COMMONWEALTH OF DEPARTMENT OF STATE BEFORE THE STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY ln the Matter ofthe Application for Licensure as a Cosmetoluglst oi Docket No. 1565--45-15 -- 1 File No, 1545-08948 I.) Applicant ORDER ADOPT HEARING PROPOSED ADJUDICATION AND Fl AL ORDER AND Now, this Ll'Zay or March, 20m, met and the entire record including the December 23, 2015, Proposed Adjudication hy Hearlng Examiner Jackie Wiesl Lutz, and tinting itcillier pony l'lled it IS hereby ORDERED that the Proposed Adjudication and Order be adapted as the Final Order nl'lhe Slate Board of Cosmetology ill ll'llS proceeding, A copy nflhe Hearing Examiner's Proposed Adjudlcallon and Order is appended hereto as "Appendix In With the Hearing anmlner'< Pmpmerl Adjudieatmn and Order dated December 23, zols, it is hereby ORDERED that notwithstanding discloecd crimilml history, Applicant shall not he barred l'rom for the examination and her Application for Professional Licensurc by Examination is GRANTED Applicant shall he to sit for the cosmetologist llcensure examination and upon her- complellon of the examination and to the Board of all required fees and documentation, 3 license lo practice as a cosmetologist shall be GRANTED. This order shall take effect immediately. BUREAU OF PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL AFFAIRS BY ORDER: STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY gag/72% -- IAN J. HARLOW. SUSANNE M. PHILO COMMISSIONER CHAIRPERSON Applicam's Anome), Prosccunng Attomey: Board Counsel: Date of PA 19464 P. Masser. Esquire Anel Mord/x Ramp APPENDIX A RECEIVED DEF 3) (13V: Dapanmenl av srare Plathunnlary COMMONWEALTH OF DEPARTMENT OF STATE BEFORE THE STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY In the Matter of the Applicatinn for Cosmetulo 'sI License of Docket No' 1565-45415 5* File No. 1545--08948 Applicant PROPOSED ADJUDICATION AND ORDER Jackie Wicst Lutz Chief Hearing Examiner COMMONWEALTH or OFFICE OF GENERAL DEPARTMENT or STATE OFFICE or HEARING EXAMINERS PTO. Box 2649 Harrisburg, PA 17105-2669 ma aisrmaurw 2 [1 fl PROSECUTION COUNSEL HEARING EXAMINER- OTHER HISTORY This matter is before the State Board of Cosmetology ("Board") on an application filed to sit for the cosmetologist licensure examination. The Board reviewcd Applicant's application at its July 6, 2015 meeting, and provisionally denied the application pursuant to section 4 of the Act of May 3., l933, P.Ls 242, No 86 (the "Cosmetology Law"), as amended, 63 507 er rel}, at 63 PS. 510, which requires that all individuals he of good moral character at the time ofmaking application. The Board also cited section 9124 of the Criminal History Record Information Act 18 9l24, which authonzes the Board to deny ltcensure to an applicant who has been convicted 0ft: felony, More specifically. the Board provlsionally denied Applicant's application based on Applicant's disclosure on her application that she currently has charges in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas as a result of an incident that took place in May of 2013 in which the Board recounts: You discussed this in a letter within your application, in which you stated that you 'remember walking into the kitchen and getting a knife, and standing right tn front of him and plunging it into his chest.' Your past conduct suggests that you may not be of sufficient good moral character. By letter dated July 10, 2015, the Board notified Applicant oflts provistonal denial other application, and advised Applicant ofher right to appeal the prbyisional denial by submitting a written request within 30 days to the attention ol'the Board's Counsel. AppliCEnt filed an appeal from the Board's provisional denial on or about August 2015. On September 2, 2015, an Order Delegaling Care to Hearing Examiner was filed by the Board, which delegated the case to a examiner ofthe Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs to conduct a formal hearing and issue a proposed adjudication and order in accordance with 1 Pa. Code (335.202 (relating to proceedings in which pr0posed reports are prepared). On September 9, 2015, a Notice of Hearing was issued by the Deputy Prothonotary of the Department of State, which scheduled the matter for hearing before Jackie Wiest Lutz, Esquire on October 16, 2015, commencing at 9:30 am. at 2601 N. Third Street, One Penn Center, Harrisburg, PA. The administrative hearing proceeded as scheduled on October 16, 2015 at the designated time and place. Prosecuting Attorney Glenn P. Masser, Esquire appeared at the hearing on behalf of the Commonwealth. Applicant attended the hearing, pro se. At the close of evidence, Applicant waived the ?ling of a post-hearing brief. The record closed with the ?ling of Hearing Transcript on November 2, 2015. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Applicant?s current address is?Pottstown, PA 19464. 18; Exhibit (Application for Professional Licensure by Examination)). 2. Applicant attended the Metro Beauty Academy from June 2, 2014 through April 24, 2015. (NT. 1 I, 34-35; Exhibit B-l (Application for Professional Licensure by Examination). 3. Applicant was an elite student at the Metro Beauty Academy and won several awards, including student ofthe month. (NT. 1 l) 4. On or about May 22, 2015, Applicant submitted to the Board her application to sit for the cosmetologist licensure examination. (Exhibit B-1) 5. Applicant answered ?Yes? to question #7 on her application (relating to background questions) that she currently has criminal charges pending and unresolved in any state or jurisdiction. (Exhibit B- 1) 6. Applicant included with her application a written statement setting forth the facts that resulted in criminal charges being ?led against her, and provided copies of the Arrest Warrant, which charged her with Aggravated Assault, a felony, and the Police Criminal Complaint, with Af?davit of Probable Cause that was issued against her. (Exhibit 8-1) 7. On September 21, 2015, Applicant pled guilty to Aggravated Assault, a felony of the second degree, in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, PA (Docket No.: CP- 46-CR-0005100-2013). (N.T. 21; Exhibit C-1) 8. Applicant?s sentencing has been deferred pending her completion of the Montgomery County Behavioral Health Court Program, in which Applicant was accepted in September 2015. (N.T. 12; Exhibits A-1 and C-l) refers to ?notes oftestimony? from the October 16, 2015 administrative hearing. 3 9. Upon Applicant?s successful completion of the Montgomery County Behavioral Health Court Program, Applicant?s criminal charges could be completely dropped or reduced. (N.T. 12; Exhibit A-l) 10. In addition to Applicant?s participation in the Montgomery County Behavioral Health Court Program, Applicant is also actively participating in mental health treatment at Creative Health Services, to help her overcome the physical and mental abuse issues that she has endured for 12 years. (N.T. 13-14, 29-30; Exhibit A-l) 11. By letter dated July 10, 2015, the Board provisionally denied Applicant?s application. (Exhibit B-l provisional denial letter) 12. Applicant appealed the Board?s Provisional denial and requested a hearing. (Exhibit B-l Appeal letter, dated July 25, 2015) 13. Applicant has no current criminal charges pending against her, and has no criminal convictions in another state, jurisdiction, territory or country or criminal charges pending in any other states. (N.T. 22) 14. Applicant has never had a drug or alcohol problem. (N.T. 29) 15. Applicant lost both of her parents - her father when she was in the fourth grade, and her mother in 2010 - and she has lost a child, so she has always suffered from depression. (N.T. 15-16, 32-33) 16. Applicant met ?Jake? while she was attending Montgomery County Community College; they were together for approximately six months when she became. pregnant with her ?rst son. (N.T. 32-33) 17. Having lost her father at a very young age, Applicant watched her mother struggle to raise four kids by herself, and she wanted to ?nish school; Applicant was not sure that she 4 wanted to go through with the pregnancy. (N.T. 32-33) 18. That is when ?Jake?s? controlling tendencies started; he threatened to leave if she would not have the baby, so she stayed. (N.T. 32-33) 19. Up until Memorial Day weekend of 2013, Applicant had been in an extremely abusive relationship for 12 years. (NT. 10) 20. The emotional abuse included name calling; ?Jake? repeatedly told her she was ?worthless? she should kill herself because she wasn?t anything of a mother; she wasn?t anything ofa person; she was a piece of ?crap;? she is ?fat? look how ugly she is; no one could ever possibly love her. (N.T. 15-16) 21. The emotional abuse was more frequent than the physical abuse, but ?Jake? was physically abusive too. (NT. 15) 22. On one occasion when she was driving, Jake grabbed her by the throat to the point that she passed out, causing her to hit a parked car. (NT. 15) 23. ?Jake? did not need a reason to lash out at her; he would pick a ?ght with Applicant for sweeping the ?oor wrong. (NT. 23) 24. Applicant?s relationship with ?Jake? was on again, off again for many years; Applicant tried very hard to hold onto her family and to make ?Jake? see the importance of it, but got so brainwashed into believing everything that he said to her. (N .T. 32-33) 25. Applicant and Jake?s second child was born with cerebral palsy; this gave ?Jake? more leverage to blame her for being this person that should not be alive. (NT. 16) 26. After Applicant?s mother died in 2010, Applicant and ?Jake? moved into her childhood home, and put $30,000 worth of savings into it to renovate it; ?Jake? left her on New Year?s Eve that year. (NT 16) 27. Applicant was unable to afford the home after time, and it went into foreclosure; Applicant had to leave everything that she knew as a child abruptly and go stay with ?Jake? because she had nowhere else to go. (N.T. 16) 28. After Applicant moved back in with ?Jake,? he told her he was sorry for everything that he put her through and made her believe that he was going to change. (N.T. 16) 29. ?Jake? was still sleeping with other people and not coming home and drinking. (N.T. 16) 30. On May 28, 2013, Applicant attempted suicide. (N.T. 10) 3 1. That night, ?Jake? came home from work around eight o?clock and a ?ght started immediately; ?Jake? works at a bar. (N.T. 23) 32. Applicant remembers telling her kids to go get Autumn, who was a friend, and to stay with Angel. Autumn?s mother, because she knew that if the fight escalated, he would physically hurt her. (N.T. 25) 33. ?Jake? started screaming in her face, saying he only felt bad for her because she had nowhere to go; he told her he didn?t want no more children; he didn?t give a crap about her; and, that she should really, really think about dying because she is worthless and just scum of the earth. (N.T. 16-17) 34. Prior to this moment, Applicant had never had a suicidal thought, but she wanted him to see how bad he was hurting her so she did something extremely stupid; she made the decision to hurt herself. (N.T. 17) 35. Applicant walked into the kitchen and grabbed a knife out of the drawer and stabbed herself in the chest in front of him. (N.T. 17, 24) 36. ?Jake? started screaming, telling her she was a she was so stupid, ?what 6 the is wrong with you, you?re crazy.? (NT. 17, 24) 37. Applicant?s wound was very close to her heart; she had to have laparoscopic surgery through her belly button to repair internal bleeding. (NT. 26) 38. Applicant does not know who called the police. (N.T. 25-26) 39. Applicant does not recall resisting arrest or hurting anyone because she was in shock. (NT. 10) 40. Applicant remembers ?Autumn? coming to the house and trying to get her to lay down on the ?oor in the living room, and Applicant just wanted to go to bed. (NT. 25) 41. Applicant remembers getting up and walking up the stairs and feeling someone grabbing her by the hair; she turned around to defend herself, thinking it was ?Jake.? and it was the police. (NT. 25) 42. Applicant remembers that the police officer kept asking her over and over again, ?did he do this to you" because the of?cer had been to their home several times. (NT. 26) 43. Applicant does not know how the of?cer got a cut on his hand; she surmises she was resisting and they were trying to calm her down and she could not be calmed down so they had to restrain her in order to get her to the ambulance. (NT. 27) 44. An of?cer got a scratch on the hand from a handcuff; Applicant remembers being in the ambulance and asking them to un-handcuff her because it was hurting her and her chest felt very tight. (N.T. 25-26) 45. From that point, Applicant only remembers pieces of it; she remembers going into the room to have surgery and a woman holding her hand and telling her that it was going to be okay. (NT 26) 46. Applicant was in Reading Trauma in intensive care for two days; upon release, 7 she immediately signed herselfimo Hospital ("Brandywine"), where she spent "16 lhrec days and was released on June 2. 2013. (NII . 28) 47. agrees that on papen having a guilty plea tn felony aggravalcd assault looks bad, (N.T. 29) 48 While Applicam was at Brandywine, her good fnend's father. who is a pastor. reached on! Io her; he has in-homc readings rhal Applicant has atlended, but her fairh is somelhing that she struggles wi|ll and has with srnce she lost her parents and her son 31) 49. Refine Applicant's releas: from Brandywinm she was broughl mm the dncror's office and was told thar she was faelng charges (NT. IO) 50 Appheant has heen to have her charges she guilty {chm} Charge when she was accepted mm Montgomery County Belluvluml Health ('uun ngram (N T. 10; SI Apphehnt has worked hard I0 overcome her ahusc; she let snmenne take control ot'her hfe, but he no longcr has that (NT. ll, 13-14) When Apphennt was released from Brandywine, she found a plhee to live, and within a year to [he day nfher releasc, she slaned beauty school. (NII. 17, 34-35) 53 Applicants suppon syslem today includes her kids. her twu sisters, a couple nt' the! have sluck hy her through and her fiance. who is very Supportive of her, (N.T 33734) 54, -- has known srnee 1997. when he was the grade ln tntennedlate seheel. (NT, 3638) 55. .nd Applicant have been acquaintances since |997 and fnends slnee 8 2010, when -first slaned dating one oprplicam's friends. (N31. 39) 56. _has watched Applicant's relationship with "Jake" and has seen from day one how he basically demoralized her, (NT. 3673 7) 57. -did not initially know anything about what Applicant had done to herself; when he found oul, he reached cm to her as a {fiend to help build her up, (NT. 37) 58. Afier -slarled talking to Applicant and saw how big nfa heart she has and how much she wanted to follow througa with her dream of doing cosmetology he supported her and encouraged her to follow through with that. (N T. 37) 59. Applicant and - are now engaged to be married. (NT. 33--39) 60. Applicant has followed her dream and has graduated from Metro Beauty Academy; the last hurdle for her to overcome is In he able to sit for the examination (NT 37) 51. Among |he ot' tommon metros that -nd Applicant have, - has never heard anyone speak negatively ahout Applicant's character or integrity or honesty. (N T. 43-44) 62, Applicant's suicide attempt on May 28. 2013 was, in View a "momentary lapse ol' judgment brought on by all that she has deall with" (N1 37) 53. Applicant attended the in this mallet, provided credible testimony, presented Ihe testimony ofn witness on her own hehalt', and introduced documentary evidence in support ofher application to Sit for the cosmetologist llcensure examination, (Transcript, pasxl'm) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Board has jurisdiction in this matter. (Findings of Fact Nos. 2, 4-6, 1 1-12) 2. Applicant had adequate notice of the statutory basis for the Board?s provisional denial of her application to sit for the cosmetologist licensure examination and was given an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the Administrative Agency Law, 2 Pa. C.S. 504. (Findings of Fact Nos. 4-6, 11-12, 63) 3. The record supports granting Applicant?s application to sit for the cosmetologist licensure examination, in that Applicant has furnished satisfactory evidence that, despite her felony conviction, she is of good moral character and was at the time of making the application, as required by section 4 ofthe Cosmetology Law, 63 PS. 510. (Findings ofFact Nos. 1-10, 13- 62) 10 DISCUSSION An applicant for licensure bears the burden of proving that she meets all of the quali?cations necessary for obtaining a license to practice in a given profession. Barran v. State Board ofMedicine, 670 A.2d 765, 767 (Pa. melth.), appeal denied, 679 A.2d 230 (Pa. 1996). The degree of proof required to establish a case before an administrative tribunal in an action of this nature is a preponderance of the evidence. Lansberiy v. Public Utility Commission, 578 A.2d 600, 602 (Pa. melth. 1990). A preponderance of the evidence is generally understood to mean that the evidence demonstrates a fact is more likely to be true than not to be true, or if the burden were viewed as a balance scale, the evidence in support of the proponent?s case must weigh more than the opposing evidence. Se-Ling Hosiery, Inc. v. Margulies, 70 A.2d 854, 856 (Pa. 1950). The Board?s provisional denial was made pursuant to section 4 of the Cosmetology Law, 63 PS. 510, as well as section 9124 of the CHRIA, 18 9124, which provide, in pertinent part, as follows: Section 4. Eligibility Requirements for Examination. No person shall be permitted by the board to receive a license as a cosmetologist unless such person (1) shall be at least sixteen years of age and ofgood moral character at the time of making application, . . . 63 PS. 510 (emphasis added). Section 9124. Use of records by licensing agencies 11 State action authorized.--Boards, commissions or departments of the Commonwealth authorized to licenseycertify, register or permit-the practice of trades, occupations or professions may refuse to grant or renew, or may suspend or revoke any license, certi?cate, registration or pennit for the following causes: (1) Where the applicant has been convicted of a felony. l8 9124(c) (emphasis added). The basis for the Board?s provisional denial of Applicant?s application to sit for the cosmetologist licensure examination was Applicant?s disclosure on her application that she currently has charges pending against her in Montgomery County, PA, as a result of an incident that occurred in May of 2013. However, in its provisional denial letter, the Board mistakenly avowed: You discussed this incident in a letter within your application, in which you stated that you ?remember walking into the kitchen and getting a knife, and standing right in front of him and plunging it into his chest. (Exhibit B- I) That is not what happened at all Applicant does not dispute that a guilty plea to felony aggravated assault2 looks bad on paper and is indicative of a person who lacks good moral character.3 Attempting to cause or 2 The offense that Applicant pled guilty to is de?ned under the crimes code, as follows: ?2702. Aggravated assault. Offense de?ned. - - A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he: 12 intentionally or knowingly causing bodily injury to a police of?cer in the performance of duty is not only a felony, but a crime that is contrary to the common sense of the community. The Board therefore acted prudently in provisionally denying Applicant?s application. However, it does not follow that one error in judgment makes one a person of bad character. As our Supreme Court explained in Commonwealth v. Jones. 280 Pa. 368, 124 A. 486 (1924), [C]haracter means reputation in the neighborhood and while it grows out of general conduct it cannot be proved by speci?c acts, inasmuch as a person may, under particular circumstances, act contrary to his ordinary disposition and practice. Furthermore, to permit character to be shown by particular acts necessarily creates as many collateral issues as there are matters to be proved and thus confuses the real issue. . . . Id. at 370, 124 A. at 486. (3) attempts to cause or intentionally or knowingly causes bodily injury to any of the of?cers, agents, employees or other persons enumerated in subsection in the performance of duty; Grading. - - Aggravated assault under subsectionfelony of the second degree. ?Hire?. emplovees. etc enumerated. The of?cers, agents, employees and other persons referred to in subsection shall be as follows: (1) Police of?cer. 18 Pa. C.S. ?2702. 3 Crimes involving moral turpitude are generally indicative of a lack of good moral character on the part of the perpetrator. It is generally recognized that ?moral turpitude? means anything done knowingly contrary to justice, honestly or good morals. Morem' v. State Board of Pharmacy, 277 A.2d 516 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1971). A crime of moral turpitude requires a reprehensible state of mind or mens rea. Bowalick v. Department of Education, 840 A.2d 519, 523-524 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004). It requires at least knowledge of private impropriety or of the potential for social disruption. Id. A crime that is "contrary to the common sense of the community" is "a crime involving moral turpitude." Sklar v. Department of Health, 798 A.2d 268, 274 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2002), citing Foose v. State Board ofMotor Vehicle Dealers Manufacturers, 135 Pa. Commw. 62, 578 A.2d 1355, 1358 (Pa. melth. 1990). 13 Applicant credibly testi?ed that she has been ?ghting to have her criminal charges dismissed, and has been accepted into a behavior health court program which, upon completion, could result in her charges being reduced or dismissed.4 Despite the consequences, the testimony elicited at the hearing diminishes the seriousness of Applicant?s offense, and places it into another context. Applicant?s testimony throughout her hearing was extremely forthright and credible; her demeanor was genuinely sincere. The testimony reveals that Applicant endured 12 years of physical and emotional abuse. On the evening of May 28, 2013, the abuse of so many years was so consuming that Applicant attempted to take her own life. She plunged a knife into her own. c/zest so close to her heart that she had to have laparoscopic surgery to repair internal bleeding. Applicant credibly testi?ed that she does not know who called the police. She only recalls ?bits and pieces" of the events of that evening. She testi?ed that she remembers her friend trying to get her to lay on the floor in the living room and that all she wanted to do was go to bed. She remembers getting up and walking up the stairs and somebody grabbing her hair. She thought it was ?Jake? and turned to defend herself; it was the police. Applicant also credibly 111 testi?ed that she does not recall resisting arrest or hurting anyone She testi?ed that th ?was shock. The fact that she spent two days in intensive care at the Reading Trauma Center followed by three days in the Brandywine Hospital lends credence to her testimony. 4 Exhibit A-l, which is a letter dated October 15, 2015, written by Applicant?s Recovery Coach at Creative Health Services, corroborates Applicant?s testimony that she has been accepted into a behavior health court program which could result in her charges being dismissed; it also corroborates Applicant?s testimony that she is actively participating in mental health treatment at Creative Health Services in an effort to overcome the abuse that she has endured for over a decade. Exhibit C-l, which are docket entries for the criminal matter against Applicant (Docket No. further corroborates Applicant?s testimony. Although Applicant pled guilty to aggravated assault, she is currently awaiting sentencing pending the completion of her behavioral health court program. Hearsay evidence, admitted without objection, will be given its natural probative effect and may support a ?nding of fact if it is corroborated by competent evidence in-the record. Walker v. Unemployment ompensatz'on Board ofReview, 367 A. 2d 366 (Pa. melth. 1976). 14 The Hearing Examiner does not believe that Applicant's felony offense, when viewed against the context in which it manifested itself, is indtcative of a person who lacks good moral character. Applicant has taken positive steps to free herself from the cycle of violence, Applicant IS now engaged to be married to a man who is very supportive of her. She has a strong support group and is currently undergoing counseling to help her to address the abuse that she has endured. Applicant testified that she has worked incredibly hard to overcome all of her obstacles. She went through a rough time and let someone take control of her life but he no longer has that control When asked how she can assure the Board that she has the requisite good moral character to be eligible to take the examination, Applicant responded: Well, like i said, a year to the day that was released from Brandywinc started school. put school, was top of my class. I reached out to the community with every event that they hosted for autism and breast cancer . . I made sure that I was involved with all of that, because I enjoyed seeing women that, you know, had gone through similar things that I went through. You know, different events through school, to be able to just make someone feel beautiful when they don't feel beautiful. I love this industry and it's what I've always wanted tn (In And it has been what has built my confidence, it's been a major part of me feeling confident in me by making others feel confident in themselves and moving forward, And whatever else life has to throw at me, 1 will never give up on it (NI 3455) Mr. -5 testimony is also noteworthy: long as l've known her I've never seen her get any type oftrouble, . . 1 think that was a momentary lapse, I mean. all that she has dealt with, with him, that was just a lapse ofjudgt'ncnt. And 1 perceive that really never happening again with how much support she has now and everything good that she has in her life, and the fact that he is no longer able to control her. The change in 15 her from when she was with him to the way she is now, and I know there?s a bias h?c?u?e change. . . . I know she?d be great in this ?eld and from my point of view I think that this would be good for her and good for the ?eld, to have her doing people?s hair and making people beautiful, giving them con?dence, giving herself more con?dence. (NT. 37, lines 15-25 and 38, lines 1-38) The hearing examiner is satis?ed that Applicant?s felony conviction does not accurately portray her character. Applicant has satis?ed her burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she is a person of good moral character and that she satis?es the statutory requirements for eligibility for the cosmetology examination. Accordingly, based upon the foregoing ?ndings of fact, conclusions of law, and discussion, the following proposed order shall issue: 16 COMMONWEALTH OF DEPARTMENT OF STATE BEFORE THE STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGV In the Mailer ofthe Application for a cosmetologist License of Docket No. 1565-45-15 -- File NIL 1545-08948 Applicant PROPOSED ORDER AND Now, 23'" day of December, zms, in accmduncc the foregoing of fact, concIusIOns Of law and dlscussion, it is ORDERED that the application ofS_ -- to sit for the cosmetologisl licensure examination 15 GRANTED Applicant shall be permitted to sn for the cosmetologist licensure exammatmn and upon her successful complehon oI'IItc cxaminalinn and submission to the Board ofan rcquxrcd {em and documentation I: llcense to practice as a cosmetologtst shall be GRANTED, The Slale Board of Cosmetology has announccd its Intentton lo remw this Proposed Report in accordance 1 Pa. Code BY ORDER: Fur [he Cammunwalt/I Glenn Masscr, Esquire OFFICE or GENERAL COUNSEL or OFFICE OF CHIFF COUNSEL IION DIVISION O. Box 69521 Harrisburg, PA 171069521 For App/10am I'Ulmown, PA 19464 Dam Decembcx 23, 2015 SERVICE OF PROPOSED REPORT: The foregoing is the proposed report issued in this matter by a Hearing Examiner for the Department of State, in accordance with the General Rules of Administrative Practice and Procedure at 1 Pa. Code ?35.207. EXCEPTIONS TO PROPOSED REPORT: Any participant who wrshes to appeal all or part of the Hearing Examiner's proposed report to the Board must ?le exceptions in the form of a Brief on Evcepnoiis with the Prothonotary of the Department of State within 30 days after the date of mailing shown on this proposed report in accordance with the General Rules of Administrative Practice and Procedure at 1 Pa. Code The Brief on Exceptions snail contain a short statement: of the case, a summary of the appealing partv's position, ior ft :ng exceptions to the proposed report, and ire argument in support of :he appealing party's position with citations to the record and legal authority. The appealing party may also include proposed ?ndings of fact and conclusions of law. In the event any participant files exceptions, the Board may substitute its ?ndings for those of the Hearing Examiner, and for may impose a greater or lesser sanction than that imposed by the Hearing Examiner without regard to the relief requested or the position argued by any party, and without hearing additional argument or facing additional evidence. trons within the time allowed under the General Rules Failure to ?le a Brief on Excep Code shall constitute a of Administrative Practice and Procedure at 1 Pa. waiver of all objections to the proposed report. FILING AND SERVICES: An original and three (3) copies of the Brief on Exceptions shall be ?led with: Prothonotary 2601 North Third Street P. O. Box 2649 Harrisburg, PA 17105-2649 Copies of the Brief on Exceptions must also be served on all participants to the proceeding. Briefs on Exceptions must be received for ?ling by the Prothonotary within the time limits speci?ed herein. Date of receipt by the Of?ce of Prothonotary and not date of deposit in the mail is determinative. COMMONWEALTH OF OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL E. Assislnm Cnunxel Pollstown. PA 19464 March 9, 2016 RC: ORDER ADOPTING HEARING PROPOSED ADJUDICATION AND ORDER In the Matter of A licalion fur Licensure as a Cosmetolo is! of; Docket N0. l565-45-15 File No. 1545-08948 Dear Ms. - Enclmed please find a copy of an Order issued in (he above-relerenced maucr. 'ry truly yours, \f mm *7 ally ArielE 'cl State Board ofCusmclulugy AEO Enclosure cc: Kelly State Board ofCosmelulogy DEPARTMENT OF m: CHIEF COUNSEL 2601 North 3m SlreeI/P 0. Box wows: