesota Board of Psychology adopted the following actions: 1. A Stipulation and Consent Order allowing Kim Mehlos, M.S.Ed., LP to Surrender

his license to practice psychology in Minnesota. 2. An Order removing the Conditions of the license of Renee Fredrickson, Ph.D.,

LP, but continuing the Restriction. PUBLIC SESSION Board Chair J. Hovland called the public session to order at 10:12 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of September 6, 2002.

J. Romano moved, seconded by S. Terhune, that the minutes of the meeting of September 6, 2002 be approved as amended. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


a. Rules Committee Update. J. Schaffer updated the Board on the progress of the Rules Committee. The Committee: Specified what an emergency or crisis intervention is (…”when in the provider’s

judgement the risk to the client’s life or welfare is such that services should be

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY OCTOBER 11, 2002

2

provided without delay and the requirement of informed consent would result in delay or denial of services.”

Discussed the choices a provider has if he cannot practice with reasonable and safety—terminate all clients or make temporary arrangements for their care.

Discussed proposing a rule requiring a written plan to cover what should be done with client’s care/client’s files in the event of an interruption of services necessitated by the provider’s situation or condition. A part of the discussion centered on the question of whether to require that the plan be filed with the Board.

b. Legislative Committee Update. N. Ruiz update the Board on the progress of the Legislative Committee. The Committee met on September 11 and 26, 2002 and on October 10, 2002. (1) The following proposed language is ready to be submitted to the legislature: Mental, physical, or chemical dependency examination or evaluation; Crimes against providers; Emeritus registration; and Definition of psychological services.

The language will be sent to the Board for approval at the meeting on 08 November 2002 and the approved language will be presented for comments to the Council of the Minnesota Psychological Association at its meeting on 15 November 2002. (2) The Legislative Committee asked the Board for additional direction before writing the proposed statute that would give Licensed Psychological Practitioners (LPP) the ability to practice independently. The Committee’s questions include these: Does the board want to create a third level of licensure, such as Licensed

Independent Psychological Practitioner or Licensed Psychological Practitioner-Independent?

Would the Board wish to change Minnesota Statute 148.90, which specifies the make-up of the Board, to add more seats for LPPs, so that there is one seat for LPPs who do not practice independently, and another for LPPs who do practice independently?

Should the 3000 supervised hours of practice, which would be required before independent practice for LPPs, commence upon licensure or on the date of first employment?

What provisions would the Board want to include pertaining to LPPs who do not wish to work towards independent practice?

J. Hovland directed staff to organize a joint meeting of the Legislative Committee and the Ad Hoc Committee on LPP Licensure to discuss answers to the above questions. The meeting should take place before the Board meeting on 08 November 2002.

c. Communication Committee Update. S. Hayes updated the Board on the progress of the website. S. Hayes met with staff on 18 September 2002. Items to appear on the website should be proofed and ready


3

by 31 October 2002 and a meeting with A. Ager, who will assist staff with posting a website, should be set for the first week in November.

The Board requested that the website be posted using the items that are ready for publication, rather than waiting until all items are ready before posting the website.

d. Certificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ). J. Schaffer lead a discussion on the issue of the Board accepting the CPQ (offered by the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards to enhance mobility of licensees among jurisdictions) as meeting Minnesota’s licensure requirements. R. Maves moved, seconded by S. Terhune that the discussion be carried over until the November 8, 2002, Board meeting, because some of the members had not had the opportunity to read the background materials provided. Voting “aye”: R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

e. 2003 Board Calendar. P. Walker-Singleton presented for approval, a proposed calendar of Board meeting dates for year 2003. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by S. Terhune that the calendar be adopted. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

f. FY04 & FY 05 Budget Planning. P. Walker-Singleton reported that budget planning for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 has begun. The health licensing Boards received instructions from the Minnesota Department of Finance to plan our budgets taking a 10% reduction in each fiscal year in order to reduce the State of Minnesota’s projected General Fund shortfall. The state’s overall budget showing these cuts would then be presented to the newly elected Governor for approval, presumably with the representation that the 10% cut from health licensing Boards’ budgets will benefit the shortfall. In fact, since the health licensing Boards’ revenue is deposited into the state’s Special Revenue Fund, money cut from our budgets will not reduce the General Fund shortfall. In addition, the Board of Psychology has just now reached a budget level where expenses can be easily covered by the revenues collected. In order to fund the 10% cut from the budget of the Board of Psychology, this Board will have to cut essential staff positions and by fiscal year 2005, eliminate functions crucial to the mission of the Board to protect the public. By consensus, the Board decided to contact legislators and candidates for public office to point out that budget cuts by the health licensing Boards will not affect the projected deficit in the General Fund.


4


a. Michael V. Hoiland, PhD, LP (LP4056) requested a waiver of the late renewal fee

(MN Rule 7200.3500). Licensee stated that the materials were sent to his business address, which he designated on his last renewal, but he is on a “leave of absence” and his former place of business did not forward his renewal application to him. R. Maves moved, seconded by J. Romano, to approve the waiver request on the basis that Licensee has met his burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously

b. The following licensees are requesting approval of six-month time-limited variances

(MN Rule part 7200.3400, Subp. 2) to complete the required continuing education hours. Each Licensee has submitted a plan, as required by rule, to complete the continuing education credits.

Name License # Renewal Date Berg, Grant M., MA, LP LP3504 8/31/02 Bolter, Helaine, PsyD, LP LP3139 9/30/02 Cowle, Robert M., MA, LP LP1480 9/30/02 Faver, Richard W., MA, LP LP3436 9/30/02 Follick, Timothy P., PhD, LP LP1492 9/30/02 Harris, Jane, MA, LP LP3146 9/30/02 Henry, Ann L., MA, LP LP4073 9/30/02 Mathieu, Patrick J., PhD, LP LP1621 9/30/02 Schmidt, Gerald M., MA, LP LP1560 9/30/02

J. Romano moved, seconded by R. Maves, to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

c. Jennifer Miller Houtz, MA, LPP, LPP0081 and Delvin Bryan Lee, MS, LPP, LPP0062 submitted evidence that they have complied with the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.925, Subd. 7(b), and they each requested a variance which would reduce the supervision they receive as Licensed Psychological Practitioners to one hour of regularly scheduled individual in-person consultations per week for full-time employment. The Application Review Committee recommended approval of the variance of supervision requirements. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


5

4. Admit to the EPPP Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

03C-015 02C-081 03C-011 03C-007 03C-021 03C-022 03C-025

5. Admit to the PRE

Application Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicants are approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 02C-044 02C-083 02C-064 OSA02-31WI OSA02-13IA 01A-051 93A-283 02C-049 OSA02-32CA 02C-074 02C-075 03C-001 OSA03-02WI 03C-013 03C-023 OSA03-01KY 6. Approval of Doctorate Degrees of Master’s Level Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the conversion from master’s to doctoral education be granted for the licensed psychologists below who are currently licensed at the master’s level. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Karen L. Marsh, PsyD 7. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Janette M. Ayd, PsyD Julie D. Erickson, PhD Olga Grun, PhD


6

Benjamin J. Lexau, PsyD Helena J. Mackenzie, PhD Jane F. Manno, PsyD Peter E. Meyers, PsyD Sonia Coelho Mosch, PhD Althea Lydia Noukki, PsyD Heidi A. Sauder, PhD Joseph Isaac Shagalow, PsyD Ann N. Stone, PsyD Linda K. Wondrasch, PsyD 8. Termination of Licenses for Non-Renewal. The following licensees have failed to renew their licenses within 60 days of being overdue. Notification has been sent as provided in MN Rule part 7200.3510. S. Terhune moved, seconded by N. Ruiz that the licenses be terminated for non-renewal. Voting “aye”: S. Hayes, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being seven ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Drucker, Marsha (MA) June 30, 2002 LP1226 Furlong, Diane (MA) June 30, 2002 LP1232 Pirozzolo, Francis ( PhD ) December 31, 1999 LP0618 Seibold, Jon (MA) March 31, 1998 LP0966 Ward, Stephen (MA) June 30, 2002 LP1307 9. Other Business Agreement for Corrective Action.

P. LaBrocca presented an Agreement For Corrective Action entered into on September 12, 2002 with the Minnesota Board of Psychology Complaint Resolution Committee comprised of J. Schaffer, N. Ruiz, and M. Farinacci. Volunteer for Membership on Application Review Committee (ARC).

J. Hovland again requested that Board members consider volunteering to serve on a second ARC.

Report from Continuing Education Consultant. N. Ruiz reported that Patrick Dougherty, MA, LP requested that a Board member attend an upcoming continuing education activity he is presenting on the subject of Spring Forest Qigong, as his guest. Mr. Dougherty has presented information to the Board in writing and in person, in the past, but the Board has not approved the activity for continuing education credit. P. Walker-Singleton does not recommend that a Board member attend the activity without payment of the appropriate fee. N. Ruiz may attend the activity at his own expense or attendance may be deemed a Board expense for the purpose of researching the content for compliance with the current rules for approval of continuing education activities.


7

Educational Requirements for Licensure. J. Romano again requested that the Rules Committee change the proposed new education rules for licensure so that the Board requires three semester credits, instead of two semester credits, for the core course areas. Dr. Romano handed out Guidelines for Defining a Doctoral Degree in Psychology printed from the website of the National Register of Health Service Providers in Psychology. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 12:10 PM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary


Minutes of the 343rd Meeting

November 8, 2002

Members Present: M. Farinacci, N. Ruiz, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J.Romano, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, J. Schneeweis, and S.Terhune

Members Absent: S. Hayes

Others Present: D. Ollendick, J. Otteson, and N. Hart, Assistant AttorneyGeneral.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

On the recommendation of the Complaint Resolution Committee, the Minnesota Board ofPsychology adopted the following actions:

1. A Stipulation and Consent Order indefinitely SUSPENDING the license of BethM. Erickson, Ph.D., LP, to practice psychology in Minnesota.

2. A Stipulation and Consent Order placing the license of F. William Fritsche,Ph.D., LP in a CONDITIONAL status.

PUBLIC SESSION

Board Chair, J. Hovland, called the public session to order at 9:31 AM, in the PsychologyBoard Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota,and a quorum was declared present.

1. Minutes

Meeting of October 11, 2002.

M. Seibold moved, seconded by N. Ruiz, that the minutes of the meeting of October 11,2002 be approved. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N.Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. Therebeing nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY NOVEMBER 8, 2002

2

Rescission of Board Action and Correction to October 11, 2002 Minutes.

The Board rescinded the termination of Stephen J. Ward, MA, LP (LP1307) (June 30,2002) for non-renewal and the minutes of the October 11, 2002 meeting were correctedto reflect the correction. The name had been included on the termination listinadvertently.


a. Rules Committee Update.J. Schaffer reported that the majority of the Rules Committee meetings since the lastBoard meeting was spent getting ready for this Board meeting where the Board willreview the Licensure and the Continuing Education rules. In addition, the Committeeis approximately 4/5 of the way through the Rules of Conduct.

b. Legislative Committee Update.N. Ruiz updated the Board on the progress of the Legislative Committee. 1. Proposed amendment to Minn. Stat. 148.925 Supervision. The Board votedunanimously to approve the language adding “visual and interactive electroniccommunication” to the definition of supervision. 2. Proposed amendments to Minn. Stat. 148.89, Subd. 5 Practice of Psychology. TheBoard voted unanimously to approve the language making housekeeping changes tothe definition of the “Practice of psychology”, including the changing of the title ofthe subdivision to “Psychological services”. The Board amended the languageslightly.3. M. Farinacci moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the Board delegate to theLegislative Committee the authority to make any changes to the language of theproposed bills deemed necessary by the Committee to facilitate the bills’ passage.The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion.

The Committee had been delegated similar authority (as in #3) during the 2002legislative session and had consequently made modifications to the language of thefollowing bills; the Board unanimously approved those changes at this meeting:

� Proposed bill to add Minn. Stat. 148.977 Crimes Against Providers.� Proposed bill to add Minn. Stat. 148.941, Subd. 8 Mental, Physical, or

Chemical Dependency Examination or Evaluation.

Dr. Ruiz reported that the Committee made no changes to the proposed bill to addMinn. Stat. 148.9105 Emeritus Registration.

N. Ruiz and L. Sherry will present the above 2003 legislative agenda to theMinnesota Psychological Association’s Executive Council at their meeting onNovember 16, 2002.


3

c. Communication Committee Update.L. Sherry reported that she met with A. Ager, who will put up the skeleton of theBoard’s website along with an announcement that the website is underconstruction. Ms. Sherry will e-mail changes and additions to him. It is expectedthat by December 15, 2002, part of the site will be available to the public. Thesite’s Uniform Resource Locator is www.psychologyboard.state.mn.us.

d. Joint Meeting of Legislative Committee and Ad Hoc Committee on LPPLicensure.N. Ruiz reported that the language for legislation allowing LicensedPsychological Practitioners to practice psychology independently is still beingdeveloped. Draft language is being written, but the process is complicated by thenumber of amendments that must be made to existing laws and rules in order toimplement the change.

e. Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board’s (ASPPB) AnnualMeeting of Delegates.J. Schaffer and J. Romano reported on their attendance at the ASPPB AnnualMeeting of Delegates in Point Clear, Alabama on October 16-20, 2002. J.Schaffer reported that Ray Fowler, retiring CEO of the American PsychologicalAssociation, gave an interesting account of his life story, which partiallychronicled some of ASPPB’s history. New Mexico presented a session of thestate’s new prescribing privileges. J. Romano informed the Board that theASPPB Foundation gives a $1000 scholarship to psychology students forresearch. The Foundation has very few applicants for the scholarship. There hasbeen a drop in the number of applicants taking the national standardizedexamination for licensure, the Examination for the Professional Practice inPsychology (EPPP). ASPPB has established a task force to study the problem,since the number of psychology students has not dropped. Since the beginning ofthe computerized version of the EPPP, there has been a 6-7% rise in scores. BarbVan Horne is ASPPB’s president-elect.

f. Board Officer Elections in December.P. Walker-Singleton reminded the Board that each December, the Board electsofficers for the coming calendar year. The officers to be elected are Board Chair,Board Vice Chair, and Board Secretary.

g. Health Professionals Service Program (HPSP).P. Walker-Singleton reported that Monica Feider, Program Manager for HPSPwill attend the Board’s December meeting and give her annual update on theprogram at 11 AM. Information about the program was distributed at theNovember 8, 2002 meeting; Board members retained the materials and stated thatthey will bring it to the December 13, 2002 meeting.

http://www.psychologyboard.state.mn.us/


4

P. Walker-Singleton also reported that the Board needed to select a representativeto HSPS’ Program Committee and an alternate for calendar year 2003. J.Peterson volunteered to serve as the Board’s representative for a second year. J.Romano moved, seconded by N. Ruiz that Mr. Peterson continue to serve asrepresentative and that R. Maves continue as alternate until he is replaced by theGovernor, and at that time, J. Schneeweis will continue his term as alternate. Themotion passed unanimously.

h. Board Member List.P. Walker-Singleton distributed a Board member list so that the members canupdate information, such as name, address, and phone numbers.

i. Certificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ).The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) issues aCertificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ) to applicants who meet their corelicensure criteria and who already hold a license to practice psychology in anotherjurisdiction. Once issued, the CPQ is designed to facilitate professional mobilityfor licensed doctoral-level psychologists. J. Schaffer proposed that the Boardaccept ASPPB’s Certificate of Professional Qualification as meeting licensurerequirements. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Romano that the MinnesotaBoard accept the CPQ for applicants with at least three semester credits or fourquarter credits, in human diversity. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J.Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S.Terhune. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motioncarried unanimously.


a. The following licensees are requesting approval of a six-month time-limited variance(MN Rule part 7200.3400, Subp. 2) to complete the required continuing educationhours. Each Licensee has submitted a plan, as required by rule, to complete thecontinuing education credits.

Name License # Renewal Date

Else, Kayla A., PsyD, LP LP1643 10/31/02Fesler, Mary K., MSE, LP LP1764 11/30/02Lesar, Judith A., MS, LP LP1678 10/31/02Nestingen, Signe L., PsyD, LP LP1544 10/31/02

J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis to approve the variance requests on thebasis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule wouldimpose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely toadversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J.


5

Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune.Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Thomas F. Soles, MA, LP (LP3133) incurred a late renewal fee for his renewal whichwas due July 31, 2002. He requested a variance to give him more time to pay the latefee and states that it will be paid no later than January31, 2003. R. Maves moved,seconded by M. Farinacci to approve the variance request on the basis that Licenseemet the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden onLicensee, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the publicwelfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Schaffer, J.Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: J. Romano and N. Ruiz.There being seven ayes and two nays, motion carried.

c. Beverly I. Turk, MS, LP, requested a waiver of the late renewal fee. Licensee wasdue to renew her license on September 30, 2001 and states that she did not receive herrenewal application, which was mailed to the address she designated in an addresschange letter received March 5, 2001 and recorded by the Board on March 7, 2001.The address is still current in the Board’s data base. Licensee states that she realizesthat it is her responsibility to know when her renewal is due, but cannot afford to paythe late renewal fee. J. Romano moved, seconded by R. Maves to deny the waiverrequest on the basis that the Licensee did not meet her burden to prove that adherenceto the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the waiveris unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R.Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, andS. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carriedunanimously.

d. Applicant 02C-057 applied for the PRE and requested a variance from Minn. Rule7200.1300, Subp. 4, B (b) Educational Requirements for Licensure. This rulerequires three graduate quarter credits or the equivalent in the core course area ofTheories of Measurement. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major inClinical Psychology from Pacifica Graduate Institute, Carpinteria, California.Applicant provided sufficient documentation of 1-2 quarter credits in Theories ofMeasurement. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance beapproved on the basis that the applicant met the burden to prove that Applicant metthe rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden onApplicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the publicwelfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J.Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayesand no nays, motion carried.

e. Applicant 03C-012 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance from Minn. Rule7200.1300, Subp. 4 B (b) Educational Requirements for Licensure. This rule requiresthree graduate quarter credits or the equivalent in the core course area of Theories ofMeasurement. Applicant met the requirements for a PsyD with a major in ClinicalPsychology from California School of Professional Psychology, Fresno, California.


6

Applicant provided sufficient documentation of 1-2 quarter credits in Theories ofMeasurement. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance beapproved on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to therule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance isunlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves,J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting“nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

f. Applicant 92A-111 applied for licensure and requested a variance. The applicant hasan active license in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The primary supervisor of theapplicant was unavailable to complete the Supervisory Verification Form. TheCommonwealth of Virginia Board of Psychology submitted to the Board copies of itsverification of supervision forms completed by the applicant’s primary supervisor.The forms demonstrated two hours of face-to-face consultation per week for morethan a one-year period of time. The applicant asked for a variance from theMinnesota Board requesting that this Board accept the Virginia documentation inplace of our own supervisory verification form. The Application Review Committeemoved that the variance be approved on the basis that the applicant met the burden toprove that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule wouldimpose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely toadversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J.Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting“nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

g. Applicant 02C-042 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance from MinnesotaRule 7200.1300, Subp. 4, B (4) Educational Requirements for Licensure. This rulerequires the transcript of an applicant document a minimum of a 2000 hour internshipfor a doctoral degree. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major inCounseling Psychology from Indiana State University on August 10, 2001.Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicantprovided sufficient documentation to demonstrate completion of the pre-doctoralinternship. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance be approvedon the basis that the applicant met the burden to prove that Applicant met therationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden onApplicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the publicwelfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J.Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayesand no nays, motion carried.

2. Admit to the EPPPApplication Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted tothe national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet theeducational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J.Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune.Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


7

03C-012 02C-042 03C-027 02C-057 03C-024 03C-028

3. Admit to the PREApplication Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicantsare approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements forlicensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J.Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There beingnine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

OSA02C-12NC 99B-052 OSA03-04ID

4. Approval of Doctoral Degree.Application Review Committee moved approval of the doctoral degree of the applicantlisted below, who applied for licensure at the doctoral level. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci,R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S.Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carriedunanimously.

92A-111

5. Approval of Doctoral Degree for Master’s Level Licensed Psychologist.Application Review Committee moved approval of the doctoral degree of the licenseelisted below, who applied for conversion of licensure to the doctoral level. Voting “aye”:M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M.Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays,motion carried unanimously.

Mary A. Miller, PsyD

6. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists.Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be grantedlicensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performedsuccessfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements ofMN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J.Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”:none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

LaVon M. Atkinson, PsyD Michael D. Brunner, PhD Kelly A. Dickinson, PhDMary L. Harlow, PsyD Steven M. Lutz, PsyD Carol Fishman Siegel, PhD


8

Timothy A. Wenstrom, PsyDGenni Lee Goschke, PsyD

7. Termination of Licenses for Non-Renewal.The following licensees have failed to renew their licenses within 60 days of beingoverdue. Notification has been sent as provided in MN Rule part 7200.3510. J. Schaffermoved, seconded by J. Romano that the licenses be terminated for non-renewal. Voting“aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J.Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayesand no nays, motion carried unanimously.

Adler, Shulamin (PhD) March 31, 2002 LP0907Bortel, Michael (MA) December 31, 2000 LP1914Imm, Charles (PhD) October 31, 2001 LP0283Meyer, Michelle (MA) May 31, 2001 LP3272Rogers, Lucretia (MA) July 31, 2002 LP3131Schlotterback, Lisa (MA) March 31, 2002 LP0964Simmons, Martha (MS) March 31, 2002 LP4008

8. Other Business

New Appointee to Licensure Committee. Board chair, J. Hovland announced that J. Peterson volunteered to be appointed to theLegislative Committee.

Review of Proposed Continuing Education and Licensure Rules.Rules Committee chair, S. Albert, provided for Board approval draft ContinuingEducation and Licensure rules and the Statements of Need and Reasonableness(SONAR). The Board unanimously approved, with modifications, the proposed rules andthe SONARs.

9. AdjournmentJ. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the meeting be adjourned. Motioncarried unanimously.

The meeting adjourned at 1:28 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LPBoard Secretary



December 13, 2002 Members Present: M. Farinacci, S. Hayes, N. Ruiz, J. Hovland, R. Maves, J.

Peterson, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune Members Absent: J. Romano and J. Schneeweis Others Present: D. Ollendick and N. Hart, Assistant Attorney General PUBLIC SESSION Board Chair, J. Hovland, called the public session to order at 9:10 AM, in the Psychology Board Conference Room, at 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a quorum was declared present. 1. Minutes of the Meeting of November 8, 2002. N. Ruiz moved, seconded by M Farinacci, that the minutes of the meeting of November 8, 2002 be approved. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. Abstaining: S. Hayes. There being six ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.


a. Rules Committee Update. J. Schaffer reported that the Rules Committee had held two six-hour meetings since the November 2002 Board meeting. The Committee discussed the following proposed rule changes:

Making revisions to the sexual conduct rule extending the two-year prohibition against sexual conduct with a former client indefinitely if the provider knows or should have known that the former client is dependent on the provider.

Making significant changes to the sections of the rules about protecting the welfare of students, supervisees, and research subjects.

Adding a provision requiring a provider to give to the Board the name of an individual designated to have custody of their client files in the event of the provider’s extended illness or death.

Clarifying current provisions on mandatory and voluntary reports to the Board having to do with alleged violations of the Psychology Practice Act by other providers.

b. Legislative Committee Update.


N. Ruiz updated the Board on the progress of the Legislative Committee. 1. Proposed amendment to Minn. Stat. 148.925 Supervision. The Board voted unanimously to approve the language adding “visual and interactive electronic communication” to the definition of supervision. 2. Proposed amendments to Minn. Stat. 148.89, Subd. 5 Practice of Psychology. The Board voted unanimously to approve the language making housekeeping changes to the definition of the “Practice of psychology”, including the changing of the title of the subdivision to “Psychological services”. The Board amended the language slightly. 3. M. Farinacci moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the Board delegate to the Legislative Committee the authority to make any changes to the language of the proposed bills deemed necessary by the Committee to facilitate the bills’ passage. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion.

The Committee had been delegated similar authority (as in #3) during the 2002 legislative session, and had consequently, made modifications to the language of the following bills; the Board unanimously approved those changes at this meeting:

Proposed bill to add Minn. Stat. 148.977 Crimes Against Providers. Proposed bill to add Minn. Stat. 148.941, Subd. 8 Mental, Physical, or

Chemical Dependency Examination or Evaluation.

Dr. Ruiz reported that the Committee made no changes to the proposed bill to add Minn. Stat. 148.9105 Emeritus Registration.

N. Ruiz and L. Sherry will present the above 2003 legislative agenda to the Minnesota Psychological Association’s Executive Council at their meeting on November 16, 2002.

c. Communication Committee Update. L. Sherry reported that she met with A. Ager, who will put up the skeleton of the Board’s website along with an announcement that the website is under construction. Ms. Sherry will e-mail changes and additions to him. It is expected that by December 15, 2002, part of the site will be available to the public. The site’s Uniform Resource Locator is www.psychologyboard.state.mn.us.

d. Joint Meeting of Legislative Committee and Ad Hoc Committee on LPP

Licensure. N. Ruiz reported that the language for legislation allowing Licensed Psychological Practitioners to practice psychology independently is still being

2

http://www.psychologyboard.state.mn.us/


developed. Draft language is being written, but the process is complicated by the number of amendments that must be made to existing laws and rules in order to implement the change.

e. Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board’s (ASPPB) Annual

Meeting of Delegates. J. Schaffer and J. Romano reported on their attendance at the ASPPB Annual Meeting of Delegates in Point Clear, Alabama on October 16-20, 2002. J. Schaffer reported that Ray Fowler, retiring CEO of the American Psychological Association, gave an interesting account of his life story, which partially chronicled some of ASPPB’s history. New Mexico presented a session of the state’s new prescribing privileges. J. Romano informed the Board that the ASPPB Foundation gives a $1000 scholarship to psychology students for research. The Foundation has very few applicants for the scholarship. There has been a drop in the number of applicants taking the national standardized examination for licensure, the Examination for the Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). ASPPB has established a task force to study the problem, since the number of psychology students has not dropped. Since the beginning of the computerized version of the EPPP, there has been a 6-7% rise in scores. Barb Van Horne is ASPPB’s president-elect.

f. Board Officer Elections in December.

P. Walker-Singleton reminded the Board that each December, the Board elects officers for the coming calendar year. The officers to be elected are Board Chair, Board Vice Chair, and Board Secretary.

g. Health Professionals Service Program (HPSP). P. Walker-Singleton reported that Monica Feider, Program Manager for HPSP will attend the Board’s December meeting and give her annual update on the program at 11 AM. Information about the program was distributed at the November 8, 2002 meeting; Board members retained the materials and stated that they will bring it to the December 13, 2002 meeting. P. Walker-Singleton also reported that the Board needed to select a representative to HSPS’ Program Committee and an alternate for calendar year 2003. J. Peterson volunteered to serve as the Board’s representative for a second year. J. Romano moved, seconded by N. Ruiz that Mr. Peterson continue to serve as representative and that R. Maves continue as alternate until he is replaced by the Governor, and at that time, J. Schneeweis will continue his term as alternate. The motion passed unanimously.

h. Board Member List. P. Walker-Singleton distributed a Board member list so that the members can update information, such as name, address, and phone numbers.

i. Certificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ).

3


The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) issues a Certificate of Professional Qualification (CPQ) to applicants who meet their core licensure criteria and who already hold a license to practice psychology in another jurisdiction. Once issued, the CPQ is designed to facilitate professional mobility for licensed doctoral-level psychologists. J. Schaffer proposed that the Board accept ASPPB’s Certificate of Professional Qualification as meeting licensure requirements. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Romano that the Minnesota Board accept the CPQ for applicants with at least three semester credits or four quarter credits, in human diversity. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: None. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.



Name License # Renewal Date Else, Kayla A., PsyD, LP LP1643 10/31/02 Fesler, Mary K., MSE, LP LP1764 11/30/02 Lesar, Judith A., MS, LP LP1678 10/31/02 Nestingen, Signe L., PsyD, LP LP1544 10/31/02

J. Romano moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis to approve the variance requests on the basis that Licensees have met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensees, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

b. Thomas F. Soles, MA, LP (LP3133) incurred a late renewal fee for his renewal which

was due July 31, 2002. He requested a variance to give him more time to pay the late fee and states that it will be paid no later than January31, 2003. R. Maves moved, seconded by M. Farinacci to approve the variance request on the basis that Licensee met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Licensee, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: J. Romano and N. Ruiz. There being seven ayes and two nays, motion carried.

c. Beverly I. Turk, MS, LP, requested a waiver of the late renewal fee. Licensee was

due to renew her license on September 30, 2001 and states that she did not receive her

4


renewal application, which was mailed to the address she designated in an address change letter received March 5, 2001 and recorded by the Board on March 7, 2001. The address is still current in the Board’s data base. Licensee states that she realizes that it is her responsibility to know when her renewal is due, but cannot afford to pay the late renewal fee. J. Romano moved, seconded by R. Maves to deny the waiver request on the basis that the Licensee did not meet her burden to prove that adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the waiver is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

d. Applicant 02C-057 applied for the PRE and requested a variance from Minn. Rule

7200.1300, Subp. 4, B (b) Educational Requirements for Licensure. This rule requires three graduate quarter credits or the equivalent in the core course area of Theories of Measurement. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Clinical Psychology from Pacifica Graduate Institute, Carpinteria, California. Applicant provided sufficient documentation of 1-2 quarter credits in Theories of Measurement. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance be approved on the basis that the applicant met the burden to prove that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

e. Applicant 03C-012 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance from Minn. Rule

7200.1300, Subp. 4 B (b) Educational Requirements for Licensure. This rule requires three graduate quarter credits or the equivalent in the core course area of Theories of Measurement. Applicant met the requirements for a PsyD with a major in Clinical Psychology from California School of Professional Psychology, Fresno, California. Applicant provided sufficient documentation of 1-2 quarter credits in Theories of Measurement. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance be approved on the basis that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

f. Applicant 92A-111 applied for licensure and requested a variance. The applicant has

an active license in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The primary supervisor of the applicant was unavailable to complete the Supervisory Verification Form. The Commonwealth of Virginia Board of Psychology submitted to the Board copies of its verification of supervision forms completed by the applicant’s primary supervisor. The forms demonstrated two hours of face-to-face consultation per week for more than a one-year period of time. The applicant asked for a variance from the

5


Minnesota Board requesting that this Board accept the Virginia documentation in place of our own supervisory verification form. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance be approved on the basis that the applicant met the burden to prove that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.

g. Applicant 02C-042 applied for the EPPP and requested a variance from Minnesota

Rule 7200.1300, Subp. 4, B (4) Educational Requirements for Licensure. This rule requires the transcript of an applicant document a minimum of a 2000 hour internship for a doctoral degree. Applicant met the requirements for a PhD with a major in Counseling Psychology from Indiana State University on August 10, 2001. Applicant’s university does not list the internship on the official transcript. Applicant provided sufficient documentation to demonstrate completion of the pre-doctoral internship. The Application Review Committee moved that the variance be approved on the basis that the applicant met the burden to prove that Applicant met the rationale for the rule, adherence to the rule would impose an undue burden on Applicant, and that granting the variance is unlikely to adversely affect the public welfare. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being eight ayes and no nays, motion carried.


Application Review Committee moved that the following applicants be admitted to the national standardized examination on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. 03C-012 02C-042 03C-027 02C-057 03C-024 03C-028

3. Admit to the PRE Application Review Committee moved that the degrees of the following PRE applicants are approved on the basis that Applicants’ degrees meet the educational requirements for licensure. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. OSA02C-12NC 99B-052 OSA03-04ID 4. Approval of Doctoral Degree. Application Review Committee moved approval of the doctoral degree of the applicant listed below, who applied for licensure at the doctoral level. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S.

6


Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

92A-111

5. Approval of Doctoral Degree for Master’s Level Licensed Psychologist. Application Review Committee moved approval of the doctoral degree of the licensee listed below, who applied for conversion of licensure to the doctoral level. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously.

Mary A. Miller

6. Licensure as Licensed Psychologists. Application Review Committee moved that the Applicants listed below be granted licensure as Licensed Psychologists based upon doctoral degrees, having performed successfully on both parts of the examination, and having fulfilled all the requirements of MN. Stat. 148.907, Subd. 2. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. LaVon M. Atkinson, PsyD Michael D. Brunner, PhD Kelly A. Dickinson, PhD Mary L. Harlow, PsyD Steven M. Lutz, PsyD Carol Fishman Siegel, PhD Timothy A. Wenstrom, PsyD Genni Lee Goschke, PsyD 7. Termination of Licenses for Non-Renewal. The following licensees have failed to renew their licenses within 60 days of being overdue. Notification has been sent as provided in MN Rule part 7200.3510. J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Romano that the licenses be terminated for non-renewal. Voting “aye”: M. Farinacci, R. Maves, J. Peterson, J. Romano, N. Ruiz, J. Schaffer, J. Schneeweis, M. Seibold, and S. Terhune. Voting “nay”: none. There being nine ayes and no nays, motion carried unanimously. Adler, Shulamin (PhD) March 31, 2002 LP0907 Bortel, Michael (MA) December 31, 2000 LP1914 Imm, Charles (PhD) October 31, 2001 LP0283 Meyer, Michelle (MA) May 31, 2001 LP3272

7


8

Rogers, Lucretia (MA) July 31, 2002 LP3131 Schlotterback, Lisa (MA) March 31, 2002 LP0964 Simmons, Martha (MS) March 31, 2002 LP4008 8. Other Business New Appointee to Licensure Committee. Board chair, J. Hovland announced that J. Peterson volunteered to be appointed to the Legislative Committee. Review of Proposed Continuing Education and Licensure Rules. Rules Committee chair, S. Albert, provided for Board approval draft Continuing Education and Licensure rules and the Statements of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR). The Board unanimously approved, with modifications, the proposed rules and the SONARs. 9. Adjournment J. Schaffer moved, seconded by J. Schneeweis that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 1:28 PM. Respectfully submitted, JACK B. SCHAFFER, PhD, LP Board Secretary

Documents

MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY - index / Minnesota.gov Minutes_tcm21-29974.pdf · MINNESOTA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY JANUARY 18, 2002 2 2. Administrative Matters. a. Rules Committee Update