AB 510 California Assembly · 2025-2026 Regular Session

Health care coverage: utilization review: peer-to-peer review.

Summary
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of disability insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law generally authorizes a health care service plan or disability insurer to use prior authorization and other utilization review or utilization management functions, under which a licensed physician or a licensed health care professional who is competent to evaluate specific clinical issues may approve, modify, delay, or deny requests for health care services based on medical necessity. This bill, upon communication of a decision by a health care service plan or health insurer delaying, denying, or modifying a health care service based in whole or in part on medical necessity, would authorize a provider to request review of the decision by a licensed physician, or a licensed health care professional under specified circumstances, who is competent to evaluate the specific clinical issues involved in the health care service being requested, and is of the same or similar specialty as the requesting provider. The bill would authorize a licensed health care professional to be the reviewer if the provider requesting peer-to-peer review is not a physician. The bill, notwithstanding any other law, would require these reviews to occur within 2 business days, or if an enrollee or insured faces an imminent and serious threat to their health, within a timely fashion appropriate for the nature of the enrollee's or insured's condition, as specified. If a health care service plan or health insurer fails to meet those timelines, the bill would deem the request for the health care service as approved and supersede any prior delay, denial, or modification. Because a violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status failed 1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2025
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 10, 2025 Last action Feb 2, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 3 comparisons

What changed between versions

04/10/25 - Amended Assembly 04/28/25 - Amended Assembly · 4 edits · Apr 28, 2025
MODERATE
The April 28 amendment makes three substantive policy changes to AB 510's peer-to-peer review requirements. First, it expands coverage from 'disability health insurer' to all 'health insurers' in the Insurance Code section, broadening which entities must comply. Second, it changes the trigger from a formal appeal or grievance to simply the communication of a denial or delay decision, after which a provider may request peer-to-peer review. Third, it removes the word 'prior authorization' from the deemed-approved provision, so any type of service request is covered if the insurer misses the deadline.
SCOPE

Section 10123.138 (Insurance Code) now applies to all 'health insurers' rather than only 'disability health insurers,' significantly expanding which companies must offer peer-to-peer review.

REQUIREMENT

The trigger for peer-to-peer review changed from a formal appeal or grievance being filed to the mere communication of a decision delaying, denying, or modifying a service. A provider can then request review after receiving that communication, lowering the procedural barrier to initiating the process.

ENFORCEMENT

The deemed-approved remedy now applies to 'the request for the health care service' rather than specifically 'the prior authorization request,' meaning the automatic approval consequence if the insurer misses the 2-business-day deadline is no longer limited to prior authorization scenarios.

DEFINITION

The bill now consistently uses the term 'peer-to-peer review' to name the process, and replaces inline descriptions of reviewer qualifications with the defined terms 'peer physician' and 'peer health care professional' for clarity.

Floor votes

How they voted

No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
12
Key actions
4
Committee
7
Amendments
3
Feb 2, 2026
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
May 23, 2025
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
May 7, 2025
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 29, 2025
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 28, 2025
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 24, 2025
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (April 22).
lower
Apr 21, 2025
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Apr 10, 2025
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on HEALTH. Read second time and amended.
lower
Feb 24, 2025
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Feb 11, 2025
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 13.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors

Sponsors

Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Photo of Dawn Addis
Dawn Addis
DDemocratic
CA
30