Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20, § 2210-1.010
PURPOSE: This rule describes the board’s operation and the methods and procedures where the public may obtain information or make submissions or requests.
Editor’s Note: The secretary of state has determined that the publication of this rule in its entirety would be unduly cumbersome or expensive. The entire text of the material referenced has been filed with the secretary of state. This material may be found at the Office of the Secretary of State or at the headquarters of the agency and is available to any interested person at a cost established by law.
(6) The board has superintending control over the practice of optometry within this state. The board’s primary duties consist of—
AUTHORITY: sections 336.130.4. and 536.023.3., RSMo (1994).* This rule originally filed as 4 CSR 210-1.010. Original rule filed Dec. 19, 1975, effective Dec. 29, 1975. Rescinded and readopted: Filed Oct. 14, 1981, effective Jan. 14, 1982. Amended: Filed Sept. 13, 1995, effective March 30, 1996. Moved to 20 CSR 2210-1.010, effective Aug. 28, 2006. *Original authority: 336.130.4., RSMo (1939), amended 1949, 1981 and 536.023.3., RSMo (1975), amended 1976. Bresler v. Tietjen, 424 SW2d 65 (Mo. banc 1968). Sale of eyeglasses, whether or not on prescription, does not constitute the practice of optometry. Section 336.110, RSMo allowing the board to determine who or what constitutes “procurers to obtain business” is not an unlawful delegation of legislative authority nor is it vague or indefinite. Declaratory judgment is an appropriate action for determining the validity of administrative rules. Under guise of rulemaking power, the board cannot enlarge upon the scope and terms of statute, and it cannot by rule constitute certain conduct a violation of statute, which, in absence of rule, could not reasonably be so construed. When acting within its rulemaking authority, the board’s judgment should be disturbed only if the rule is unreasonable. Ketring v. Sturges, 372, SW2d 104 (Mo. 1963). Statutory provision granting power to “adopt reasonable rules and regulations” and “to do all other things necessary” is neither vague and indefinite nor an unlawful delega- 20 CSR 2210-1 tion of legislative power in violation of Art. IV. section 1 of the Missouri Constitution. Where the legislature has established a sufficiently definite policy, standard or rule, it may, without violating rule prohibiting delegation of legislative power, authorize administrative officer or body to adopt and enforce rules, or orders relating to administration or enforcement of law, to carry out the purpose of the legislature. Op. Atty. Gen. No. 10, Bockhorst, 10-4-54. A naturopath not licensed as a physician or surgeon in this state is not authorized under section 336.120(1), RSMo (1949) to practice optometry without a certificate of registration from the State Board of Optometry. Op. Atty. Gen. No. 68, Mo. State Board of Optometry, 4-19-54. It is unlawful for an osteopath to advertise as a “registered optometrist” when not duly licensed by the State Board of Optometry to practice optometry in this state.